JUDGE AND JURY DIFFER.
(Received. 9.10 a.m.) SYDNEY, this day. In summing up in the Hermann case, the Judge said the evidence was so strong on the forgery charge that he failed to sec how the jury had returned the verdict they did on that oonnt. That Hermann was sane at the time of committing the offences he had no doubt, and the epileptic fits were the result of anxiety over the magnitude of the offences which he had committed. Hermann carried on a business in Sydney for managing investments, and he handled large sums of money. He was charged with forging and uttering bills to the value of over £13.000, the name appearing on the notes being that of a prominent grazier. The defence was one of insanity. It was claimed that the prisoner suffered from severe fits of epilepsy, during which Jie was liable to do all sorts of things of which he had no knowledge when he recovered. Hermann said that when he was under the influence of these fits he was obsessed with an irresistible desire to make huge sus-, of money. The jury found prisoner guilty of uttering the bills, but recommended him to mercj' on the ground that he was a victim of epilepsy.
Permanent link to this item
https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/AS19150323.2.49.3
Bibliographic details
Auckland Star, Volume XLVI, Issue 70, 23 March 1915, Page 6
Word Count
210JUDGE AND JURY DIFFER. Auckland Star, Volume XLVI, Issue 70, 23 March 1915, Page 6
Using This Item
Stuff Ltd is the copyright owner for the Auckland Star. You can reproduce in-copyright material from this newspaper for non-commercial use under a Creative Commons BY-NC-SA 3.0 New Zealand licence. This newspaper is not available for commercial use without the consent of Stuff Ltd. For advice on reproduction of out-of-copyright material from this newspaper, please refer to the Copyright guide.
Acknowledgements
This newspaper was digitised in partnership with Auckland Libraries.