DOOMED MEN

Auckland Star, Volume LXIX, Issue 137, 13 June 1938, Page 5

DOOMED MEN

SHADOW OF GALLOWS. JUDGE'S STRONG TONE. AN APPEAL c DISMISSED. (From Our Own Correspondent.) SYDNEY, June 9. There are four men at . Long Bay Penitentiary just now living "in the shadow of the gallows." Harold Thomas (22), a school teacher, was convicted last week of outraging one of his pupils, a girl of nine years, under circumstances that I have-already described. r - •' V:. • V

Eric Chatfield (22); murdered Ijiis I uncle, Jules Maltby, for refusing to allow..him the use of his house for a I [drinking party. He may appeal; against the sentence, or for a new trial, but he' has not yet. moved in that direction. .

HarokL Mansell (46) was convicted of murdering his employer, James dckinsj apparently because he had fallen in love with Dickins' wife and wanted the husband out of the way. He lias appealed, but the Full Court has rejected his appeal. . • ... Thomas Dixon (19) was sentenced for shooting Cyril Maher, a railway official, with the object of robbing the station, safe. A strong effort has been made toi secure a reprieve for Dixon on the ground] of his youth, and also on the plea that the murder was not premeditated. His appeal has been rejected also, the judges of the Court of Criminal Appeals agreeing unanimously that the jury . J* taken cognisance of all thc re 1 eya 111 a,_, and that it is quite impossible to (list the verdict. No Sentimentality. nTtofe i Ml by sentimental considerations

and are prepared to enforce the law. on capital charges when .they have no doubt about the. guilt of the accused.

The plea advanced in Dixon's favour was that the verdict should have been manslaughter, and not murder; but from this the Chief Justice dissented strongly.

"The evidence," liej said, "shows that the accused was'a young ruffian who, deliberately and for gain, .in cold blood shot down a. railway officer for the purpose of robbing him. ,In these circumstances I should- have, been very much surprised if the jury had brought in any other verdict."

As to the character of the crime the Chief Justice was equally emphatic. He had gone with- the jury /to view tjie premises where the crime was committed, ami lie .was convinced that Gibson's own of what had happened was .quite impossible. Moreover, he thought that the "jury had been "particularly lenient"' in acquitting "Coleman, one of Gibson's .epmpanions, who was charged as an accomplice in the murder. Youth of Offender. So far as Gibson was concerned, the Chief Justice held that "there is' abun-, : dant evidence to show tliat tlic acc " st , iW-ja*, - ; and cowardly murder, an lin d er ' his inability to have J , menation for' ™ c "^ se for this leniency v • Or course, tlhe - o jj- en d e r, for Gib- w ) was the youth 0 1J. and many tc son ! S ,rln believe in capital punishment ii P-f ! abstract might hesitate to sign tho rrant of a youth who is tl not vet old enough, in the eyes of the n law, to contract a debt or to record a v vote. " However, the strong tone that the t Chief Justice adopted in dealing with w this matter provided a welcome relief b from the maudlin sentiment too often fi talked in this connection, and no doubt the judgment of the Criminal Appeal v Court will play its part in the discus- o sions in the Executive Council when this b sentence ■ comes 1 before it next week. v