Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
This article displays in one automatically-generated column. View the full page to see article in its original form.


SEQUEL TO BOY'S TRIAL APPEAL, COURT DECISION P.A. WELLINGTON, Friday. The Court of Appeal this afternooh delivered judgment in the case stated by the trial judge in the trial of a boy aged 13, Noel Ingram Brooks, on a charge of murdering his mother and his brother, Clarence Brooke, near Greytown in. March ! 2&st The questions for the Court of Appeal concerned the right of the Crown to call medical evidence on the question of insanity when a defence of insanity w3s not raised by accused's counsel, also questions as to the validity of the trial judges direction to the jury and as to the meaning of the jury's verdict. The Chief Justice, Sir Michael Mvers, said the Crown had to show, affirmatively if it could, that accused knew that the act charged against him was wrong, and added that it was no part of the duty of the prosecution —indeed, it was contrary to its duty, contrary to practice, and, in his opinion, contrary to law—to seek to prove insanity, which was clearly a defence and no portion of the Crown's case. It was proper, however, for the Crown to call medical evidence to show that accused knew the act was wrong. * Sir Michael continued that in his opinion the direction to the jury y the trial judge was erroneous when it stated that the Crown said that accused should be acquitted °£ ground of insanity. The medical evidence brought by the Crown was not for that purpose, but to put the whole of the conflicting medical evidence before the jury. In respect of the section of the Crimes Act providing that no person™ ver the age of seven and under 14 shall be convicted unless the Court or jury are of the opinion that he knew what he had done was wrong The Chief Justice continued that the jury should have been told the ingredients of an offence in the case of a child under 14 and what thp Crown had to prove, and they should have been told that unless thev were satisfied by the evidence thlt Tn committing the offence accused knew that he was doing wrong it was their duty to acquit. s5 g Michael said that in his opinion the verdict should be conauthorities °"onsiderai either that accused was insane within themeanaccubeu vv or that he m g of the crimmai , the was the Mental Defectives qfl although his defect may fal ' short of criminal insanity aptaii snui v, cou id doubtless be taken for the protection of both aC Mr S6 Julti?e S Callan and Mr. Justice licquit- + i°nmi thaMt was not necessary to f Hk> a ns e aSdfn tSTSe stated' E s jSf'dissented from the majority of the court.

This article text was automatically generated and may include errors. View the full page to see article in its original form.
Permanent link to this item

Bibliographic details

ACQUITTAL VERDICT, Auckland Star, Volume LXXVI, Issue 177, 28 July 1945

Word Count

ACQUITTAL VERDICT Auckland Star, Volume LXXVI, Issue 177, 28 July 1945