TWELVE YEARS.

Press, Volume LXV, Issue 19772, 9 November 1929, Page 4

TWELVE YEARS.

CAFFERY SENTENCED FOR MANSLAUGHTER. HIS HONOUR*B REMARKS. [THI P*»»S MfcUl »«rrtce.] AUCKLAND, November 8. Twelve years' imprisonment with hard labour was imposed on George Caffery, aged 34, a quarter-east negro, who was the central figure in the Nelson street stabbing affray. When Mr Justice Smith pronounced sentence in the Supreme Court this ir.orning a woman's heartbroken sob» echoed through the Court. The woman, Cafferv'a wife, was taken away still crying bitterly. Caffery was unmoved. After a" trial for the murder of Thomas Leavy, which lasted three days, Caffery was found guilty of manslaughter, with a strong recommendation to mercy, the jury believing that the whole guilt" was not Caffery's. "Your Honour will remember that the verdict of the jury was one of manslaughter, with a strong recommendation to mercy, because the jury was of the opinioi. that thb full guilt was not Caffery's," said Mr Dickson, who represented the prisoner. "If the Court comes to the conclusion that there were two parties, then the question arises as to who actually used the knife. There is this outstanding fact, Caffery wa* undoubtedly under the influence of liquor. Therefore," it would appear that the whole affray rose out of the fact that he had beeii drinking. The verdict of manslaughter excludes r.ny possibility of Caffery having gone there for the purpose of knifing this man. His mind was not set on goinff- to a householder's place with the idea of using a knife." j Hi* Honour: Not on Leavy. i Mr Dickson: No. not on Leavy, or on I Cole.

His Honour: I do not know so much about that. There were the threats. Mr Dickson: Of course, there is no evidence that be weiit there with a knife.

His Honour: There is certainly evidence that he was there at the time the knife was used. In fact, he was quite close to the dead man.

Plending again, Mr Dickson submittde th.it a short sentence would cover the case.

" IJy i's verdict, the jury has indicated that someone else was implicated," said Mr Hubble, for the Crown. "Even allowing the benefit of all doubts, there can be no doubt that Caffery took an active part in the affray that led to this man's death." "Prisoner at the bar, the jury has found you guilty of manslaughter with a strong recommendation to mercy," said his Honour. "The reasonable inference from that is that someone else was there. Who that person was, it is not for me or any judicial person to say at the present time, but it is clear that Leavy would not have been foully done to death in hit own house but for you. If another man was there and had anything to do with the stabbing, it is clear that you took him there, following your bent to assault, actually with violence, if not to kill.

"It can scarcely be said that Leavy gave you any provocation at all, and I think that both the Crown Prosecutor and myself went to the full length we ongbt to have gone in suggesting to he jury a verdict of manslaughter. I will, however, take the jury's view that you did 'not actually do the stabbing, but I must take into account that but for you and your violent attitude no crime would have been committed.* I can do no other than impose a substantial term of imprisonment. The sentence of the Court is that yon be sentenced to hard labour for a period of twelve years.''