Supreme Court 18 MONTHS’ PRISON FOR RAPE ATTEMPT

Press, Volume CII, Issue 30062, 21 February 1963, Page 7

Supreme Court 18 MONTHS’ PRISON FOR RAPE ATTEMPT

Eighteen months’ imprisonment was imposed on Edward Frank Hughes, aged 30. a machinist, when he appeared for sentence before Mr Justice Wilson in the Supreme Court yesterday on a charge of attempted rape of a 20-year-old married woman at Hinds on October 5. The accused was found guilty by a jury in the Supreme Court on February 12.

His Honour said he would fail in his duty to the community if the sentence was any less than 18 months. in his submissions on behalf of Hughes, Mr B. J. Drake said the crime was originally given a great deal of publicity. It was written up as a horrifying experience involving the use of a knife. In court it soon took on a different character. It became almost a comedy. Mr Drake said it was dear from the evidence that the woman had suffered neither physically nor in any other way. The crime was extraordinary because of the previous life and character of the prisoner. This was a man of whom such conduct could never have been expected. It was obvious from the evidence that Hughes was befuddled with drink. ' V

A sentence to deter others would not meet the justice of this particular case, Mr Drake said.

Mr C. M. Roper said he had no submissions to make on behalf of the Crown.

His Honour said that rape was regarded as a most serious crime and that this was a deliberate attempt on a respectable, young, married woman. The prisoner stopped her on a lonely road, overcame her resistance by the threat of an open knife, and tried to recapture her when she broke away. “The law is to make all roads, even lonely country roads, free for women from the molestation of unprincipled men. . “Probation or a fine is completely out gf the ques-

tioo. Normally the punishment would be a substantial term of imprisonment,” bis Honour said. He said he could not accept the submission of counsel that the crime had been committed in a state of befuddlemeni. Other matters raised by counsel were substantial matters in the prisoner's favour.