Boy Not Guilty On Ground Of Insanity

Press, Volume CIX, Issue 32234, 28 February 1970, Page 48

Boy Not Guilty On Ground Of Insanity

(New Zealand Press Association)

NEW PLYMOUTH, February 27.

Paul Julian, aged 14, of New Plymouth, was found not guilty of murder on the ground of insanity by a jury in the Supreme Court at New Plymouth today.

Julian was charged with the murder of his sister, Helen Mina Julian, aged 11, at New Plymouth last November 9.

Summing up, his Honour said this was particularly a case in which the jury’s common sense should be used. The term “murder" meant | that the offender meant to cause death, or meant to cause bodily harm that was known to the offender to be likely to cause death and the offender was reckless, as to whether death ensued or not. The jury had to consider the question of legal insanity on the balance of probabilities. “I suggest you look at this absence of motive, the killing of a person Paul loved, that he was obviously of more than average intelligence, and the incongruity of the emotional response to the killing of his sister, which seems to be accepted and to be comm.on ground as coming from a condition of schizophrenia.” His Honour suggested that the matter was one of degree.

He pleaded not guilty to the charge and was defended by Mr G. L. McLeod, with him Mr D. G. Medway. Mr R. C. Savage, with him Mr Mr J. A. Laurenson. prosecuted for the Crown.

The trial lasted five days and was heard by a jury of 11 men and one woman Mr Justice Beattie ordered that Julian be confined in strict security at Oakley Hospital until the pleasure of the Minister of Justice was known The jury took three hours and a half to reach its verdict. In his final address to the jury, Mr Savage emphasised the importance of viewing the case dispassionately. For there to be a defence of legal insanity, said Mr Savage, there must be more than “something vitally wrong” with Julian, there must be something wrong to the extent of its being within the provisions of the act referring to legal insanity. i All four psychiatrists, whose evidence was heard, had agreed that the boy suffered from schizophrenia. It would probably be fair to say they all agreed that he was in the early stages of the disease. However, being a schizo- , phrenic was not enough. Was , the schizophrenia of such an I extent to bring him within . the two tests laid down in . the act? Mr Savage said the defence . had satisfied neither criterium. , “1 suggest that from a prac- . tical point of view there are 5 only two verdicts open to '. you: guilty, or not guilty on . the grounds of insanity," he said. Defence Submissions Mr McLeod told .the jury that several defence witnesses i had shown that the boy’s I state had deteriorated over I the last year.

“Don't, please, oversimplify it to the ’extent of saying. ‘Oh well, he is a schizophrenic.’ ” said his Honour.

Julian was far worse a schizophrenic than the Crown witnesses thought. On their own admission they did not know the full story.