Nine years jail for manslaughter

Press, 18 October 1980, Page 4

Nine years jail for manslaughter

PA Wellington Grenville Warren Boyles, aged 33. a shearer, was jailed for nine years by Mr Justice Hardie Boves in the High Court at Wellington! yesterday on two charges of manslaughter. Boyles had been found guilty by a jury in Blenheim last week of killing his wife, Jane Sara Boyles, and hei lover, John McLeod Taylor, in a disused railway carriage at Hapuku near Kaikoura. j The Judge said the Jury: had reduced the charge from murder to manslaughter, a crime with a wide range of actions and culpability. He added that he must regard the crimes as on the upper limit of the scale and it was his duty to sentence on that basis. - . The jury’s verdict bad aroused considerable public concern and interest, but. he could, not- allbw that to influence him; . Nevertheless, , the Court must acknowledge the extent of violence especially in situations of domestic, differences. ■ ‘ ,; .;. , ’. The public concern was in part due to a Jack of information and one short newspaper report that dealt with his summing up, of 45 minutes. ■ ' ■ ■ ■ The’ law relating to provocation was the same, whoever the offender, and the

i jury had given the case lengthy consideration. . A most significant factor s was that Boyles had in fact ■ I parted from his wife because -i of her association with Tay-i.-lor. However grave the fault I ’here was no justification for the vengeanefe he had taken. i The jury had found that . the provocation was rela- : tively minimal. Violence was . repugnant to society and the u courts would not condone it i under any circumstances. ' Mr B. McClelland, for i Boyles, referred to- press i statements which he said ' were critical of the case and which he claimed were completely misinformed. They were a deliberate'attempt by some people to in- ' fluence the Court in passing sentence and amounted tc c ' tmpt of court. Before the killing Bovles had been a man of good character, a hard-working and responsible family man, and verv fond of his wife and children. The remorse he felt -for his actions was apparent from. his attempted suicide when he went to a cemetery and inflicted a grievous wound on himself. For the Crown.-the Solici-tor-General (Mr D. P. Neazor) said there was no’ basis on which it could properly be suggested that there were some special, rules when wives were the victims of violence. Provocation applied to all variations of human behaviour and must be judged that way. The jury’s verdict reducing the charge from murder to manslaughter due to provocation was a matter of in- : dulgence by the law in a i case where intent, necessary for murder, had been shown. ' . That indulgence could be extended to the area of sen- I fence onlyAvith care. ;