WITHOUT PREJUDICE

Dominion, Volume 21, Issue 241, 12 July 1928, Page 10

WITHOUT PREJUDICE

NOTES AT RANDOM

(By

T.D.H.)

Even though judges and juries may be animated by the best intentions the wrong man gets it in the neck in the law Courts at times as some famous instances testify. Just at present they are digging into the Oscar Slater case in Britain after a lapse of nearly" nineteen years. Away back in December 21, 1908, an old lady, Miss Marion Gilchrist, was murdered in her flat in Glasgow, and a foreigner of disreputable character, giving the name of Oscar Slater, was arrested in America and trielljn Edinburgh in the following year. The point at issue was Sinter’s identity with a man who had been seen hanging about the locality before the crime, and with a man who bad been seen running from the house after the crime. Nobody but the murdered woman was in the flat at the time. After a retirement of ;sf 70 minutes the jury, by nine to six, found Slater guilty, and he was sentenced to death. This sentence was later commuted to imprisonment for life, and very grave doubts have since arisen as to whether Slater really was the man. He has protested his innocence throughout. -

A legal correspondent writes of this much disputed' case: “In the Oscar Slater case now under appeal in Scotland, Slater may derive some advantage from the lapse of time. There is no doubt that the evidence of the girl who saw the murderer leave the house, and another girl who saw him run from the street door was hotly attacked at the trial, but it is very probable that the jury depended less on that than on some of the other evidence.

“In Scotland, as in France and in some other countries, evidence may be given- of the whole career of the accused: in Slater’s'.case it Was shown that he had been previously convicted of crimes. His name was not known; it was said that he came from Poland, and he did not leave Scotland as Slater, but under an assumed name.

“The real strength of the case for the Grown, however, lay id these circumstancesit was at once evident that the man who committed the murder must have known how to get at the murdered lady’s flat and what hour to choose for going there, that hour being when the servant girl went out, as was her daily practice, to buy a newspaper. This took less than half an hour. Slater lived at a very short distance from Miss Gilchrist’s house. As must necessarily have been the case, a man was seen hanging about looking at the house as if watching for something. This extended over a good many days.

“Eleven witnesses identified Slater as the man who was seen to be so acting. That was stronger evidence than that of the girls. Some of these witnesses were rather, weak; others viewed now in the printed report of the case, look very strong, witnesses Speakiug without doubt. The murderer must have had an idea that there was jewellery in the house, but such matters are talked about, and the fact may have, been widely known. A n attempt to show that a hammer in Slater’s possession had traces .of blood on the handle came to nothing. There remained purely a case of identification.”

When Oscar Slater was tried his lawyer dwelt at length qn the mistakes which people make in identifying suspected persons, and ' quoted the then recent case of Adolf Beck, a. most unlucky Norwegian. Beck was standing at the street door of his place of residence in Victoria Street, London, on December 16, 1895, waiting for a newsboy to pass, when u woman came up a lid said to him : “What have you done with niy watch?” Subsequently ten other women identified Beck as a man who swindled them heartlessly. He was tried and sentenced to seven .years’ penal servitude. He was identified by the police as a. previously convicted sivindler named John Smith, who had been sentenced to five yefirs’ imprisonment. iu 1877. Tile question of Beck's identity V'ith Smith tfas, ' however, ruled out as irrelevant at' the trial. 4> ♦ ‘ *

Fifteen petitions were presented to the Government urging that a grave miscarriage of justice had occurred. There was conclusive evidence that Beck was in South America when Smith was in gaol. The Government, however, said this was immaterial. In 1901 Beck was released from prison in Ibe ordinary course. ’ He at once set about attempting to vindicate himself, and spent nearly £lOOO to bring his ease before the public. Then in April, 1904, he was arrested again charged with swindling another wo-iL-n, and four other similar charges followed. Once more he stood in the dock as John Smith, and the jury found hini guilty. Mr. Justice Grantham, however, had grave doubts in his mind, and postponed' passing sentence.

Then at Inst Beck’s luck changed. The real swindler, John, Smith, was arrested on similar charges to those preferred against Beck, and Inspector Kane satisfied himself that this man was the John Smith convicted iu 1877. Of the five women who had identified Beck at his second trial, three now identified Smith as the man who hgd robbed them. The other two had gone abroad. Furthermore, Smith was found in possession of a gold watch which Beck was supposed to have stolen in 1895. Some Grand Hotel notepaper as alleged to have been used, by Beck was found in Smith’s possession. Finally, n handwriting expert who had helped to send Beck off to gaol with positive evidence, was obliged to swallow all his “expert” assertions. On July 20,1905, the King granted Adolf Beck a free pardon in respect of his convictions in 1896 and 1904, and eventually a committee of inquiry cleared the unfortunate Mr. Beck completely, and a payment of £5OOO was made to him iu compensation for his sufferings. He had lost all his means and died within a year or two. As a result of this famous miscarriage of justice a Court of Criminal Appeal was Set up in Britain.

First Sportsman (on the ranges)-: We’re lost. Second Sportsman : Great guns! Let’s shoot, ah extra deer so the ranger will find us. Sweet Sixteen: “Mother, I’m tired oi looking such a kid—couldn't I have shorter frocks now?” FOR BiY DAUGHTER Dear daughter, when the dusty shelf receives me. Pray understand that only one thing grieves me: I grudge the distant moment you di® cover Year dangerous views were all old t# your mother. —Elizabeth Morrow, in “Harper’s.'’