DEATH SENTENCE

Dominion, Volume 27, Issue 34, 3 November 1933, Page 12

DEATH SENTENCE

Edwards Found Guilty GREY LYNN MURDER Recommendation to Mercy JUDGE’S SUMMING-UP By Telegraph.—Press Association. Auckland, November 2. The trial of John Hubert Edwards, aged 41, labourer, charged with the murder of Mrs. Christian Cunningham at her home at 111 Crammer Road, Grey Lynn, on August 16 concluded in the Supreme C-airt to-day. ’ The jury returned a verdict of “guilty,” with a strong recommendation to mercy. Mr. Justice Herdman pronounced sentence of death. During the trial, which extended over four days, evidence was given by 20 witnesses, of whom two were medical witnesses for the defence and four were medical witnesses for the Crown. The jury retired at 3.30 p.mand returned at 5 P- m - Evidence of medical men on the question of prisoner’s sanity occupied the Court in the earlier part of the day. Dr Buchanan, superintendent of the Auckland Mental Hospital, was asked by Mr. Justice Herdman: “Did he strike you as being honest in his answers during your interviews with him?” Witness: I did not think his statement that he could not remember certain things was honest. His Honour: Would you certify to him being insane? Witness: No. Dr. G. M. Tothill endorsed Dr. Buchanan’s opinion, and said he thought the accused was neurasthenic. Emotional instability was one of the symptoms of neurasthenia, and people so suffering were quicker to fly into a passion than normal people. ine witness said he had no reason to believe that at the time of the killing the accused did not know what he was doing. Witness thought his acts were conscious acts. Cross-examined, Dr. Tothill said that if it was proved that the accused had suffered from hallucinations and delusions he would have to alter his opinion. „ , 1( Dr. Gribbin and Dr. Tewsley, medical officer of the Auckland prison,, both said they considered that the accused knew what he was doing. , This concluded the evidence, and counsel then began their addresses to the jury. Judge’s Summing Up. His Honour, whose summing-up occupied half an hour, said that, apart from a few acts of eccentricity, there was no evidence that accused had, prior to this crime, been guilty of violence to anybody. Witnesses had stated that it was his habit to sing at odd moments, he / had strong political convictions, and he was a vegetarian, but many people were vegetarians, sang in their bath and had strong political convictions, yet it did not follow they were irresponsible. The jury was asked to believe accused had delusions, and was so unbalanced he did not know what he was doing. The law as to insanity was the same in New Zealand as in England, said his Honour. If $ man committed mur<]er he was presumed to be sang unless the contrary was proved. The defence might prove that accused suffered from disease of the mind, but that "was not sufficient. The disease had to be of such a character that the accused would not understand the nature and quality of the act he was committing. Such a law was necessary in the public interest. Tens of thousands of people might be suffering from diseases of the mind, but that was not to say,they constituted a menace. Actions of Accused. Continuing, his Honour said that accused went to Cunningham’s home wearing his pyjamas under his clothes, obviously with the intention of staying the night. He slept there, asked for his breakfast, had a shave and went out with Mr. Cunningham. None of those things proved insanity. If he wrote the “death pact” letter before committing murder it was very strong evidence he had made up his mind to destroy the woman, for why should he write “The death pact—we die together” if he did not intend to kill her? The defence claimed he wrote ft after the bjows had been struck. If that were so he must then have gone to the daughter’s bedroom, opened the drawer, taken out the writing-pad, sought a pencil and deliberately written those words, afterward placing the pad on top of the gas meter. Was that consistent with the theory that he did not know what he was doing? Was it likely a man would write such a letfer and not know what he was doing? It was no proof of innocence that a man committed a crime as a result of uncontrollable impulse. Reviewing the medical evidence, his Honour said three witnesses for the Crown had a very wide experience in mental diseases, both in England and in New Zealand. ‘They all declare that when the crime was committed accused was not suffering from disease of mind which might disable him from understanding the nature and quality of the act, and they declare that, when he did it, he knew he was guilty,” said his Honour. “If you accept their evidence, the defence of insanity fails.”

When the jury returned with its verdict, his Honour assumed the black cap and pronounced sentence of death.

“I am bound to say,” added his Honour, addressing the jury, “on the evidence put before you I am of the opinion your verdict is the correct one.”