KISSEL GUILTY

Evening Post, Volume CVI, Issue 48, 25 August 1923, Page 10

KISSEL GUILTY

MURDE^fe^^ INSANE | \. MOMENT .■-■-

"BE PROTECTED"

'SrDDGEtf.CONDEMNS .LANTASTIC | ii. 0^.:.-: THEORIES. ;"' : ' v

-ji '-XBT'TBIBaRiPH;— PRESS "ASSOCIATION.) *-. § I'.CgBISyCHtjECH," -24th August. j£rife;" trial" ;of "Albert "Frederick- Kissel fp'r '■ the murder' of James. Mackenzie,' wjiich evolved;into one of the most im?' jjortat murder trials in the Dominion, aijd probably under the British criminal code, from a* legal and medical jiSint of.Cview.iiwas.concluded this even-ing.--.The-day was'taken up with addresses by counsel and His .Honour's summing up.'r. ; > •_i ' .■'•"' *.'•:. jsit. Acland, ■ counsel for prisojfer;-: said "that-_there■•■■were only three pWssibleexplan'atioris; r6f the tragedy. If " i£had. bVen'for revenge ".the circu'mgt|nces;,wouid be rational, but all the evidence Showed* that Kissel at the time \Ss'not "rational". ~ Apart from a cart 7 , ridge, the only..thing..to connect Kissgj wit£lthe,,tragedy, excluding his own sfete.ments, Vras ..the cartridge, from his rijje. , A secoid . explanation^ was that h$ was after Mackenzie's money, which" was absurd. A . third explanation was"' ij'sanity. That undoubtedly was the rfifil one: there^vas no other possible wrdict.^.The evidence, demanded-* a vSrdict 6f'not. guilty onith'e ground that Eassel^wai'insane at the ' time of 'to tragedy. , ,-■' . .. ; 'SMr. ArVT^^porinelly, Crown Prosecutor, said the jury should demand that the defehceliiot'-.iwpsporisibilit^'t' r 'should,, l.:be' proved-up'-'to''the".standard' allowed-by %\r. The case was of great public importance on account of the^unusual defence of (automatism. He?submitted -that the will;':le'ft wDy Mackenzie" showed onlythe relationship between a kindly and lonely old man and a- boy in whom he was deeply interested " No. perversion Bad been disclosed; Kissel's', story did not bear the stamp of vtrutli. ■ The theo- ( £ies advanced by, th£!r3octorsa;niust'.be 'carefnlly contested. ; In;^ automatism-sit x Tjas common for a peison™affectedinot.to remember anything tfiaf took plSceJwhen Ec was under the iftfjluence." :,Th'e;* doctors themselves differed; iri regard to the extent of that "navel obscure seiece. Kissel was noif'insane ;'!the doctors said that they wouldr'not;, certify to that. He was an ordinary,, .well-de-veloped, intelligent young man, and there would be no use-sendingi-himito.^a mental hospital foc.«&ere^,were no.Cgrcjunds for keeping him "there. "Mr": Donnelly concluded: "The^ .medical defence set up is without paralfer"in.'t'fie history","of.. our criminal laW-J -rtTholJdactors'; ppuld;' give no authority in support of their evidence.. This defence is based on a new and .undeveloped science "which, if if is a science" at" "alii'is in" the realm vof doubt, debate, .and dispute, . It.is.a .defence that "will undermme, the jO whqle jof our criminal law.*."; /'""i*".' -"""""^ .■.*—.->- ---' Mr. Justice Beed, in Kis summing'up,''" said that law, not medicirie, .was charge eyl witfctKe protection-ofsocietyj- and itasked, Did accused-know .the, nature and quality of . the. act" h'e'tcommitted, aijid did" "lie knbwnt-" was wrong ? Any ■ widening of the definition by letting In fantaßticr-theoms- would place' society at the'mercy of every thief, ravisner, and child despoiler who could prevail upon a, jury to believe some- func-, tion in.Vhis. brain -was noj£> wqrking-,'3ift the time ;Ee! icomnuttea Jhf offence:, Sf t the jnry decided to discard the psychological theory and turn to the ordinary facts they would find that one of; the first; things submitted' to juries un-" der this head was< that- of.;.hereditary, feint, ''and 'the evidence of anything jfereditary- was very,- very meagre.- The' hext thing, as a rulej was evidence about the person concerned .to shoivr'aß-".' normal acts previously indicating abnor-, ytiality jijihej^evidence of that nature was also lighfe'"'- ■ ■ : . • ■'.. :;V""'."■'.'.■•:'

S THE JUEY'S-VERDICT 1: '■'■' gThe jury returned at 4.43 and asked: Bis Honour Whether a verdict of guilty .while temporarily insane'would" be equivalent 11ol.aVverdict .of{pot. guilty. 3 His Honour : "Yea ; you would return a; verdict of not guiltyion-'tfi& ground, of insanity. In that 1 case,* 1 would asfi: you two questions: (1) Was accused insane at; the 5, $me of "the; cpmmission-1 of the offence?- (2) Do'j'du acquit ; him- oh the ground of insanity? ■'{

I The jury again retired and returned 1 4t 7.42; p.m. In answer, to the Kegistrar, the foreman said: n ''We find.prisr. oner guUtySof murder while temporarily msane^wijth a strong" recommendatibji_ that he be detained in-a suitable inatitution." , ; .-..--..

~ His Honour: "That amounts to a ver-; alct of not guilty on the ground of insanity. How do you'answer the questions I put-to you?" "" : ■•■■'•* "'■ i The Xorem^n: "To the first we answer. \Yes'; the ""second we are unable ■to answer." , ■ . ' „..".

| His Honour :j"You*ha.seTanswfired it .£& your firefi-'.qu&tion^ Mr: Foreman." You must fihdthat you acquit him." J The foreman:-'iWe are riot-unanimous': oh the second count."

His^Honour: "I think you ■vull have ib fi^J him, guilty .while temporarily in sanejfjwhich=. means\ that jou find him ribfi?guilty on the ground of insanity At allj*events">,you don't'*a(*quit him on a.hy.'^l^r, grounds.-" * f The'fdremairi "''No, Your Honour " vHiaJ'Hon'Sr' then announced.the yer diet, and added that't'prisoner would Ibe l{ept in strict custody" in prison 'at Eaparua till the pleasure of the Minis ter of Justice was known "