HUSBAND AND WIFE

Evening Post, Volume CXVI, Issue 31, 5 August 1933, Page 15

HUSBAND AND WIFE

SEVEN YEARS' HARD LABOUR

AN UNLAWFUL OPERATION

(By Telegraph.—Press Association.) AUCKLAND, August 4. An unusual instance of a prisoner going into the witness box before sentence was passed upon him and taking aIL: responsibility for the crime Of which he and hia wife had been | jointly convicted occurred at the Supreme Court when Eobert William Campbell, aged 37, and his wife, Mary Campbell, aged 39, were plated in the dock for sentence. Both had been found guilty of performing an unlawful operation upon a girl who had later died in the Taumarunui Hospital.In asking Mr. Justice Smith to nfake the penalties as light as the Court could reasonably make them, Mr. B. A. Singer, for the prisoners, said: "I want to say this, that the whole responsibility for what was done at the house is attributable to the husband alone. All Mrs. Campbell did was to take care of the patients. The husband desires to take the whole blame. If it is'p light that she was compelled to assist her husband, then the penalty imposed upon her should'bo exceptionally light. I submit that some consideration should be given by the Court in tho light of modern changes." His Honour: The position is an unusual one. He says he really did it. In the eyos of the law both are guilty. You can call him. Campbell then went into the witness box and said that hia wife was in, ignorance of what,was done to the girls. It was a secret method, or treatment, that was used. All his wife did was to give care and attention to the patients. . ■ . When Mr. Singer was questioning. Campbell his Honour said: "I am not. going to re-try the case, Mr. Singer. I will remand the prisoners for sentence till 2.15.p.m. " This afternoon his Honour said;: •'The male accused gave evidence this morning in support, of , his counsel's statement that ■' he was the more responsible party in tha commission of the, offence of which both prisoners have been found guilty, and I adjourn-, ed the case in order to consider the matter. Such evidence is obviously open to the gravest suspicion, and I have come to-the conclusion that it ought not to be admitted, for if admit-

ted and acted upon—if evidence to separate the guilt of prisoners were to bo admitted-r-it should have been given during the trial. The* facts'have been concluded by, the finding of the jury. Both prisoners are guilty of the offence charged, and I fully agree' with the jury's verdict. "Apart from this I do not believe the male accused's statement lam unable to distinguish between either prisoner. Reports show that an extensive practice has been carried on. Whether this has been the case for a long period or not I have, however, only to sentence these prisoners for the particular act of which they, have been found guilty, and which resulted in the death of a woman. Each prisoner will be sentenced' to seven, years' imprisonment with hard labour."