"MUTE OF MALICE"

Evening Post, Volume CXVII, Issue 112, 14 May 1934, Page 16

"MUTE OF MALICE"

A JURY'S DECISION

"The jury, found the prisoner 'mute of malice/ and the Court entered fi plea of not guilty." Thus ran tho report "of a ease at1 tho Middlesex Sessions recently. '

The prisoner, who was absolutely save, and -who was neither deaf nor dumb, simply stood, silent with ' a "dumb demeanour, so tho jury decided his muteness was mere obstinacy and. not caused "by the visitation of God." Thereupon the Court itself entered a plea of not guilty, and the case went on.

That prisoner may consider himself fortunate that he did.not live 200 years ago. If lie had tried the same game then ho would have been taken to the "press yard" of the prison and stripped. Ho would have been laid between two planks, sandwich fashion, and upon the upper plank thero would have been placed weight after woight until ho was either, dead or. had found his tongue and pleaded one way or tho other. That process was known to the 'law as the "peine forte et dure"— "the punishment strong and sore." ■ In those days,.if a prisoner refused to plead he could not be tried, and by silence a prisoner might avoid tho consequence of - a conviction for _felony, with the resulting forfeiture of all his property, to the Crown. If ■- he died without pleading, his family would not suffer. Actually the last case of the infliction of the -poinc forte et dure- was in the year 1741. In 1772 silenco was made equivalent to actual conviction, and at last, in 1827, refusal to plead (it being found by a jury that the prisoner was mute of malice and not by the visitation of God) was made tantamount to a plea.of not guilty.