WESTPORT TRAGEDY

Greymouth Evening Star, 10 September 1931, Page 5

WESTPORT TRAGEDY

VICTIM’S WIFE ACQUITTED ON GROUNDS OF INSANITY Charged with the murder of her husband Frederick Upham, at. Westport on August 6, Eva Maud Upham appeared before Mr Justice Adams and a jury, at the Supreme Court at Westport yesterday, Mr A. A. Wilson conducted the for the Crown and Mr j. J. Molony, with him Mr A. A. Black, represented Mrs Upham- . Mr Wilson, in addressing the Court, said that the day following the murder the accused, who was 22 years of age’ confessed to murdering her hus-. band. She was married when 17 years of age. The Uphams had been an illassorted couple, and on several occasions Upham had assaulted his wite severely—almost cruelly. He related the record in the Magistrate’s Court concerning Upham, referring to prohibition orders and to a conviction against Upham for assaulting his wife. Latterly they had lived in a shop in Palmerston Street, in practically abject poverty. In June last accused had to go to the Kawatiri Maternity Hospital; After she had been there about fourteen days she gave signs of puerperal mania, but she was better in a few days. When she left the home she went back to the shop, but shortly after the Child Welfare Department took action, when the children ’were committed to the care of the State. The removal of the children appeared to distress the accused .very much. Later the accused went to stay with Mrs Fox, a woman who had been a good Samaritan. She stayed there three weeks, but she was still distressed about the children. While there, she .showed Mips Mathewson how to use a rifle- She was allowed to come and go as she pleased at .Fox s. On June 7 she visited Mrs Watson’s shop, Where she made the ominous statement that, “If it is the last thing I do, I will get him.” A man named Collins saw Upham on June 6 about 4.30, when he appeared to be unsteady.

The Crown’s theory of the crime was that Upham went straight home, and it was then that he was shot at short range. Mrs Upham was back at Fox’s at five o’clock when nobody noticed any change in her demeanour; nor was there any change next morning. In the afternoon Miss Mathewson found Mrs Upham crying, but she would not'say what was the matter. Then Mrs Fox came in and Mrs Upham told her that she had shot her husband. Later she showed the police where the rifle was to be found. When she was searched, a notebook was found on her. He read the extracts from it. He understood the defence would be that she was insane at the time.

Robert Harbin Young, William Collins, Anne Edna Fox, Constable Matches. Susan Elizabeth Mathewson and John Dodds gave evidence along the lines of that given by them in the Lower Court. -

Jean Elizabeth Wilson'stated accused blanied her late husband for cruelty and for the children being taken away from her, and stated if it was the last thing she did, she would get him, witness urging her not to be foolish and to come to her if she wanted anything. She said she had no money no home, and no children.

Dr. Dickel’s evidence was similar to liat given in the-Lower Court.

To Mr Molony: He had visited Mrs Upham in the Maternity Hospital and he considered that she was suffering from puerperal mania. He described the symptoms of the disease, which were delusions and a turning against husband or child. When he visited Mrs Upham’, she was depressed and was suffering from delusions. He ordered the infant to be removed. Such a mania may be permanent or temporary. It usually lasted about- six months. The patient might' appear normal for a time, and then the mania might recur. A puerperal maniac might be haunted for days with a homicidal impulse. The treatment Mrs Upham had received and being deprived of her children would also be a predisposing cause. The malady from which the patient was suffering would be sufficient to obscure her reason altogether, and prevent her from distinguishing right from wrong. Accused when she shot her husband, -probably did not know she was doing wrong.

To Mr Wilson: Puerperal mania was fairly common in child birth. Witness considered that he had grounds for believing that Mrs Upham was suffering from delusions.

Dr. Dickel gave similar evidence, stating that accused was not a bad enomrh case to be sent away. When she shot her husband she probably thought that she was doing the correct thing. Dr. Foote state that when he was called to the Maternity Hospital on June 22, he was Biformed by the matron that Mrs Upham had delusions. She thought she had blood poisoning, that the tonic was poisoning her, and that she heard voices. She would not talk to witness. ' She was suffering from puerperal insanity and was treated for such. One of the effects was that the patient was. in a very depressed condition and had a. tendency to commit suicide or infanticide. It might extend to homicide. The patient was insane and sometimes took a violent dislike to the husband. It was a grave mental malady. A patient might appeal* normal and to all intents and purposes be rid of the mania and it occur again. The mania might be aggravated by antecedent conditions. Assuming hereditary conditions enumerated by counsel, they would have an effect on accused. Constable Spence reiterated the evidence he gave in the lower Court regarding the finding of accused down on the railway line, and the subsequent, finding of the gun. Evidence was also given by Constable Surgeoner, Sen.Sergeant McGlone, and William Fox recognised the'rifle used, as his own property. Dr. McKillop, called by Mr Molony, gave similar evidence to Drs. Dickel and Foote.

After counsel had addressed the jury, His Honor in his address said in all criminal cases the Crown desired to have a conviction recorded If any of the accused is found guilty of the offence of which he or she stands charged. .While any man guilty of a crime ought to be punished, it was better that 99 guilty men should escape than that one innocent should be punished. The desiro was not to secure a conviction unless the jury

was satisfied beyond reasonable doubt of the guilt of the prisoner. The Crown in this case had displayed some little anxiety to obtain a verdict against this accused. Section 43 of the Crimes Act, in force in this country, stated anyone should be assumed to be sane unless proved otherwise. His Honor lucidly explained the law in its application to such cases and said the proposition on behalf of the accused was that the woman was not guilty of the crime of murder, not because she did not do tlfe act, but did so under disease of mind that rendered her incapabli of knowing that what she was doing was wrong. His Honor said Dr. McKillop was brought from the other side of the ranges ’ the Crown, but not called by them. He thought it peculiar and at his discretion suggested that he be called and he was called.

The jury retired at 5.15 p.m. and returned at 5.35 p.m., their verdict being “Not guilty, because insane.” His Honor thanked , the jury, and said if it was any satisfaction to them he would say that he entirely concurred in their decision.