EDWARDS GUILTY

Hawera Star, Volume LIII, 3 November 1933, Page 5

EDWARDS GUILTY

SENTENCED TO DEATH JURY RECOMMENDS MERCY INSANITY PLEA REVIEWED. HIS HONOUR’S SUMMING UP. (By Telegraph—rress Association.) AUCKLAND, Nov. 2. The trial of John Hubert Edwards, a labourer, aged 41, charged with the murder of Mrs Christian Cunningham, at her home at 111 Crummer Road, Grey Lynn, on August 16, was concluded in the Supreme Court 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 twenty witnesses for the defence and four were medical witnesses for the. Crown. The jury retired at 3.30 p.in. and returned at 5 p.m. His Honour, whose summing up occupied half ail hour, said that apart from a few acts of eccentricity there was no evidence that Edwards had prior to this crime been guilty of violence to anybody Witnesses had stated it was his habit to sing at odd moments. He had strong political convictions and he was a vegetarian, but mpjiv people were .vegje.tajrians, sang in their baths and held strong political convictions; yet it did not follow that they - were irresponsible. LAW AS TO INSANITY. The Jury was asked to believe Edwards had delusions and was so unbalanced that 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 a man committed murder he was presumed to be sane unless the contrary was proved. The defence might prove that Edwards suffered from disease of the mind, out that was not sufficient. The disease had to be’ of such a character that Edwards would liot understand the nature and quality of the act he was committing. Such a law was necessary in- the publie interest. Tens of thousands of people might be suffering from diseases of the mind, but that was not to say they constituted a menace. . His Honour said Edwards went •to Cunningham’s house wearing his pyjamas under his, clothes, obviously wf.th the intention of staying the night. He slept there, asked for his breakfast, had a shave and went out with Cunningham. |ivo>ne of these things proved insanity. If he wrote the “death pact” letter before «ommittinrr the murder it was very strong evidence that 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 had claimed he wrote it after the blows had been struck. If that were- so he must then have gone to the daughter’s bedroo-m, opened the drawer, taken out the* writing pad sought a pencil and deliberately written those words, afterwards placing tlje pad on top of the ga-s meter. Was that consistent with the theory that he did not know what he was doing? Was it likely that the man would write such a letter and not know what he was doing? It was no proof of innocence that the man committed the crime as the result of an uncontrollable impulse. MEDICAL EVIDENCE! Reviewing, the medical evidence his Honour said the three witnesses for the Crown had very wide experience in mental diseases both in England and in vr -ew Zealand. “They all declare that when the crime was committed Edwards- was not suffering from » disease of the mind which might disable him from understanding the nature and nual:tv 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 sav,” added his Honour, addressin «■ the jury 7, “that on rthe evidence put before y r ou lam of the opinion that vour verdict is the correct one.”