THE STYCHE CASE.

New Zealand Herald, Volume XXXVIII, Issue 11618, 4 April 1901, Page 6

THE STYCHE CASE.

NEW TRIAL REFUSED. [BY TELEGRAPH.PRESS ASSOCIATION.] Wellington, Wednesday. The Appeal Court has refused the motion for a new trial in the Styche case. The charge against Styche was that on or about June 4, 1900, he attempted to procure one Geoffrey Sherboume Clayton, of Christchurch, medical practitioner, to murder his wife, Elizabeth Styche. The jury foiind accused guilty, and a new trial was asked for on the ground that this verdict was against the weight of evidence. Styche was sentenced to seven years' imprisonment, the sentence to be suspended till the appeal had been disposed of.

In delivering judgment the Chief Justice said, in civil cases, the principle upon which applications for new trials are dealt with is, that the verdict of a jury will not be set aside unless it is such that no reasonable men could have come to such a conclusion. There must," of course, be a higher degree of assurance in criminal cases than in civil cases, but if the jury were of opinion that this higher degree of assurance was attained, then, if this opinion was one which reasonable men could come to, the Court could not interfere. In this case the Court had to start with this: That the evidence was that accused had borne a good character, and nothing which could be really called a motive for the act had been shown.. Reviewing the evidence, ho woven, on the question whether the incriminating letters had been written with the machine in accused's office, His Honor said it could not be said the jury were not warranted, if, indeed, they were not compelled, to come to the conclusion that the letters were written with that machine. The evidence also showed that it was extremely improbable that any person other than the accused could have had access to accused's room on the different occasions , in question, and have written the letters with that machine. ,As regards the question whether the breakage of the machine was accidental or intentional, Hist Honor, after reviewing the evidence on this point, concluded that the jury had been fully justified in finding that it was not accidental. Having come to this conclusion, the jury were amply justified in coming to the further conclusion of the guilt of accused. His Honor commented further on the similarity in style between the acknowledged letters by the accused to Dr. Clayton, and those containing the criminal suggestions, and said there were other minor matters pointing to the same conclusion. Taking the evidence as a whole, His Honor said that if believed, it pointed to one person, and to one person only, as the guilty person, namely, the accused. In His Honor's opinion, therefore, the case was not one for a new trial.

The other members of the Court also delivered written judgments concurring in all points with that delivered by the Chief Justice. ■

I The motion for a new trial was therefore dismissed.