SEPTUAGENRIAN SENTENCED

NZ Truth, Issue 771, 14 August 1920, Page 6

SEPTUAGENRIAN SENTENCED

1 — -* — Charge of Murder Fails "MOTHER" GLEGG FOUND GUILTY Boobed for Abortion. At Dunedin Supremo Court last week, before his Honor, Mr. Justice Sim and a jury of twelve, Mrs. Helen Glegg stood her trial on a charge of murdering Olive May Pile, aged 20, on or about May 28 last. She pleaded not guilty, and waa represented by Lawyer Hanlon. The complete evidcmc© of the case has already appeared In these columns. The facts w.ero that until twelve months beforo her death Olive May Pile, a young-, unmarried woman, lived with her parents at Puketeraki. She then went to Oamaru as a domestic, where she kept . company with Charles. Thomas Burdett, Thia man took her to Mrs. Glegg's place at 15, Phillips-street, Dunedin. He gave Mrs. Glegg: a £10 note and two £ 5 notes. Mrs. Glegg assured him the girl would be all right, and he went away, returning again on th'o nigrht of June 12, when the accused Informed him /that the girl was dead. She toid. Burdett to CLEA.R A WATT AS QUICKLY AS , POSSIBLE,. and say nothing. Constable Hart, acting on the Information of Dr. London, who had been summoned to the house by Mrs. Glegg, saw the dead body. Sergeant Thomson and Detective Hall later, visited the place and possessed themselves of certain instruments. Rose Williams, who was found m the house seriously ill, had previously resided at Clyde, where she got into trouble, for which a laborer named William Keith McLeod admitted resppnsibility. This gent, stated that he had asked Mrs. Glegg- to perform a certain operation or. Roso Y/iJHains, giving the sirl's name as Smith. Miss Williama duly came to Dunedin. She save Mra. Glegg 1 £ 10. Later she was removed to the hoapital. Dr. Drennan, who made a post mortem examination of the body of Olive May Pile, gave aa his opinion that death was due to septic infection, which affected tins j lungs. Lawyer Jrlanlon, addressing the jury>' said that the charge of murder m the pi'esent case t/slsj v^hat might be called constructive raurdai 1 . It was killing: another while m the performance of some unlawful act Did ac- i cused know her conduct waa likely to cause death? If not, " her offence would be manslaughter only. Where j was the evidence that accused inter- ! fered with Miss Pile?, There was the evidence of the infoi-rner, Uurdett, who, hoy/ever, waa an accomplice. The Williams' case was brought m because ■■ the Crown sought to show by the girl Williams, and the man McLeod, that the operation performed upon her was similar to the one performed upon the #irl Pile, which had caused death. That was their logic. They could not prove that the woman had touched the girl Pile at all. He invited the jury to Ignore absolutely the evidence given In connection with th e case of the girl Williams. Juries were not entitled HANG PEOPLE ON SUSPICION. Could they for a moment believe that, assuming Mrs. Glegg did perform the operation, she knew, or o"ught to have known, that her conduct was likely to cause death? If not, she could not be convicted of murder. But there was not any evidence at all that the woman had interfered with this girl, and he put it to the jury that their verdict should be one of acquittal. On. the issues, the jury found: (-1) Did the girl, Olive May Pile, die as the result of an illegal operation? — Yes. (2) If so, did the accused Helen Glegg perform that operation? — No. His Honor: The verdict amounts to one of not guilty. Accused was then charged with having, m June, at Dunedin, with intent to procure the miscarriage of Rose Williams, unlawfully used an instrument or 'other means. The facts were the same as elicited m preceding case and previously published In "Truth." Lawyer Hanlon defended. . The Jury returned a verdict of guilty with a recommendation to mercy. In view of the recommendation of the Jury and the woman's age and condition, his Honor sentenced her to a torm of eighteen months' imprisonment without hard labor.