SUPREME COURT

Southland Times, Issue 25362, 14 August 1935, Page 9

SUPREME COURT

CRIMINAL SITTING PRISONERS SENTENCED The quarterly session of the Supreme Court was opened in Invercargill yesterday. His Honour, Mr Justice Kennedy, presided. The following Grand Jury was empannelled: Arthur Hume Mackrell (foreman), Albert Edward Bath, Leslie Albert Blackmore, William Alexander Brown, Albert Cundall, Clarence John Davies, James Swan Dick, Thomas B. Dorman, Herbert James Farrant, Charles William Francis, George McKay Frobarth, George Frederick Jaquiery, Charles Maxted King, William Rouse Mabson, Robert H. Moffett, Ralph Mclnnes, Herbert James Pennington, Herbert Shuttleworth, John Henry Thomas, Rodan Thomson and David Wishart. The Charges. “All the charges of crime which will concern you or the Court at the present sitting are of a sexual nature,” said his Honour in his charge to the Grand Jury. “One man is committed for sentence for the crime of incest, but you will be particularly concerned with the charges against other persons, one of having unlawful carnal knowledge of a girl under the age of 16 years and the other of using unlawfully an instrument to procure the miscarriage of a woman,” he continued. “A serious aspect of the crime last mentioned —and yoU will understand I am speaking generally and not with reference to any case which may come before you—is that there frequently appears to be in these cases a neglect of ordinary cleanliness and the proper precautions, thus leading to septicaemia, with the result that the unfortunate woman concerned may lose her life or suffer a severe illness. Tlie law was no doubt framed for other purposes, but its enforcement may protect poor women, and prevent them from trusting their lives, with calamitous results, to those who are serving them for their money and not through humanity.” The unlawful carnal knowledge charge, explained his Honour, was against a man who, it was alleged, had committed the offence against his own niece. Tlie evidence would be easily followed and he did not propose to de-' tail it. The unlawful use of the instrument charge was made against a young woman who, it was alleged, had used the instrument upon an unmarried woman who was with child. Tlie evidence in that case would also be followed by the jury and he would not need to define it. His Honour concluded his charge by outlining and defining the functions of the Grand Jury. True bills were returned by the Grand Jury, after a brief retirement, in both cases laid before them, namely, Thomas Colvin Turnbull, alleged unlawful carnal knowledge, and Jean Cartwright, alleged unlawful use of an instrument. Young Man Sentenced. Thomas Colvin Turnbull, a single man, aged 28, was placed on his trial on a charge of unlawful carnal knowledge of a girl under the age; of 16 years. He entered a plea of guilty. In pleading for leniency on behalf of the prisoner, Mr Eustace Russell said he was of sober habits and had always borne an excellent character. His father was a rathex’ stern man who had not allowed prisoner to go about with girls, and the fact that the girl had been the only female in the household had probably a bearing on the case. Counsel sought that probation might be granted to the prisoner. The Crown Prosecutor (Ml’ H. J. Macalister) said he had nothing to add to the probation officer’s report. “Prisoner at the Bar, you are now a man of 28 years and when you first improperly interfered with the girl she was only 14J years of age,” remarked his Honour when passing sentence. “Your crime has been repeated frequently. You will be imprisoned with hard labour for nine months.” Three Years’ Hard Labour. Three years’ imprisonment with hard labour was the sentence imposed by his Honour, Mi’ Justice Kennedy, upon Victox- Lewis Fluerty, aged 52, when, having pleaded guilty in the Lowei’ Court to a charge of incest, he appeared for sentence in the Supreme Court yesterday afternoon. The prisoner, who was not represented by counsel, had nothing to say in mitigation, while the Crown Prosecutor (Mr H. J. Macalister) indicated that he did not wish to add anything to the probation officer’s report. “You appeal’ for sentence for the crime of incest,” said his Honour. “I shall not repeat the sorry and sordid story. It is a bad case. The sentence of the Court is that you be imprisoned with hard labour for three years.”