PENNED A CONFESSION TO GIVE TO JUDGE

Sun (Auckland), Volume II, Issue 584, 9 February 1929, Page 6

PENNED A CONFESSION TO GIVE TO JUDGE

ANOTHER SURPRISE PRISONER AT PALMERSTON Press Association PALMERSTON N., Friday. James Morton McGill, who yesterday revealed the location of a stolen safe to the police, created a further surprise in the Supreme Court by handing in to the Judge a written confession when he appeared for sentence. ADDRESS FOR THE DEFENCE Mr. Lough nan, counsel for accused, addressing His Honour, said he would like the Court to know that accused was a man of exceedingly temperate habits, with no tendency to drink. With such a man, if he had the capacity for earning a decent living, there was always the hope that he would return to a decent form of life. “It has struck me,” continued Mr. Lo.ughnan, “that in a certain stage of my arguments I presented an aspect of the case involving his wife I put it strongly to the jury that if it accepted the nightwatch man’s story then the woman was in it as well as the man. I feel that it might be in your Honour’s mind that implication of accused’s wife adds to the gravity of the offence. The argument w*as one I framed and I hope that it in no way will be attributed to prisoner. My intention was limited to the evidence. “It might be that your Honour thinks that she was induced to come here and give false evidence to save her husband. I think I am entitled to say that nothing would have kept her out of the box, which she entered without any inducemen and on her own insistence.” His Honour: What has happened to the safe? Mr. Louglman: I would rather have the detective make a statement concerning that. I know it has been returned. but am unaware of what its condition is. His Honour: The money has gone. THE SAFE WAS BARE Mr. Cooke, Crown Prosecutor: The safe is in the police station covered with rust and in a very dirty condition. The hinges have been sawn off and the contents removed. There is no possible prospect of securing any finger-prints. We will produce the safe for your Honour’s inspection. The Judge: There is no need, but from tile point of view of restitution? Mr. Cooke: Everthing has gone. The production of the safe at the last minute is rather a two-edged weapon. If that position had been before the jury at the trial it might have affected the verdict on the first count. “This confession which you handed in,” said his Honour, in addressing the prisoner, “from a legal point of view amounts to evidence of guilt on the first count. Therefore, there is no reason for you to complain at the fairness of the jury in dealing with your case. Perhaps, from the wider point of view, your confession and restoration of the safe should be in your favour, but from the point of view of restitution there is nothing for the wronged man at* all. Confession before trial would have been taken into consideration in fixing sentence, but when it is made afterwards at the last minute before sentence, it is very difficult to deal with the confession as a mitigating circumstance.” McGill was sentenced to reformative detention for a period not exceeding three years.