SECOND THOUGHTS.

Wanganui Chronicle, Volume LXVI, Issue 7563, 6 May 1919, Page 5

SECOND THOUGHTS.

SUPREME COURT JUDGE'S

VERDICT

OLD COUPLE'S CHARACTER CLEARED.

(Per Press Association.)

AUCKLAND, May 5

"To be imprisoned till the rising ftf the Court," was the sentence imposed'this morning upon William and Elizabeth Keyland an elderiy couple who pleaded guilty some months ago to a charge of failing to supply the necessaries of life to their idiot son. The case was finally dsiposed of at the Supreme Court, Mr. Justice Cooper reading the judgment of Mr. Justice Hocking upon Jegal points raised regarding the accused's plea of guilty in the lower court. The old couple who have a farm in the Paparoa District, were shown at an earlier hearing to have retained on their, farm an idiot son, about 29 years of age. who was found by the police living in an outhouse practically naked and in a very filthy state. It was shown, however, by evidence subsequently called that the idiot was well nourished and was Kept in the shed only at nights and in the middle of summer.

Dr. Beattie, Superintendent of the Auckland Mental Hospital stated that the boy had not a shred of intelligence and was indescribably filthy in his habits. Under the circumstances, the accused seemed to have done well for him.

At the- hearing, some important legal questions relating to the withdrawal of pleas of guilty were raised by Mr. W. D. Anderson, who appeared for the accused. A ml'tion was filed asking (a) that the plea be j recalled and the accused be allowed tc record a plea of not (guilty; (b) That the Court grant the accused leave to withdraw the plea in order that they might plead not guilty, or (c) That the committal for sentence be quashed or set aside. The judgment stated that no relief could be afforded in the form asked by paragraphs (a) and (b), and that the fact that the depositions did not support the offence charged, was not sufficient grounds for quashing or 3etting afeide the ples^; "As I doubt If the evidence supported the offence charged," added His Honour, "I do not think it right that any punishment should be inflicted beyond the sentence that .the accused be imprisoned until the rising of the Court. I wish to add that after hearing the evidence of Dr. Beattie the evidence contained in the depositions as to the treatment by accused of their imbecile son took on. a very different aspect in my mind from that which arose on reading the depositions in the first instance. The circumstances were peculiar, and in the light of Dr. Beattie's evidence I prefer the view that the accused did their best with a most difficult case, although through ignorance and absence of facilities their efforts were not well •Jirected. From this point of view I am confirmed in the propriety of sentence I have given. At the same time the police were quite justified ii> bringing the matter before the Court.