Crown Evidence In Rebuttal (Press, 28 August 1954)

In a significant trial reported on 28 August 1954, the case centred on the sanity of two accused individuals, Parker and Hulme, in connection with the murder of Mrs Parker. Mr Brown, representing the defence, argued insanity as their only defence; however, the Crown called upon evidence from three psychiatrists to challenge this assertion. Dr Kenneth Robert Stallworthy, a senior medical adviser from the Avondale Mental Hospital in Auckland, testified about his extensive experience with patients in mental institutions. He noted that across his years of practice, he had never encountered two insane individuals collaborating to commit a crime. He detailed the standard psychiatric procedures in cases of murder, emphasising the responsibility to assess whether the accused understood the nature and quality of their actions, and whether they recognised these actions as wrong both legally and morally. In his examination of Parker and Hulme, Dr Stallworthy concluded that neither exhibited any illness of the mind at the time of the murder. He referenced Parker's diaries, indicating premeditation and an understanding of the potential consequences of their actions, which illustrated their awareness that they were breaking the law. Both young women acknowledged their understanding of right and wrong during interviews, further suggesting they were in a sound mental state. Dr Stallworthy asserted that the conceptualisation of their potential insanity appeared to be a strategy to evade punishment. Dr James Edwin Saville, another psychiatrist, corroborated Dr Stallworthy’s findings after interviewing the accused several times. He indicated that during their initial meetings, the girls attempted to portray themselves as insane, yet by the end of their consultations, they expressed a preference for being deemed sane, aware of the substantially less favourable outcome of a mental institution versus a prison sentence. Dr James Dewar Hunter also echoed the previous testimonies, affirming that he did not see any indication of mental illness in the accused. He noted the general rarity of two individuals conspiring in a crime while insane, further substantiating the psychiatrist's consensus that both Parker and Hulme were functioning normally and able to appreciate the moral and legal implications of their actions. The trial attracted substantial media attention in the UK, with many British newspapers extensively covering the proceedings, reflecting a keen public interest in the case. This highlights the case’s high profile and the implications of the verdict, particularly surrounding youth, sanity, and crime. As the evidence concluded, the judge suggested that the jury could either continue that day or adjourn until the morning, leaving the courtroom in anticipation of a deliberation that could potentially shape perceptions of mental health in legal contexts significantly. The trial would remain a focal point in discussions about crime, sanity, and justice in New Zealand.

The text on this page is created, in the most part, using Generative AI and so may contain errors or omissions. It is supplied to you without guarantee or warranty of correctness. If you find an error or would like to make a content suggestion please get in contact

The text on this page is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 New Zealand