|
[murder, by police – police, defendants
in crime – Morpeth - manslaughter]
R.
v. Johnstone
Supreme Court of New South Wales
Dowling C.J., 6 May 1840
Source: Sydney
Herald, 13 May 1840[1]
John Johnstone, late constable
in the Morpeth Police, was indicted for the wilful murder of Richard
Darlington, at Morpeth, on the 9th of last March. It appeared that
on the evening of the day laid in the indictment, the prisoner observing
the deceased, who was in liquor, interrupting the people going along
the highway, in the exercise of his duty as a constable, took him
in charge for the purpose of lodging him in the station-house, and
in order to enable him to lodge the deceased there, he obtained
the assistance of two other persons connected with the Morpeth Police.
When getting him along the prisoner and deceased kept arguing and
irritating each other, and the deceased was told by the prisoner
that if he did not go on he would shoot him; the prisoner kept urging
him on to the station-house, and for the purpose of locking him
in, was in the act of reaching out his left arm for the key, from
the keeper of the station-house, when the pistol which was in his
right hand went off, the shot lodging in the back of the deceased,
whose clothes were set on fire by the fire from the pistol, which
was about a foot long; the deceased lingered for four days, having
previous to his death made a declaration, charging the prisoner
with having caused his death. After the death of Darlington, an
inquest was held on the body, when the jury under the direction
of the Coroner, returned a verdict of Accidental Death. The Attorney-General
seeing the depositions, thought that the case ought to be investigated
and for that purpose he had brought it before the Supreme Court.
It was proved that the prisoner, after the pistol was fired, appeared
stunned at what had occurred, remained in a state of stupor for
about a quarter of an hour, but afterwards appeared very sorry for
the event, and gave himself into custody for having shot the deceased.
His Honor, in commenting on the case, condemned the indiscriminate
use of fire-arms by the constabulary when on ordinary duty, and
pointed out the illegality of their carrying fire-arms when on town
duty. The Jury returned a verdict of Guilty of Manslaughter.
His Honor, in passing sentence
on the prisoner, adverted to the reckless conduct of the prisoner
in taking his pistol from his belt in order to compel the deceased
to go to the watchhouse, at a time when he had other persons belonging
to the police to assist him, and also pointed out the harsh manner
in which he behaved throughout the whole affair; he called the prisoner’s
attention to the favorable view which the jury had taken of his
conduct, and informed him that had they returned a verdict against
him on the first count he would certainly have passed sentence of
death on him. As it was he did not see that there were any mitigating
circumstances in the prisoner’s case which could warrant him in
exercising that leniency which, as the administrator of the laws
had vested in him. He then sentenced him to be transported for
seven years.
Notes
|