[TO TEE EDITOR OP TEE " SPECTATOR. " ] SIR,—As regards the
Slater case and Mr. Robert K. Risk's last letter, I would call his attention and yours to the following
passages in Mr. Roughead's introduction to his account of Oscar Slater's trial :— " The votes of the fifteen jurymen were, it is understood, given as follows : Nine for ' guilty,' five for 'not proven,' and one for • not guilty.' It is noteworthy that, bad two of the majority voted differently, Slater would have been set free. In England, of course, a conviction in such circumstances would not have been obtained, and a new trial would have resulted" (pp. lxvii-viii).
Speaking of the reception of the verdict by the Press:— " Perhaps the more general view was that a verdict of 'not proven' would, in the circumstances, have been a safer finding." (p. lxvii.) That is the view I took after studying the case in two series of Scottish trials and before following the controversy in your columns, and I think it will recommend itself to impartial persons, with whom Mr. Robert K. Risk, on his own showing, can hardly be classed. On the same page Mr. .Itoughead writes It is not too much to say that the verdict came with a shock of surprise to most of the auditors in the crowded court-room. A large proportion of these would be men of law."
am, Sir, &c., G. G.
[We cannot continue this correspondence.—En. Spectator.]
Previous page
