H. M. Advocate v Savage
| Jurisdiction | Scotland |
| Judgment Date | 21 May 1923 |
| Docket Number | No. 11. |
| Date | 21 May 1923 |
| Court | High Court of Justiciary |
Lord Justice-Clerk.
Crime—Murder—Culpable homicide—Insanity—Mental unsoundness not amounting to insanity.
At the trial of a person on a charge of murder, direction to the jury (per the Lord Justice-Clerk) that aberration or weakness of mind—mental unsoundness bordering on, though not amounting to, insanity—at the date when the alleged murder was committed, was a circumstance which reduced the crime from that of murder to that of culpable homicide.
John Henry Savage was charged on an indictment at the instance of His Majesty's Advocate which set forth that ‘on 14th March 1923, in the dwelling-house at 25 Bridge Street, Leith, occupied by Richard Tillett, engineman, you did assault Jemima Grierson, then residing there, and did cut her throat with a razor or other sharp instrument, and did murder her, and you have been previously convicted of crime inferring personal violence.’
The accused was tried in the High Court at Edinburgh on 21st May 1923 before the Lord Justice-Clerk and a jury. He pleaded ‘not guilty and further that at the time of the act charged he was insane and not responsible for his actions.’
Evidence was led on behalf of the panel that at one time he had received an injury to his head, and instances were given of his eccentric conduct on several occasions. Evidence was also led to the effect that he was in the habit of indulging to excess in alcohol and was constantly under its influence, and that at times he also drank methylated spirits; and that when under their influence he was violent and irresponsible. Witnesses also spoke to his being under the influence of methylated spirits or alcohol on the night of the murder.
On behalf of the Crown the medical evidence was to the effect that the panel was sane, and that the eccentricities to which his witnesses had spoken were the ordinary eccentricities of one who over-indulged in alcohol. Witnesses for the Crown also gave evidence that, on the night of the murder, the panel appeared to be sober and in his proper senses.
During the trial reference was made to the undernoted authorities.1
In the course of his charge the Lord Justice-Clerk (Alness) gave the following directions to the jury:—
Lord Justice-Clerk (Alness).—… In many murder cases you have a simple and indeed a single issue, namely, Did A kill B? This, ladies and gentlemen of the jury, is not a case which can be solved along such simple lines as these. There...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
The People (Director of Public Prosecutions) v Heffernan
...responsibility emerged as a common law development in Scotland. Its elements were first clarified in the case of HM Advocate v Savage [1923] JC 49. In reading the judgment of the Lord Justice Clerk in that case it is clear that a defence akin to insanity had evolved over time through prior ......
-
R v Golds
...to the level of impairment, which included (but were not confined to) references to the borderline of insanity (see HM Advocate v Savage 1923 JC 49). The court (Lord Goddard CJ, Hilbery and Salmon JJ) concluded that the correct course for the trial judge was not to attempt synonyms or re-de......
-
Wendy Graham Against Her Majesty's Advocate
...Connelly having proceeded upon a misunderstanding of the Lord Justice Clerk’s (Alness) charge to the jury in HM Advocate v Savage 1923 JC 49. It was on this basis, which had been conceded by the Solicitor General, that the conviction was quashed. That is the ratio of Galbraith. What follows......
-
Kim Louise Scarsbrook Or Galbraith V. Her Majesty's Advocate
...that the third ground of appeal could succeed only if a larger court were convened and decided to overrule Savage v. H. M. Advocate 1923 J.C. 49 and subsequent authorities such as Carraher v. H. M. Advocate 1946 J.C. 108. The possibility of a retrial if the first or third grounds of appeal ......
-
Evolution and devolution: Scottish legislation relevant to people with intellectual disabilities within mental health and forensic services
...3/4 2015jJOURNAL OF INTELLECTUAL DISABILITIES AND OFFENDING BEHAVIOURjPAGE135 Galbraith v HMA 2001 (2001), SCCR 551.HMA vs Savage 1923 (1923), JC 49.HMA vs Wilson 1942 (1942), JC 75.Hume, D. (1844), Commentaries on the Law of Scotland Respecting Crimes, Bell and Bradfate, Edinburgh.McKay, C......
-
Battered Woman Syndrome, Diminished Responsibility and Women Who Kill: Insights from Scottish Case Law
...available6. Scottish Law Commission, Insanity and Diminished Responsibility (Scot Law Com No 195, 2004) s 3.5.7. HM Advocate v Savage 1923 JC 49.8. Galbraith (n 4).9. Savage (n 7).10. In particular, Connelly v HM Advocate 1990 JC 349 had wrongly interpreted the ratio decidendi of the earlie......
-
The Psychopathic Offender
...somewhat rhetorically, ifthere werenotin fact many persons who might be included inthis category. Moreover, inH.M.Advocate v. Savage (1923J.C.49)theLordJustice Clerk remarkedthatifthedefenceof diminished responsibility were made available to persons ofa very short temper or lacking in self-......