The Hawaiian gazette., 1908-04-07
MURDER FINE
AMAzEs MAUI


From an indictment of murder in the
first degree to a conviction of man
slaughter in the third degree is long
leap and then when the court imposes
sentence of only one dollar on the
criminal without penal servitude and
RENTS all costs we have a sentence
that has been equaled but once in the
history of the Territory. says the Maui
News. discussing the remarkable sem
tence imposed in the Circuit Court Of
the Second Circuit of the Territory on
Monday of last week when Judge A. N.
Kepoikai passed sentence on Higaki
Ryosuki.
The memorable ruling OF the court.
which caused the quashing of the in
dictment on the ground that the First
Deputy Attorney General was not
legally authorized to represent the At
torney Generals Department for the
reason that he was not specially COM
missioned office for this particular
court, although he had repeatedly been
recognized as such on previous occa-
sions in this, court and in every other
court of record OF the Territory, is
matter OF history.
A new Indictment was found charg-
ing the defendant with murder in the
before a jury.
The Territory was represented by
County Attorney d. II. Case who put
up good case against the defendant.
The evidence was that the victim
was found dead In a canefield. The
physician testified that she had been
dead between three and four hours.
That she was strangled TO death, that
there was nothing around her neck to
strangle her. The defendant was found
lying by her side. An obi was wound
twice around his neck and then tied
twice In a hard knot. one end of the
obi was tied to the dead girls wrist.
The defendant was unconscious.
Whether she strangled herself to
death alone (Which Is hardly prohable)
or whether the defendant had n hand
In strangling her to death was for the
jury to decide.
1t Is certain that the child after her |
death did not have much to do with
stranglng the man even IL the one end |
Of the obi was tied to her wrist.
Attorney ]. NJ. Vivas represented the
defendant and made one of the best !
lefences he has made here. At the |
argument before the jury It was noted |
that Attorney Nivas. who Is a sick man,
was not himself and showed fatigue. |
He, however, recovered himself toward |
The last of his argument and made a |
good plea for his client.
Ii Is understood that the jury stood |
six for acquittal and six for conviction
II murder in the first degree on the i
irst ballot, After the jury were in
heir room for over an hour II was
that they had arrived at a
verdict of manslaughter in the third
legree with recommendation for
mercy.
Just how they arrived at such a YER
lict is a mystery. There are many
Who contend that the case was one of
as the evidence showed
hat the defendant and the fourteen
year-old child whose life was taken
we're in love and that as the parents
If the child would not consent to her
to the defendant TINT they
lad agreed to die together now sts9l9Ir
The only evidence on this particular J
,iont was the confession of the de-
endant before the coroner's jury, which
vas admitted in evidence. In this con-
ession the defendant stated tina. he
md the child had agreed to die together
md that she was to pull the, obi and
triangle him to death and he was to
,ull the obi around her neck.
AS the defendant did not go on the
witness stand in his own defence and
10 other witnesses were produced to
how any other theory as to the death
If the child that was the only proof
# the exact manner in which she came
o her death.
There are many who do not justify
he mans action, especially after con-
idering the tender age of the child
whose life was taken nor do they be-
ieve the law justifies the request for
mercy after a verdict of manslaughter
which they contend carries with it
,enalty light enough. When however
he court imposed a fine of one dollar
Without penal servitude and RENTED
Ill costs which in this case ran up into
he hundreds there was the greatest
stonishment expressed.
4. |