Brighouse & Rastrick Gazette. — 1892-11-26 (Brighouse, West Yorkshire, England)

VERDICT LND SENTENCE.  The trial of George Barker James Cooper for causing the death of his wife was concluded on Monday, when Deemster Sir W. L. Drinkwater summed up. The prisoner looked careworn and anxious. He kept his heed on the dock, and constantly rocked his body to and fro.--The learned judge commenced his summing-up by saying that it was proved and ad:nitted in this case that the prisoner stabbed his wife with a knife, and that that wound caused her death. The jury might also take it that the blow Was struck in anger, and after serious altercation. That relieved the jury from the question of whOhsr Vie prisoner could be held altogether not guilty. The jury must take it as a definition that if a person irritated by his wife's language struck her a blow with intent to kill or to do her grievous bodily harm, and :caused her death, this, in the eye of the law, was murder. The provocation by words would not justify a blow so as to reduce the crime to one of manslaughter. But if the provocation was a blow, it depended in some degree on the severity of the blow Whether the crime would be manslaughter. The prisoner being found locked in the room with his wife, there were suspicious circumstances which threw upon him the duty of shewing that death was caused in some way which would reduce the crime from murder to manslaughter. This might be done by shewing that it was unintentional altogether; but in point of fact it had not been alleged that it was done by accident, but that it was done as the result of the blow he received. The jury were to look with great suspicion and caution on the statement of the prisoner. No doubt there was a certain amount of quarrelling before the blow was struck, and he was glad that the prosecution did not see fit to press that the act was done after long premeditation. The prisoner's evidence must be weighed, because if a blow had been struck by the deceased sufficient to irritate him as much as was alleged it would reduce the crime from murder to manslaughter. Witnesses had been called to prove that the accused was in the habit of holding a knife in his hand trimming his nails, so as to make it appear probable that he did not deliberately go from where his wife was to get the knife with which to deliberately stab her. The next serious point was, why did not the prisoner call for help ? The prisoner's defence was that he believed the deceased to be in a faint till the doctor pronounced her dead. The learned judge next dwelt on the various false statements made on and for some days after the date of Vie alleged murder. Referring to the position of the knife in the prisoner's hand,his:Honour said: "You will see that Dr. O'Mally, referring to the manner in which the blow is stated to have been committed, namely, that he struck backwards, says that he sees no difficulty in believing that the blow was inflicted in that way; and the prisoner himself says that he was sitting alongside the deceased paring his nails, and that after receiving the blow he struck backwards. It seem hardly to be denied that the knife, when the prisoner struck backwards, slipped into the position of a dagger, and that it was in that position when the wound was inflicted. You must remember that you have only the prisoner's statement as to the manner in which the blow was given. He says that in turning the knife he acted unintentionally. If the knife was turned intentionally, and he used it to strike her alai to do her grievious bodily harm, then the conclusion you must come to must be a very serious one." His Honour reviewed the evidence regarding cruelty very minutely, and referred to the letter written by Cooper when in gaol. This letter, he said, shewed that even at the time it was penned—September 11th—Cooper was relying on the defence of suicide. His Honour then pointed to other circumstances shewing the prisoner's reliance on the defence of suicide.  The jury were out of court for an hour and three-quarters, and returned with a verdict of manslaughter. The judges, after a retirement of five minutes, returned into court, and Deemster Drinkwater, addressing the prisoner, said: You have been found guilty after a long trial of the crime of manslaughter. The jury have taken a merciful view of your case, and one with yr.:lief' the court is not incliru d to disagree. The court, however, sees that this is not the only act of violence which has been committed by you, but that various assaults upon your wife have been committed, causing her considerable bodily injury, and that these have at Last culminated in causing her death. The prisoner was then sentenced to 10 yrkars'• penal servitude. The sentence was received ill court with considerable excitement.