TNAG-0604-FCO40-752-Capital-punishment-in-Dependent-Territories-1977 — Page 155

-112-

you can see that what the specialist told you fits right

in.

Now Members of the Jury, the

psychiatrist's expert

opinion as to the accused's personality and his mental

make-up is relevant and useful to you to consider.

That is the specialist's field, it's a scientific field.

But Members of the Jury, as the judges of the facts,

you can draw your conclusions as well, on the proven

facts and on the things that you have seen here, because

that is your province. The scientific part of the expert's

evidence is relevant, and you have to take that, because

you have no knowledge of the scientific side.

On the factual side, a jury will not need a psychia-

trist to tell them how people react to the stress and

strains of life if they have no mental abnormality.

That's a situation that will fall into your laps as

the jury in this case. If there is no mental abnormality

the reaction to stress and strain of people in the world

is a matter for the jury and is therefore a matter for

you.

Now mental retardation Members of the Jury, you will

have seen many a person in your life time who is mentally

retarded, and you have seen different conditions of

mental retardation. Some people who are mentally retarded

are mainly idiots. In this case I think it is safe to

say that the accused is not an idiot, because he gave

sensible evidence, he could recall everything, so he is

not an idiot, he is not that class of mentally retarded,

but the psychiatrist tells you that in his assessment

5

10

15

20

25