121
emotional man, he was the darling of the public but less popular with Judges and members of the English Bar.
It was not easy, given the facts outlined above, for Marshall Hall to establish a sound defence, one that would save the unfortunate man from the gallows. The three murders — that of his Welsh wife (born Catherine Morgan) and of his two daughters, Doris (20) and Cecilia (18) — appeared to be unmotivated. Since Marshall Hall could not understand why Lock went berserk, he concluded he must have been insane when he committed the crimes. In 1925 a plea of insanity had to satisfy the M'Naghten Rules. These rules declared:
'to establish a defence on the ground of insanity it must be clearly proved that, at the time of committing the act, the accused was labouring under such a defect of reason, from disease of the mind, as not to know the nature and quality of the act he was doing, or, if he did know it, that he did not know he was doing what was wrong'.8
But when Lock phoned the Liverpool police and reported the murders, it was clear he knew what he had done and that it was wrong, and that he expected to be punished.
If the case were tried today, it seems likely his counsel would plead 'diminished responsibility'.10 In 1925, needless to say, such a plea was not available to the defence, so Marshall Hall fell back on a rather dubious argument, supported by questionable medical and psychiatric evidence, that Lock acted as he did in a state of 'unconscious automatism', brought on by an epileptic fit.11
In 1918 some drunken Russian sailors had attempted to enter the Chinese Republic Progress Club, run by Lock; a fight had broken out when he attempted to eject them and he had been stunned by a billiard cue. Witnesses for the defence averred that his behaviour started to change afterwards, that he began to drink heavily at times, but more so when, in 1923, he lost much of his fortune — £10,000 — in an unsuccessful shipping venture. As Marshall Hall argued: "Some minute happening in the brain caused a change for which none of us can account, turned a man — a mild, lovable, peaceable man — into a raving madman. Absolutely and entirely motiveless, he killed those
121
emotional man, he was the darling of the public but less popular with Judges and members of the English Bar."
It was not easy, given the facts outlined above, for Marshall Hall to establish a sound defence, one that would save the un- fortunate man from the gallows. The three murders that of his Welsh wife (born Catherine Morgan) and of his two daughters, Doris (20) and Cecilia (18) appeared to be un- motivated. Since Marshall Hall could not understand why Lock went berserk, he concluded he must have been insane when he committed the crimes. In 1925 a plea of insanity had to satisfy the M'Naghten Rules. These rules declared:
to establish a defence on the ground of insanity it must be clearly proved that, at the time of committing the act, the accused was labouring under such a defect of reason, from disease of the mind, as not to know the nature and quality of the act he was doing, or, if he did know it, that he did not know he was doing what was wrong'.8
But when Lock phoned the Liverpool police and reported the murders, it was clear he knew what he had done and that it was wrong, and that he expected to be punished."
If the case were tried today, it seems likely his counsel would plead 'diminished responsibility."10 In 1925, needless to say, such a plea was not available to the defence, so Marshall Hall fell back on a rather dubious argument, supported by questionable medical and psychiatric evidence, that Lock acted as he did in a state of 'unconscious automatism', brought on by an epileptic fit."1
In 1918 some drunken Russian sailors had attempted to enter the Chinese Republic Progress Club, run by Lock; a fight had broken out when he attempted to eject them and he had been stunned by a billiard cue. Witnesses for the defence averred that his behaviour started to change afterwards, that he began to drink heavily at times, but more so when, in 1923, he lost much of his fortune £10,000 in an unsuccessful shipping venture. As Marshall Hall argued: "Some minute happening in the brain caused a change for which none of us can account, turned a man — a mild, lovable, peaceable man into a raving Absolutely and entirely motiveless, he killed those
madman
+
+
+
It
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.