Simester & Brookbanks, Principles of Criminal Law, op. cit., p.267.
Ibid.
Sigmund Freud died in London in August 1939, immediately before unprecedented id forces exploded in the Second World War.
Principles of Criminal Law, pp.266 & 267.
54. C.E. Beeby, The Biography of an Idea: Beeby on Education (Wellington: NZ Council for Educational Research, 1992), p.65.[Educational Research Series No.69]
Ibid., p.289. Simester and Brookbanks agree that a succession of eighteenth and nineteenth-century cases “appeared to harden the notion that only those who were completely bereft of reason were entitled to the defence of insanity”, citing R v Ferrers (1760) 19 St Tr 885; R v Hadfield (1800) 27 St Tr 1281; R v Bellingham Coll Lun 636; R v Oxford (1840) 4 St Tr (NS) 498.
Ibid., p.268.
Ibid., pp.268 & 288.
Ibid., p.288.
Daniel M’Naghten’s Case (26 May, 19 June 1843), 8 ER 718 [1843-60] at 718.
Ibid., 719 & 722.
Ibid., 720. Cf. Robert Goff, ‘The Mental Element in the Crime of Murder’, The Law Quarterly Review, Vol. 104 (January 1988), 30-59.
Peter Goodrich, Reading the Law: A Critical Introduction to Legal Method and Techniques (Oxford: Basil Blackwell, 1986), p.76.
62. Ibid., pp.76 & 73.
63. Adams J; cited by Glamuzina and Laurie, Parker & Hulme, op. cit., p.97.
64. Glamuzina & Laurie, ibid., pp.96-97.
65. Turner J was echoing the character of Polonius in The Tragedy of Hamlet, Prince of Denmark :“Though this be madness, yet there’s method in’t” (2.2.206-7). I have in mind Hamlet’s boast to Guildenstern: “I am but mad north-north-west; when the wind is southerly, I know a hawk from a handsaw”( Hamlet ,2.2.382-83).
66. The Crimes Act 1908, The Public Acts of New Zealand, Vol.II [1908-31] (Wellington: Government Printer 1932), p.195.
A.W. Brown (Senior Crown Counsel), The Press, 24 August 1954 (cited in Parker & Hulme: A Lesbian View, p.84). A recent edition of Adams on Criminal Law acknowledges the validity of Dixon J’s Porter ruling—(ed.) Hon. J.B. Robertson, Adams on Criminal Law 2nd Student Edition (Wellington: Brooker’s, 1998), p.73. Despite some demurrers, this reasoning (as per R v Macmillan [1966]) has been upheld in the 1990s by New Zealand courts (ibid., pp.74-75). In addition, Simester and Brookbanks assert that Dixon J’s jury instructions in Porter “has come to be regarded as a classic direction” in New Zealand (Principles of Criminal Law, op.cit.,p.285).
Gresson; cited by Neil Clarkson in ‘Jury rejected insanity submissions’, The Press, 17 June 1989, p.23.
Brown; cited in ‘Discovery of Body Described’ and ‘Court Told About Families’, The Christchurch Star-Sun, 23 August 1954, p.1.
Brown; cited by Neil Clarkson, ‘Separation threat trigger for a brick attack’, The Press, 17 June 1989, p.23.
All references to Pauline’s diaries and her and Juliet’s statements were sourced in Neil Clarkson, ibid. and R.W. Medlicott, ‘The Parker-Hulme, Leopold-Loeb Cases and the Concept of Omnipotence’, New Zealand Law Journal Vol.37, op. cit. Diary transcripts may be viewed online at a FAQ database site created in 1995 by Dr John D. Porter: http://www.geocities.com/hollywood/studio/2194/faq2/Section_7/7.4.3.html. or at http://members.tripod.com/hc_faq/7.4.3.htm .
Cf. Mary Hadley, ‘Social Injustices in Anne Perry’s Victorian England’, clues: a journal of detection, Vol.20:2 (Fall/Winter 1999), 1-12.
Anne Perry; cited by Sarah Gristwood, ‘Haunted by my Horrible Past’, The Australian Women’s Weekly (March 1995), p.8.
Nicholas Reid, ‘VIEWING: Heavenly Jackson’, North & South (October 1994), p.152.
Jackson cited by Glenn Inwood, ‘Film-maker aims to dispel myths’, Christchurch Star, 12 October 1994, p.2. The novelist Fay Weldon has given a disputed view of Christchurch Girls’ High School in the 1940s in her memoir Auto Da Fay (London: Flamingo, 2002 ), describing it as “a deeply serious and miserable place…haunted by the murder that was yet to come”.
76. . McClelland; cited by Neil Clarkson, ‘Murder Without Remorse’, The Press Weekend, 5 October 1991, p.1.
McClelland; cited by Jeremy Flint, ‘Mystery writer’s past resurfaces’, Christchurch Star, 10 August 1994, p.13.
McClelland; cited by Clarkson, op.cit.
Ibid.
Helena Kennedy, Eve Was Framed: Women and British Justice (1992; rpt. London: Vintage Books, 1993), p.51.
Reported by Chris Cooke, ‘Whatever happened to Pauline Parker?’, New Zealand Women’s Weekly, 13 January 1997, p.5.
Cf. Helena Kennedy’s discussion of women and the criminal law in Eve Was Framed, op.cit., Ch.8: Man-Slaughter (pp.190-221).
Saxby; interview with James McNeish, February 1981; cited in The Mask of Sanity: The Bain Murders (Auckland: David Ling Publishing, 1997), p.202.
Gurr and Cox, Famous Australasian Crimes (1957), op.cit., pp.155-156.
Medlicott, ‘The Parker-Hulme, Leopold-Loeb Cases and the Concept of Omnipotence’, NZLJ 37:22 (1961), 345-48 at 345. Medlicott’s earlier paper, ‘Paranoia of the Exalted Type in a Setting of Folie a Deux: A Study of Two Adolescent Homicides’ for the British Journal of Medical Psychology 28:4 [1955], 205-223 can be found, slightly abbreviated with minor annotations, at http://members.tripod.com/hc_faq7.8.1.htm (Dr John Porter’s comprehensive FAQ website).
Kennedy, Eve Was Framed, pp.9 & 15.
Ibid.,pp.23 & 238.
Ibid., p.101.
Jenni Millbank, ‘It’s About This: Lesbians, Prison, Desire’, Keynote Address [Plenary Two], “Mediating Law” Conference (University of Melbourne Law School), 30 November 2002. Dr Millbank was in fact quoting Ruthann Robson, Lesbian Outlaw: Survival Under the Rule of Law (Ithaca, NY: Firebrand Books, 1992). Other useful texts are Susan Calvin’s Lesbian Origins (San Francisco: Ism Press, 1985) and Celia Kitzinger’s The Social Construction of Lesbianism (London: Sage, 1987). See Millbank, ‘From Butch to Butcher’s Knife: Film, Crime and Lesbian Sexuality’, The Sydney Law Review, Vol.18:4 (December 1996), 451-473. (I am indebted to Dr Millbank for providing me with a copy of this excellent paper which contends usefully with representations of the Parker-Hulme case.)
Cf. McKernan,The Amazing Crime and Trial of Leopold and Loeb, op.cit., pp.60 & 103.
Cited in ibid., pp.107 & 121.
Clarence Darrow; cited ibid.,p. 185.
Darrow, ibid., pp.215 & 214.
94. Darrow , ibid., pp. 215 & 216. Darrow cited Nathan Leopold Jr’s letter to Loeb of 10 October 1923, in which Leopold explained his ‘system of Nietzschian [sic] philosophy’ – “In formulating a superman he is, on account of certain superior qualities inherent in him, exempted from the ordinary laws which govern ordinary men. He is not liable for anything he may do, whereas others would be, except for the one crime that it is possible for him to commit – to make a mistake”(cited ibid at p.219). Darrow produced this letter as clear evidence of an immature and ‘diseased brain’, although the trial judge rejected the insanity defence.
Helena Kennedy, Eve Was Framed, op. cit., p.240.
Gurr & Cox, Famous Australasian Crimes, p.164.
Medlicott, NZLJ 37:22 (1961), 345.
Ibid.
Ibid., 346. In 2002 several New Zealand policemen spoke out on this point: retired detective Eric McLachlan noted that the duo “were just skylarking” when he visited them at the Ilam Homestead after the crime and another detective, Bob Bamber, added that when taken to the central Christchurch police station for questioning they sat in his office and “ were just casual. I was a little bit surprised. A lot of people who have committed murder worry about what’s happened or show remorse” (cited by Yvonne Martin, ‘Hulme sorry about murder’, The Press [Christchurch], 30 November 2002 , p.1).
Ibid.
Ibid.
Adams J, cited by Julie Glamuzina and Alison Laurie, Listener & TV Times, 21 October 1991, p.14. (“Letters”)
Adams J, cited by Medlicott, op. cit., 347. It seems extremely likely that Adams J was deeply reluctant to follow the policy of comity in the common law by acknowledging the reasonings in the sister jurisdiction of Australia, given that New Zealanders were even more dedicated than their trans-Tasman cousins in the 1950s (this case occurring after the exciting 1954 Royal Tour) in trumpeting their status as ‘Better Britons of the South’, “to the point where 12,000 miles of distance were transcended and they became in many respects a virtual Scotland” and full “shareholders in…Old British culture”(James Belich, Paradise Reforged: A History of the New Zealanders from the 1880s to the Year 2000 [Honolulu: University of Hawai’i Press, 2001], pp.11 & 345). Adams J was also likely to have reverenced (or at least been in judicial sympathy with) the trials of Oscar Wilde (detailed in: Frank Harris, Oscar Wilde [1918; rpt. London: Robinson Publishing, 1997], H.Montgomery Hyde, The Trials of Oscar Wilde [London: William Hodge, 1948] and The Oscar Wilde File, compiled by Jonathan Goodman [London: Allison & Busby/W.H. Allen, 1988]).
Margaret Anne Doody, The True Story of the Novel (1996; rpt. London: Fontana Press, 1998), p.76.
Ibid.
Helena Kennedy, Eve Was Framed, p.18.
Hargrave Adams; cited ibid.
Kennedy, ibid., p.200.
A.E.J. Fitchett, ‘Parker-Hulme Murder’, “Letters”, Listener & TV Times, 25 November 1991, p.11.
Glamuzina and Laurie, ‘Parker-Hulme Murder’, “Letters”, Listener & TV Times, 21 October 1991, p.14.
Medlicott, NZLJ (1961), op.cit., 346.
Medlicott, cited by Neil Clarkson, ‘Jury rejected insanity submissions’, The Press, 17 June 1989, p.23.
Moran, ‘Justice and its Vicissitudes’, The Modern Law Review, Vol.54:1 (1991), 160 & 159.
Leslie J. Moran, ‘Violence and the Law: The Case of Sado-Masochism’, Social & Legal Studies, Vo.4 (1995), 246.
Chaplain’s presentation to WAVE recruits; cited by Andrew Koppelman, ‘Why Gay Legal History Matters’[:review article], Harvard Law Review, Vol.113, No.8 (June 2000), 2038. Koppelman asserts that “The repression of gays in the 1950s was more far-reaching in its impact than were the anti-Communist witch-hunts of the same period”(at 2039), which may be over-stating the case more than somewhat.
115a. D.R. Lange; quoted by Vernon Wright, David Lange Prime Minister: A Profile (Wellington: Unwin Paperbacks/Port Nicholson Press, 1984), p.25.
Medlicott, Department of Justice Transcripts, Notes of Evidence, p.43; cited in Parker and Hulme: A Lesbian View, p.38.
Gresson; reported in The Press, 25 August 1954.
Glamuzina and Laurie, Parker and Hulme: A Lesbian View, p.93. Robin Wood describes this stereotype in the context of Hitchcock’s film Rope (1948), loosely based around the Leopold-Loeb case : Wood, Hitchcock’s Films Revisited (New York: Columbia University Press, 1989), Ch.16 ‘The Murderous Gays: Hitchcock’s Homophobia’(pp.336-357).
Bevan-Brown; cited in ibid., p.98.
Glamuzina and Laurie, p.123.
Ibid., p.126.
Ibid., p.149.
Ibid., p.181.
Ibid., p.129.
Peter J. Hutchings, The Criminal Spectre in Law, Literature and Aesthetics: Incriminating Subjects (London & New York: Routledge, 2000), Chapter 1.
Peter Goodrich and David Gray Carlson, ‘Introduction’ to (eds.) Goodrich & Carlson, Law and the Postmodern Mind: Essays on Psychoanalysis and Jurisprudence (Ann Arbor, Michigan: University of Michigan Press, 1998), pp.4 & 5.
Mieke Bal, ‘Legal Lust’; Keynote Address to the 10th Annual International Conference of the Law and Literature Association of Australia (University of Technology Sydney, Australia) on 7 July 2000. [Professor Bal is Professor of Theory of Literature and a founding Director of the Amsterdam School for Cultural Analysis, Theory and Interpretation (ASCA) at the University of Amsterdam.]
Anton Schútz, ‘Sons of the Writ, Sons of Wrath: Pierre Legendre’s Critique of Rational Law-Giving’; in Law and the Postmodern Mind,op.cit., p.194.
Schútz, ibid., pp.198 & 202.
Michael Vincent Stace, Legal Form and Moral Phenomena: A Study of Two Events (Doctor of Jurisprudence, 1980), Graduate Programme in Law, Osgoode Hall Law School, York University, Toronto, Ontario, p.178.
Ibid., p.320.
Ibid., p.v. A useful account of the context of the Kiwi sexual paranoia of the 1950s is provided in Redmer Yska, All Shook Up: The Flash Bodgie and the Rise of the New Zealand Teenager in the Fifties (Auckland: Penguin Books, 1993), Chapter One: ‘A New Cold World’(pp.15-36) and Chapter Two: ‘Catching Fire’(pp.37-57).
For this portion of the paper I am deeply indebted to the current Crown Prosecutor for Canterbury-Westland, Mr Brent M. Stanaway, for a thoughtful consultation on this case (7 August 1997). I must insist, however, that the views expressed here are mine alone. I have also benefited from a discussion with someone who had extensive dealings (in a banking context) with Francis Boyd Adams. This person viewed Mr Justice Adams as a patrician and an olympian Anglophile much removed from the hurly-burly of ordinary life, believing that Adams’ remoteness and sense of his high calling to the judicial task would have freed him from using the Ranfurly Shield rugby game as a ploy to exert pressure on the jury. It was, more likely, evidence of Adams’ patrician disdain for mob enthusiasms and of his zeal to prosecute efficient justice that he called the jury in before such a high-profile event: viz., that in his view, the trial was of infinitely greater moment and that he would have expected jurors and counsel to have shared this lofty dedication. Adams J’s apparent ignorance of important Australian case-law in preference for R v Windle [1952] would seem to testify to his ardent Anglophilia.
Nigel Andrews, ‘Cinema: Magic kingdom runs amok’, Financial Times [London], 9 February 1995, p.21 (Arts section).
Gurr and Cox, ‘Death in a Cathedral City’, Famous Australasian Crimes (London: Frederick Muller, 1957), p.149.
Ibid., pp.151 & 152.
Chris Watson, ‘The Reconstruction of Society’s Mores of the 1950s as Exemplified in Peter Jackson’s Film Heavenly Creatures (NZ,1994) in Terms of Michel Foucault’s Theories Contained Within His ‘History of Sexuality’(Paris,1976)…Or, if Michel Foucault had seen Peter Jackson’s Heavenly Creatures’; in (eds.) Jeff Doyle, Bill van der Heide and Susan Cowan, Our Selection On: Writings on Cinemas’ Histories (Canberra: School of English, Australian Defence Force Academy, 1995), pp.217-231 at p.225.
Ibid., p.229.
Colin Wilson, Origins of the Sexual Impulse (1963; rpt. London: Panther/Granada Publishing, 1978), p.267 (Appendix: The Criminal Mentality).
Ibid., p.268.
Goodrich, Reading the Law: A Critical Introduction to Legal Method and Techniques (Oxford: Basil Blackwell, 1986), p.221.
R.W. Medlicott, ‘The Parker-Hulme, Leopold-Loeb Cases and the Concept of Omnipotence’, New Zealand Law Journal, Vol.37 (1961), op. cit., 347.( The change of perspective, post Porter and Stapleton, in New Zealand’s criminological praxis, which could have exculpated Hulme and Parker, has been summed up by Simester and Brookbanks as moving to a subjective moral standard test [ Principles of Criminal Law, p.286.])
