Frant Murder(another case of manslaughter?)

[Robin]

Times Archive Sept 22 1892.
At Mark Cross petty Sessions, yesterday, Frederick French, hop picker, was charged with the wilful murder of Lucy Langstead, at Frant, on Sunday last.
Evidence similar to that given at the Inquest on Tuesday was adduced, and the prisoner, having been cautioned, made an incoherent statement to the effect that he had had a lot to put up with lately, as they were always grumbling at him.
He thought someboby gave him something in his beer whch made him bad.His wife was always making a noise and puling the carpets up.
The prisoner was committed to take his trial at the next assizes

[Robin]

At Lewes , on Thursday and yesterday, before Mr Justice Hawkins, Fred FRENCH, 30, cabdriver was indicted for the wilful murder of Lucy FRENCH or LANGSTEAD, at Frant on Sept 18 last.
On the prisoner being called upon to plead he said "I suppose I must plead "Guilty", musnt't i?""
Mr Raven asked that a plea of "not guilty" should be entered and the learned judge assented to this course being adopted.
The evidence for the prosecution showed that on Sept. 18 last the prisoner and the deceased went into the hopper hut they occupied in the afternoon, having been out together. Soon after a sound of a thud was heard and screams of "Murder."
People rushed up, and it was found that the unfortunate woman's head had been beaten with a bit of iron. The prisoner was at once secured. The woman died within the hour, the cause of death being concussion of the brain arising from a fracture of the skull.
For the defence, a number of the prisoners relations and friends were called, who stated that two years ago he had had Typhoid fever, followed in Janaury last by influenza, and in July last by an attack of delirium tremens, the result of a long period of drunkeness.
His conduct had been strange, his talk incoherent, and he suffered from variour delusions, so much so that his employer had to resume driving himself.
Two medical men who attended the prisoner in Brighton were also called and gave evidence as to his condition on these occasions. At the conclusion of the case for the defence.

[Robin]

Dr. Sheppard, the well known expert in mental disorders, was called by the prosecution, and stated that, in his opinion, the prisoner was of sound mind, and was only shamming insanity in the dock, when he made the various remarks he had made all through the case.

He had examined him first on November 14 for three-quarters of an hour and on Thursday last for a few moments, when he found his health greatly improved. He considered the prisoner a poor creature at best. He had not been able to test whether the prisoner suffered from delusions or not. The various illnesses he had gone through would, no doubt, affect both his physical and mental capacity.

Dr. Turner, the Medical officer for Lewes Goal, said that, as the prisoner had threatened to take his own life, he was put under observation. On October 13 he made a report to the Home Secretary. He had formed an opinion as to the prisoner's mental condition.

Council for the prosecution objected to the witness's stating what his opinion was, and the question was withdrawn after a discussion between council on either side and the learned Judge.

Mr. Raven, then addressed the jury, commenting strongly on the course adopted by the prosecution in keeping back their medical evidence until the case for the defence was closed, and in using the greater part of Dr. Turner's report, and yet objecting to that part, which he suggested, was in the prisoner's favour being used.

Mr. Justice Hawkins, it summing up, expressed surprise that the question of manslaughter had not been touched upon by either the prosecution or the defence.

The learned Judge, having called the attention of the jury to the rule in the M'Naoughton case(I.C. and K.130), in which it was laid down that the question for them to consider was, not weather the prisoner was sane or insane p;
Council for the prosecution objected to the witness's stating what his opinion was, and the question was withdrawn after a discussion between council on either side and the learned Judge.

Mr. Raven, then addressed the jury, commenting strongly on the course adopted by the prosecution in keeping back their medical evidence until the case for the defence was closed, and in using the greater part of Dr. Turner's report, and yet objecting to that part, which he suggested, was in the prisoner's favour being used.

Mr. Justice Hawkins, it summing up, expressed surprise that the question of manslaughter had not been touched upon by either the prosecution or the defence.

The learned Judge, having called the attention of the jury to the rule in the M'Naoughton case(I.C. and K.130), in which it was laid down that the question for them to consider was, not weather the prisoner was sane or insane at the time he committed the act, but weather his mind was able to appreciate the nature of the nature of his act, and that the act was a wrong one, told the jury the following verdicts were open to them:- First, murder, if the act was unprovoked; they would probably have no doubt that the woman did in fact die from the blows given by the prisoner; </SPAN>

Secondly, manslaughter, if the prisoner had been provoked by the woman, not by words but by a blow;

thirdly insanity, if they found that the prisoner's mind was unsound, by reason of disease, as to not know the nature of his act, or, if he did, that he did not know the act was wrong.

The jury retired for a quarter of an hour, and returned a verdict on manslaughter. Sentence was postponed

<FONT color=black><I><FONT face=Tahoma>Thought so another one geat the time he committed the act, but weather his mind was able to appreciate the nature of the nature of his act, and that the act was a wrong one, told the jury the following verdicts were open to them:- First, murder, if the act was unprovoked; they would probably have no doubt that the woman did in fact die from the blows given by the prisoner; </SPAN>

Secondly, manslaughter, if the prisoner had been provoked by the woman, not by words but by a blow;

thirdly insanity, if they found that the prisoner's mind was unsound, by reason of disease, as to not know the nature of his act, or, if he did, that he did not know the act was wrong.

The jury retired for a quarter of an hour, and returned a verdict on manslaughter. Sentence was postponed

Thought so another one gets away with Murder

[emma@esh]

blimey, they were all at it!

[lucretia]

Sussex Express Tuesday September 20th 1892 [page 2]

On Sunday evening a terrible tragedy took place at Shoesmiths farm Frant, Frederick French a cab driver from Brighton and his wife Lucy Lanstead had been hop picking, at little Shoesmiths farm Bartley mill, Lucy 27 died at 6.15 pm, she was killed with a heavy piece of iron. French said "She told him to do it"Inquest will be held at Brecknock Arms.

[emma@esh]

looks like she was registered in both names

Deaths Sep 1892
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Burt Lucy 81 Ticehurst 2b 71
French Lucy 26 Ticehurst 2b 71
Langstead Lucy 26 Ticehurst 2b 71