A case of considerable sensitivity was brought before the Royal Court this week, involving Edwin Laurence, a 19-year-old labourer from the Vale. Charged in connection with an alleged indecent assault upon a child, Laurence’s case has stirred both concern and compassion among officials, who must now decide whether the young man is fit to be held accountable for his actions.

🩺 Medical Officer: “A Simple Lad”

Dr. E. L. Robinson, Medical Officer of the Prison, reported that Laurence has been under his care for a fortnight. He stated plainly that the accused was not answerable for his actions, recommending that he be kept under restraint or placed under “sane control.”

👮 The Local Constable’s View

Mr. W. Corbet, Constable of the Vale, confirmed that Laurence’s parents were themselves “somewhat simple.” Due to concerns, the Constable had employed Laurence on his premises to observe him. While the lad worked satisfactorily, Corbet remarked that he appeared “strange in some ways” and offered to supervise him if arranged by the Court.

⚠️ The Alleged Offence at L’Ancresse

The incident involved a five-year-old girl playing in a sand bunker. According to the father, Laurence approached the group offering to show them a “bird’s nest” and led one girl into an enclosed area.

The child later gave her evidence in Court “in a clear and intelligent manner.” When confronted with the testimony, the accused responded simply: “That’s right what the people says.”

⚖️ Responsibility vs. Public Safety

The central question facing the Court was clear: Is the accused mentally responsible?

• The Comptroller: If responsible, a severe sentence of hard labour is warranted. If not, medical confinement.
• Dr. Kinnersly: Called Laurence “a public danger” and suggested he may be a monomaniac, recommending 6 months observation.
• Jurat Collings: Disagreed, asserting the young man understood his actions and should be imprisoned.