"ABSOLUTE IMMUNITY."

Auckland Star, Volume LVII, Issue 16, 20 January 1926, Page 9

"ABSOLUTE IMMUNITY."

THIEF GRANTED PROBATION. iTO HIS NAME SUPPRESSED. "TBOSECUTCF. DISAGREES WITH . ~ JUDGE. On t;;e grounds mat mc prisoner, the Mn of wealthy parents living at fftongarei. had a sister wording as a Liner h c n ° '"' : Lne cltv ' 5 bl ? drapery !L res , and tha" sue Ul d suffer from ♦lie publication of tier brother's name, Ji3 Honor Mr. Jus. ice Stringer, in the Supreme Court this morning, yielded to Corel's request, and. 11 addition to Rowing the youtn probation on a Charge of their, ordered tie suppression _- ys name- Ihe Crown Prosecutor did jot agree with l:Je latter concession. The youth, w:.o=e age was given as test over 20. had pleaaed guilty in the lower Court to the theft of £66 from the premises of the K.K. Footwear, Ltd. When prisoner was placed in the dock, •je Judge said mat the Probation Officer's report was quite favourable. The Crown Prosecutor (Mr. Meredith) Stated that the amount stolen had been recovered, with the exception of £11 17/1. ilr. J. F. VU Dicrtson. who appeared for prisoner, intimated thai "he amount could be paid immediately. . His Honor: I am quite satisfied that jlie circum=tar. »; fuiiy justify mc in granting probation. _ Mr. Dickon then a-ked the Judge to consider the rnatre- of suppressing prisoner's name. "He has a lister who is employed as a cashier in a big drapery fnn," said counsel. "If toe lad's name is -published, it might be detrimental to Jier. employment. I would not make this request were it not for the fact tiat innocent parties might suffer. The father is a wealthy man well-known at that I make the reqtre-r. In the Lower Whangarei, but it is not on his behalf Court the magistrate. Mr. Poynton. said that this was eminently a case for suppression of the name from his point of view:" - ■ Asked by his Honor for his view of the matter, the Crown Prosecutor said that he thought that in an offence such as the,one under review, the granting of probation, although the prisoner was toung, was a most merciful punishment. "If the name is suppressed, it is absolute immunity." said Mr. Meredith. "'The public are entitled for .something to be done without absolute immunity being granted. The offence is an extremely serious one and I consider that suppression in this instance would be extendinglJhe benefits of the Act rather far."' "I am always rather reluctant to order th! suppression of names except in special circumstances, and in this particular case I think there is hardly any reason," said his Honor. "But as the magistrate in the Court below thought it a special case. I think I shall follow his precedent and order the name to be suppressed. I do "this on Mr. Dickson's assertion that innocent people will suffer irere it published." The youth was granted three years' probation- and an order made for the repayment of the amount still unrecovered.

The facts of this case were that on the evening of January 12, the youth. trio had been employed by the firm, entered the K.K. Footwear shop in Kara-ngahape Road,: just before closing time, and hid himself in the fciKment. After the employees had gone lie went to where the money was hidden Hid stole the £66, made up of notes, deques and silver. Suspicion fell on Mm, and next morning he was interviewed by the police. He confessed;--