YOUTHS' CAREER OF CRIME.

Press, Volume LXVI, Issue 19852, 13 February 1930, Page 5

YOUTHS' CAREER OF CRIME.

GRAY BROTHERS' CASE.

SENTENCE DEFERRED UNTIL

TO-MORROW

The Gray brothers, who have pleaded guilty to a series of crimes, will appear for sentence at the Supreme Court tomorrow, at 10.15 a.m. Charles Robert Gray and* James Wilfred Gray appeared for sentence yesterday morning, but his Honour state that he wished to consider carefully the remarks made by counsel (Mr M. J. Burns) on behalf of the two prisoners, and he would not pass sentence until to-morrow.

"Will your Honour sentence them separately?" asked Mr Burns, before addressing the Court. His Honour: I may as well hear what you have to say on behalf of each, am not at all sure that I will pass sentence to-day. Mr Burns then addressed his Honour, stating particularly that both prisoners were very young men, and that the younger of the two, Charles Robert Gray, was the ringleader. The Court was packed with spectators. Charles Robert Gray and James Wilfred Gray had pleaded guilty jointly to: — Seventeen charges of arson. Three charges of attempted arson. Two charges of burglary. Three charges of housebreaking with theft. Three charges of breaking and entering with intent to commit theft. Two charges of breaking and entering with intent to commit a crime. One charge of attempting to break and enter a shop with intent to commit a crime. Charles R. Gray alone had pleaded guilty to:— One charge of attempted murder. Four charges of breaking, entering, and. theft. Two charges of breaking and entering with intent to commit a crime. One charge of mischief. Normal Home Atmosphere. "Charles Robert Gray is the younger of the two boys, and is the ringleader," said Mr Burns. "It is extremely difficult for me to say anything in mitigation." When the crimes were committed, Charles Gray was just over 16 years of age, continued Mr Burns. Their home was a normal one. The mother was a Russian, born in Finland. She went to England at th<3 age of 16 years, and had lived in British-speaking countries ever since. To all intents and purposes she was a British citizen. The question of heredity therefore, did not seem to enter into the matter at all. The father was a well-educated man, and was an accountant. Unfortunately he was stone-deaf, which prevented him from securing, permanent employment. Another brother, of twenty years of age, also lived at home with the parents. They were in very poor circumstances, for the father was able to do only odd accountancy jobs. Actually the running of the home devolved upon the mother. The latter's suspicions that the two boys were up to some mischief were aroused some time ago, for she had found certain trinkets in their clothes. Had there been a stronger band at the family helm, there was no doubt that the crimes would not have gone on so long. Charles Robert Gray was always quite normal, said Mr Burns, and there had been no indications that he would break out in such a way." As far as the thefts were concerned they had made only about £BO or £9O in cash, out of their crimes. All the stolen jewellery had been recovered. It seemed to have been a pure outburst of destructiveness, and Charles Gray's mentality was most curious. It was obvious that neither boy was a larrikin. They were wellspoken and intelligent.

Question of Mentality. They had been examined by Professor Shelley and Dr. Beeby, of Canterbury College, for the purpose of arriving at what was at the back of their minds. The experts' view of Charles Gray's mentality was that it was distinctly above the average, and nearly equal to that of a rather superior adult. He was fairly open to suggestion, was of an active nature, and of the type that found satisfaction in powers of exhibition. He had always wanted to be a sailor, but a defect in one eye prevented him from going to -sea. He wanted a life of adventure and always delighted in books of the adventurous type. He was employed as an odd-job boy in a newspaper office, and Professor Shelley's opinion was that the crimes represented the result of the rebellion against repression, of a boy in a sphere inferior to him.

His Honour: That would apply, Mr Burns, to a large number of lads, who grew into useful citizens. Surely those circumstances are applicable to large numbers of boys.

Mr Burns said that if the boy's energies had been pointed in the right direction he would h?tve turned into a valuable citizen. His exhibitionist tendency was shown in his enjoyment of the excitement caused by the fires, and the resultant notoriety. The fire idea became a "trade mark," as he himself expressed it. He always selected conspicuous places for his activities, and that was a form of selfexpression. Professor Shelley had found him lacking in a realisation of the human consequences of his actions. Taking the attempted murder charge, it seemed incredible that while Mr Hammond was lying at death's door, he should go back and break into the same place again. 1 His Honour: But surely that would be the safest place to go to. No one would dream that he would do that.

A Stowaway. Mr Burns continued that twelve months ago Charles Gray" had stowed away on a ship for Sydney, and, on being discovered, he was placed in a reformatory for boys. - While there he mixed with the juvenile criminals of Sydney, and his parents stated that, on his return, he was full of the doings of the Sydney youths, which included cases of arson. Charles Gray said that he had never intended to kill Mr Hammond. Murder was not in his mind.

"To this charge I pleaded guilty with extreme reluctance," said Mr Burns. "Gray, on being caught, was in a wild panic, and escape was his one idea. He was then reckless as to whether he caused death or not."

His Honour: Yes, Mr Burns, but he carried the revolver with him.

Mr Burns: Had he carried it loaded the case would have been far more serious. He had gone to Hammond's to secure ammunition. It was later on that guns were carried by both prisoners regularly. The crime was unpremeditated. The mere fact of a burglar carrying a revolver did not prove that murder was in his heatt. ."The prisoners are just young boys," said Mr Burns, in extenuation. "Further, both boys made a clean breast of the whole thing.'' There was not a shred of evidence against the boys except their own confession. As to sentence, a substantial term of imprisonment and a declaration that they were habitual criminals rhight suffice. If such a declaration was made they would be under control on being released. Then, if they behaved themselves, the declara-

tion could be lifted. Of course, from the deterrent point of view, the terms must be substantial.

His Honour: Do you propose to say anything about the older boyf

Older Boy Easily Led

"Yes, your Honour," said Mr Burns. The older boy was simply led away by the other, said Mr Burns. The boys were quite different in temperament. The older was very definitely subnormal, and Professor Shelley's opinion was that he possessed the mentality of a boy of about 12 years of age. He was of a passive temperament, and allowed chance to do as it willed with him. Ho was employed by a lithographer, and the work was quite above him. He thus suffered from a sense of inferiority and was led by the more forceful mind. His only motive seemed to be petty theft, for he got no satisfaction from the fires. He was of a type very easily influenced, by environment, for good or evil. He was concerned in only about half of the other boy's crimes. His normal bent was towards farming.

"Nothing in Mitigation." "Unfortunately nothing can be said in extenuation on behalf of these youthß," said the Crown Prosecutor, Mr A. T. Donnelly. His Honour: Have there been any other cases here of youths fully armed, as if they had adopted a definite career of burglarious crime? It seems almost unique in New Zealand. "Quite unique, your Honour," replied Mr Donnelly. There was quite a distinction between the two boys, he continued. Charles Gray was in a far more serious position than his brother. When he shot Mr Hammond he showed that he was quite prepared to go to any lengths to avoid detection and arrest. For over a period of months both boys committed arson and burglary all over the place. On December 3rd they broke into Tisdall's and that fact was important, for it showed their mentality—and stole two .44 calibre rifles, which were the most powerful class of weapon that could be used. They stole, also, hollowed-nosed ammunition, cut down the barrels of the guns and the butts for convenience of carriage. Any person shot with a weapon of that kind would have no hope of recovery at all. When the constable arrested Gray on December 18th, Gray had one o.f the cut-down weapons in his possession. Had he had a chance he would probably have used it on the constable, who would have met the same fate as Mr Hammond. The prisoners had caused a loss of £50,000, and it was purely by chance that there was no loss of life. Crimes of the type were very common in the Dominion to-day, but there had been no similar crimes of such gravity for a very long time. They were both voung criminals, but very bad criminals indeed. Considering all the circumstances, there was not the slightest doubt that both required most exemplary punishment. As to the older boy, he was simply not quite as bad as his brother.

His Honour: I have listened with a good deal of attention to what counsel has said. I propose to remand the prisoners until Friday, at 10.15 a.m., so that I may review the whole of the facts carefully.