SUPREME COURT

Press, Volume LXXX, Issue 24258, 16 May 1944, Page 6

SUPREME COURT

PRISONERS SENTENCED IMPRISONMENT FOR FORMER CIVIL SERVANT Angus Cameron Macfarlane, aged 44, a former civil servant employed in the Ministry of Supply, who had been found guilty on six charges of theft involving £327 from the Government, appeared with other prisoners for sentence yesterday in the Supreme Court in Christchurch before Mr Justice Northcroft. "I heard in detail the case against you,” said his Honour, when sentencihg Macfarlane, to imprisonment for 18 months, "and it was clear to me that you and C. S. Sapsford (who is now serving a sentence in connexion with the same offences, to which he had pleaded guilty) had developed this scheme or conspiracy to defraud# the Government,” It was also clear, his Honour continued, tnat one man could not have acted without the other, also that they had together equally halved the proceeds. In the circumstances. he could not accept the view that Macfarlane had been in any way coerced by his superior officer, Sapsford, into the commission of the offences. He thought that the prisoner should receive the same sentence as Sapsford had received (18 months’ imprisonment with hard labour).

When appealing for leniency for prisoner, Mr F. D. Sargent said he was a married man without children, and, apart from a minor offence some years ago, had not previously been before a Court. He had found temporary employment in the Ministry of Supply, said counsel, who alluded to it as “a most difficult department of mushroom growth." He had performed useful work for the community, particularly in regard to manpower and shipping. Though the department was handling goods to the value of about £750,000 annually, he said, Macfarlane’s salary was little more than £3OO, and he had worked long hours under pressure.

Sapsford had been Macfarlane’s superior, he continued, and the latter had extendeo to him loyalty. Sapsford was certainly to blame for the transactions that had brought both before the Court. Counsel spoke of the mental agony suffered by the prisoner, and said he was most contrite for the part he had played. Three Young Criminals

George William Chase, aged 24, an engineer. and Reuben Charles Whitford Darling, aged 30, a labourer, appeared for sentence, having pleaded guilty to breaking. entering, and theft. Chase was also charged with' James Robert Sutherland, aged 21, a labourer, on three charges of breaking, entering, and theft, one of breaking and entering with intent, and one of escaping from lawful custody. For ’Sutherland,' Mr J. K. Moloney said he was a member of a family of eight children, his father was a well-known criminal and a drunkard, and he had never had the benefit of a decent home. “He is one of the’ under-privileged, and 1 ask that your Honour extend to him the utmost leniency so that he might have an opportunity of rehabilitating himself. ’ he said.

Much the same circumstances had prevailed in the early environment of Chase, counsel continued. Chase had embarked on a career of crime at the age of 15. and had had little opportunity of leaving it.

Mr D. J. Hewitt, who appeared for Darling, said he had served overseas and had been wounded. He was just out of hospital, he said, when the present offence was committed. Unfortunately, his record was not a good one. In regard to Sutherland, Mr Justice Northcroft said ne had been admonished in the past and had taken no notice "Your case is one with which I am quite familiar,” he remarked, “and your record is a Very bad one indeed. The last time you appeared in Court was for a most brutal assault on a warder.” Darling, said his Honour, had made a thorough nuisan.-e of himself, “You abuse everyone, and you use the steel from the support for your arm as a weapon,” he added. “The community has to be safeguarded from such nuisances as you.” Chase had also chosen to ignore admonitions in the past from the Court, and it was his intention to send all three to orison.

Sutherland and Chase, who had confessed to three charges of breaking, entering, and theft, were sentenced to nine months’ imprisonment accumulatively. For breaking and entering with intent to commit a crime after they had escaped from custody, they were sentenced to six months’ imprisonment, to be served concurrently with the first sentence. Six months’ imprisonment was also imposed for escaping, also to be served concurrently.

Darling was sentenced to nine months’ imprisonment with hard labour. Sheep Stealing ~ A , ver y distressing case indeed,” was es^ ri Pti° n applied by his counsel, Mr R Stout, when Edgar Maxwell Husband. aged 24. a single man. appeared for sentence for sheep stealing in the Timaru district.

“Sheep stealing Is always regarded as a very serious offence,” said his Honour when sentencing Husband to be detained for reformative purposes for 12 months It is difficult to trace It Is often the cause of much unpleasantness in country centres. It has always been the policy of the Court, therefore, to treat it with severity ”

Since Husband's return from service with the Army, he said, it had been shown that he had been acting m an irresponsible manner. He had a duty to the community, commented Mr Justice Northcroft, and it was necessary to imoose a period of detention Husband came of a hard-working family, said Mr Stout (for the prisoner), and until this offence his conduct had been exemplary He began work when 13 years old. Of late • he had owned his own plant and had crutched 70.000 sheep and shorn another 34,000 He was regarded as a useful and hard-working member of the community. Husband had seen service in the Pacific, and had been invalided home. Counsel described the offence as "stupid and very clumsily executed” at a time when the prisoner was financially embarrassed. Many Convictions “It certainly putting it mildly to say that your record has been an unfortunate one.” said his Honour to Arnor Gohannes Fagerholm, aged 35, a Finnish seaman, who had been convicted of assault. “You have between 40 and 50 previous convictions, approximately half of which are for assault, .fighting, and resisting the police From your l record it appears that you are one of those people who. when under the influence of drink become intolerable bullies.” The woman concerned in the present charge, he continued, had been very badly beaten indeed, and it was fortunate for Fagerholm that the jury had not convicted him on the first count of assault so as to cause bodily harm, as he (the judge) thought they should have done: otherwise, he would have Imposed the maximum sentence possible. Fagerholm was sentenced to nine months' imprisonment with hard labour. The prisoner, said his counsel (Mr D J Hewitt) had been at sea since he was 14. and he had arrived in New Zealand about 1927. He asked the Court to take into consideration the fact that Fagerholm had been in gaol for two months and a half awaiting trial, also that the offence had been committed when he was

drunk. The prisoner’s former record, unfortunate!}', was not good. He now asked for an opportunity of returning to sea. Woman’s Bad Record "The Probation Officer states that since the age of 14 you have been leading a very loose life," said his Honour to Sarah Josephine Lewis, aged 29, a domestic, who had pleaded guilty to a charge of having broken into a dwelling at Eyrewell with the intention of committing theft. He was also satisfied, he said, that Lewis was the instigator of the crime for \vhich two youths had recently appeared before him for punishment. “You took upon yourself a grave responsibility when you took those boys to the scene of that offence.” he continued. “Your action might easily have led to bloodshed, if not worse." The prisoner was sentenced to imprisonment with hard labour for 15 ‘months. The trouble with Lewis began when she left her own community at Morven, said Mr C. V. Lester, and. unfortunately, during her sojourn in Christchurch she had been in the company of people who had criminal inclinations. He asked the Court to give her a chance to rehabilitate herself. / Theft From Person John Leadbetter, a middle-aged waterside worker, who had been found guilty by a jury at Christchurch, of having committed theft from the person of a young man in Cathedral square, was sentenced to six months’ imprisonment with hard labour. The prisoner, who .was not represented by counsel, handed a written statement to his • Honour.

, Mr Justice Northcroft said that probation could not be granted in Leadbetter’s case, as his record had not been a good one, and his offences, including a conviction for housebreaking, had extended over some years, "However, I will tak£ into consideration the fact that you were Under the influence of liquor when you committed this particular offence.” he commented, “as that may have affected your reasoning powers ” ■ Theft at Ashburton

William Jimson. aged 22. a single man, who had worked as a farm labourer, appeared for sentence, having pleaded guilty to theft at Ashburton and to carnal knowledge of a girl under the age of 16 at Rolleston. He received the accumulated sentences of 12 months’ imprisonment with hard labour for the first offence, and six months for the second, The prisoner, said Mr K. G. Archer, had had to fend for himself since the age of 13, and his only excuse was that he had lacked- the advantage of a good upbringing He had enlisted at the age of 18 but ■ unfortunately his record In the Army had been a bad one: he had received two substantia) sentences and had been dismissed.

Counsel pointed out that a substantial portion of the money stolen from the Mid-Canterbury Transport Company at Ashbiwton had been recovered. As for the offencf against the girl, he said, the latter had given the appearance of being more than 16 years, and actually one charge was the outcome of the other While he would take into account the period that Jimson had already spent in gaol awaiting trial, said his Honour, he could not overlook his record. “It is a very bad one indeed,” he added, “and in some respects the prisoner has maintained a defiant attitude towards society.” Mr A. W Brown, for the Crown, pointed out that certain goods, including a bicycle. overcoats, and a leather bag, had been obtained by the prisoner, obviously with the stolen money, and he asked for an order for their return.

His. Honour: I do not know that I have that power. Counsel pointed out that a precedent existed in an unreported case at Auckland.

Mr Justice Northcroft asked the prisoner if he were willing to return the goods, or did he wish to retain them as his own property? The prisoner said he preferred to keep them as his own property. “In that, case I cannot make an order," said Mr Justice Northcroft, who added that there was no reason why the ordinary civil process should not be employed.