Boy Burglars ‘Not Really Unusual’

Press, Volume CIV, Issue 30737, 29 April 1965, Page 1

Boy Burglars ‘Not Really Unusual’

The Child Welfare Act contained provisions which were sufficient for dealing with juvenile (under 17) offenders, said the District Child Welfare Officer (Mr M. Lyons) yesterday.

Mr Lyons had been asked to comment on figures given by Christchurch police which showed that between 180 and 200 of 400 burglaries reported to the Christchurch C. 1.8. this year had allegedly been committed by boys. “These things come in little waves,” Mr Lyons said. “There are, obviously, some gangs of boy burglars operating in Christchurch. This is not alarming to us in the department, nor, unfortunately, is it really unusual. A few boys did commit further offences while under the care of the Child Welfare Division, Mr Lyons said. “We are human, and we make errors,” he said. “However it should not be forgot* ten that the action we do take leaves a mark on the boys. We do not believe in precipitate action. Usually, the boys concerned have had experience of precipitate action before they come to us.”

The Stanmore Road Boys’ Home was a multi-purpose

centre. It could take 28 boys at once, and was very rarely full.

“We have the power to administer corporal punishment, and I would not like that power taken away. However, it is used very selectively. It is no use punishing seven boys with corporal punishment, doing six of them good but irreparably damaging the seventh, for instance,” Mr Lyons said.

“A few of the boys may commit burglaries while on the way to and from school from the home, but the majority of boys are not allowed to go to work or school from the home while there. “The home is for shortterm, in the main, training or holding purposes (while on remand, for instance), and training means in most instances getting to know the boys, their backgrounds, and so on. Boys are held there so that they can be put before the Court when their remand period is up.” Mr Lyons said that access to cars, the climbing rate of juvenile offenders, which was greater than the population increase, more money in society and consequently less care taken of property by owners, meant a changing pattern of juvenile offences and changing methods by the division in dealing with the problem.