SUPREME COURT “Not Sensitive” To Uninformed Views

Press, Volume CVI, Issue 31089, 18 June 1966, Page 24

SUPREME COURT “Not Sensitive” To Uninformed Views

i Saying that he was not sen ( sitive to uninformed public iopinion on penalties for sexual attacks on women and > children, Mr Justice Wilson in the Supreme Court yesterday took the “quite extraordinary step” of placing on probation a man who, according to evidence at his trial earlier this week, lurked naked in a girl’s Merivale flat last Christmas Eve, and attacked her Xvhen she came in. The man, Brian Andrew Waterreus, aged 30, a nightj shift taxi-driver, was found guilty of breaking and enter ling the girl’s flat with intent to commit a sexual assault His counsel (Mr S. G. Erber) referred in his submissions yesterday to the “recent rather uninformed outcry” over penalties for at- ; tacks on women and children, i “Someone is reported to ihave said that judges are not sensitive to public opinion," said his Honour.

“That applies to me,” he said. “I am not sensitive to

.‘hat sort of opinion. I have Imy duty to do, and I do it I to’ the best of my ability, according to my experience and to the facts before me." His Honour said he was prepared to treat Waterreus as an honest man who had committed his offence through a combination of financial worry, emotional upset, and indulgence in drink. Waterreus, said his Honour, had shown industry in his work, and responsibility towards his wife and six children. His Honour said he was confident that Waterreus was of such character that he would not offend again and placed him on probation for three years, under the usual terms. Four Months’ Gaol For the burglary of a Chester street dwelling-house on May 1, Wayne David Beri, aged 20, a workman (Mr A. Hearn) was sentenced to four months’ imprisonment. Beri pleaded guilty earlier In the I week.