SUPREME COURT Judge Upholds Four-Year Prison Term For Incest

Press, Volume CVI, Issue 31339, 8 April 1967, Page 16

SUPREME COURT Judge Upholds Four-Year Prison Term For Incest

Mr Justice Wilson upheld in the Supreme Court yesterday a prison term of four years imposed on a man liable to 58 years’ imprisonment in respect of three charges of Incest, and four of indecent assault, involving hls own four daughters.

Parliament had fixed a maximum of 10 years’ imprisonment for incest, said his Honour. “I think four years is anything but excessive for these offences, which must rank among the worst of their kind.”

The appellant, whose name and district of residence his Honour ordered to be suppressed, had appealed on the ground that four years’ imprisonment was excessive. His counsel, Mr S. G. Erber, said the offences themselves were indefensible, but traversed three reasons in support of the ground of appeal. . First, said Mr Erber, incest was not, like burglary, a prevalent crime, and a long sentence was not therefore required as a deterrent to others.

Second, the appellant was a first offender, with a previous good record as a citizen, and a long prison term militated against his rehabilitation.

Third, punishment should not be entirely retributive, as expressing the revulsion of the community against the crime of incest. For the Crown, Mr N. W. Williamson submitted that incest was the very type of offence which required a deterrent sentence. With its maximum penalty 10 years, and that for indecent assault seven years, the appellant had been liable to 58 years’ imprisonment His Honour, in dismissing the appeal, said: “If it is possible to think of worse circumstances attending offences of incest and indecent assault, I should be curious to learn them. These offences must rank among the worst of their kind in that the appellant abused the love, confidence, and trust he had earned from his daughters to seduce them, and lead them into a pattern of immorality which they may find difficult to break.”

It was essential, said his Honour, that the appellant’s separation from his daughters be a long one, and that justified the four-year sentence, apart from the seriousness of the offences themselves. “The sentence will also help him expiate his offences by the realisation that he has undergone a punishment which was at least adequate,” his Honour said.

Careless Driving Causing Death

A 19-year-old clerk, whose car overturned on the Blen-heim-Kaikoura highway when he dozed at the wheel while returning in the early hours of the morning from motor races and a social at Blenheim, appealed unsuccessfully against conviction for careless driving causing the death of one of his passengers. For the appellant, Daryl Tennyson Neate, Mr P. T. Mahon submitted that the prosection had failed to show, beyond reasonable doubt, that Neate had had either forewarning that he might doze off, or knowledge that he might do so before he had started out. If such were not proved, said Mr Mahon, Neate was not liable to conviction.

In dismissing the appeal, his Honour said there was evidence that the appellant had attended motor races and a social function afterwards, where some liquor was consumed, had set out at 1.30 a.m. on an 82-mile drive to Kaikoura, and had had forewarning of possible dozing at the wheel in that two of his passengers had fallen asleep. Appeals Dismissed

An appeal in person by Peter Lloyd Machirus, aged 21, a workman, against two years’ imprisonment for the attempted theft of a theatre manager’s money bag, was dismissed, his Honour saying that Machirus must learn the lesson that easy money was not to be had by crime. Machirus appealed on the ground that his sentence was too severe, and that he was not the instigator of the offence, but led along, and yielded to sudden temptation to take the money bag.

“You must have been led a long way, for you followed this theatre manager about the town—but the police were too clever for you, and all you got was a bag of stones,” his Honour said.

“I cannot look upon the matter as other than planned and premeditated,” his Honour said. “You were looking for easy money and you have simply got to learn the lesson that money got by crime is not easy. It just doesn’t pay. “It is a great pity that a young man of your capability and intelligence should be involved in this criminal life,” said his Honour. “You have the capability to cut loose from it. You have had many opportunities in the past to do so, but you have abused them.”

An appeal by Anthony John Howard, aged 24, a workman, against a sentence of three years’ imprisonment on 30 charges of false pretences.

burglary, and car conversion was dismissed as being “of no merit whatever.” Viewed as a whole, said his Honour, Howward’s offences were so considerable that any lesser sentence would be grossly insufficient

An appeal by Edward Alexander Greer, aged 18, a workman, against a sentence of Borstal training for receiving a stolen camera, was also dismissed, his Honour saying that Greer had grossly abused leniency previously extended to him, and that his appeal as filed not only contained a gross untruth but had no merit at all.