SUPREME COURT Eighteen months for stealing drugs

Press, Volume CXV, Issue 34000, 14 November 1975, Page 16

SUPREME COURT Eighteen months for stealing drugs

A young man who was said to have been driven to commit burglaries of chemists’ shops to satisfy his craving for hard drugs was gaoled for 18 months by Mr Justice Roper in the Supreme Court vesterday.

The young man, James: Francis Wiison, aged 24, > unemployed, was appearing for sentence on two charges of burglary’ of chemists’ i shops in Dunedin on May 1. : Wilson pleaded guilty to the charges in the Christchurch Magistrate’s Court, and was committed to the! Supreme Court for sentence. , Mr K. N. Hampton, for, Wilson, said that all three of the prisoner's previous con-1 victions of importance —1 two of theft and one of pos-j session of instruments of burglary — and the two'; present offences were drug-. inspired. Wilson’s history was sad. I He was a person of in-j telligence and ability, but he had some personality disorders. For a number of years he had experimented with drugs and he had the naive belief that he could control his use of drugs. However, during the last two years he had become; addicted to the hardest of. drugs. His desperation to get drugs had led him to com-' mit these offences so that he could satisfy his craving. The offences were not I committed for personal gain,,

and he did not steal money; which was in the shops. No violence was involved. Wilson knew full well the ; desparateness of his state, but he had been unable to I break his addiction. He wash disturbed by the prospect of;

having to associate with other drug offenders in prison, where illegal supplies of drugs were available at times. Wilson had been receiving medical treatment for his drug addiction, and wanted to continue it. He had been admitted to hospital eight times because of drugs, but 'he had never stayed long.; However, on the last occaision he had spent 10 weeks at Cherry Farm Hospital. I His Honour said that both I charges involved the burI glary of chemist’s shops to get drugs, but he had been successful at only one shop. He had stolen a lot of drugs. He agreed with Mr Hamipton that Wilson had a sad history and that the question of sentence presented a diffiicult problem. “This type of burglary is all too prevelant. and the i Courts must deter others I from breaking into chemist’s shops. There has been a tendency to regard this as a 'less serious type of offence, than one committed for gain, 'but I do not agree. There is no alternative to a sentence ■ of imprisonment,” his 'Honour said.

j Disqualified driver i Alexander John Bromley, ■ aged 24, a prison inmate, was sentenced to one year’s imprisonment to be served 1 concurrently with his i present term. on two

charges of driving while disqualified at Greymouth in November 1974. His driver’s licence was cancelled for a further 18 months. Mr M. J. Glue, for Bromley, said that the prisoner would be in gaol for most of next year. He was studying for his school certificate examination and had some abilitv in art. He asked that Bromley’s present sentence be not Increased. His Honour said that despite Bromley’s poor record the probation officer held out some hope for him. The last time Bromley had been sentenced he had been told that he was in danger of becoming institutionalised. He proposed to extend leniency on this occasion.