Bookmaker’s fine cut

Press, 26 July 1978, Page 4

Bookmaker’s fine cut

Because of his personal circumstances, a bookmaker who was fined $750 in the Magistrate's Court has had his fine reduced on appeal to $4OO by Mr Justice Casey in the Supreme Court. Mr W. H. McMenamin appeared for the appellant, Ronald William Ross, aged 53, a beneficiary, and Mr B. Stanaway for the police.

His Honour said that Ross was fined $750 on his second conviction for bookmaking and the appeal would have been dismissed without hesitation if it had not been for the information which Mr McMenamin had now given about his personal circumstances.

That information made it quite clear that the fine of $750 was well beyond Ross’s means and in effect would result in a term of imprisonment in default-—a sentence which the Magistrate declined to impose, in order to give Ross one further opportunity to learn that bookmaking did not pay. “I am now informed. that as a result of an accident Ross has been on compensation for the last five weeks and will remain on it for a further fortnight. He has $6OO in the bank and after his compensation ceases he will need to find employment.

“On this basis I think a fine of $750, even for a second offence, although only a minor one, must be regarded as excessive in not taking adequately into account Ross’s personal circumstances,” said his Honour.