Jail for burger bar arsonist

Press, 21 October 1983, Page 13

Jail for burger bar arsonist

A few days after a drunken youth had had a disagreement with the proprietor of the Nosebag Burger Bar in New Brighton, the youth had returned and fire-bombed the premises, causing $lO,OOO damage, Mr Justice Hardie Boys was told in the High Court yesterday. His Honour jailed Warren Brent Wootton, aged 17, for 18 months on charges of arson and wilfully damaging a shop till to the value of $2OO.

The police statement said that at 11.30 p.m. on Friday, June 17, Wootton was in the Nosebag Burger Bar on Seaview Road when he became involved in a disturbance and had an argument with the proprietor. Wootton had pushed the cash register from the counter on to the floor and the machine, valued at $2OO, was damaged beyond repair. About 1.30 a.m. on June 24, a fire was discovered in the premises. It caused about $lO,OOO damage and an examination showed that the front window had been smashed and a Molotov cocktail thrown into the shop. When Wootton was seen by the police on July 5, he admitted that he had thrown the cash register on the floor and said that he was drunk at the time. Wootton alleged that the Srietor had produced a jun, which terrified him.

In the early hours of June 24, Wootton and two other youths went to the burger

bar with a bottle filled with petrol. A rag was stuffed in the neck of the bottle as a wick, which Wootton lit The fire-bomb was then hurled through the window, which had been smashed by one of the other youths, who threw a rock through it. The premises erupted in flames, the police said.

Mr D. J. Taffs, for Wootton, said that his client had “graduated” through the institutional system. He was covered in tattoos — a symbol of hopelessness pointing to a conviction record which went back to 1980.

Suspended sentences, periodic detention, corrective training and prison had been tried. Wootton had been brought up in a domestic background in which drunkenness, verbal and physical abuse, and separation featured. His earliest memories were of vicious physical punishment The probation officer had said that Wootton had been subjected to prolonged emotional deprivation, but a more accurate description might be “emotional brutalisation.”

Considering Wootton’s history, it was hardly surprising that he had frequently appeared in court. Even more remarkable was that he did not have a disturbing list of convictions involving personal violence, Mr Taffs said.

Wootton was out to avenge some imagined wrong and he was apprehended because he had boasted about what he had done.

“This was malicious and wanton conduct and it has to be punished severely,” his Honour said. “It is apparent that you are out of control. In the last two years since you were too old to be dealt with in the children’s court you have been before the District Court seven times on 23 charges of dishonesty or lawlessness.”

The present offence was committed only two weeks after Wootton’s last appearance.

Wootton had a very sympathetic report from the probation officer and Mr Taffs’ submission had produced a sympathetic response from him. Wootton had great disadvantages in his upbringing, and his wild behaviour was in response to that.

“You have shown more positive qualities in your present domestic relationship, although it is hard to understand how someone who cares for another person and who is looking forward to be being the father of a child can behave in the way you did,” said his Honour.

'You cannot go on trading on sympathy. You have got to show self-control and responsibility,” said his Honour.

Until Wootton demonstrated some maturity the community was entitled to be protected from his conduct. The Court had to make it clear that persons who set out to take revenge for real or imagined wrongs would have to pay the penalty, he said.