Girl, 14, sentenced for offences

Press, 6 March 1985, Page 4

Girl, 14, sentenced for offences

A girl, aged 14, who last week, in the High Court received a three-year suspended sentence for her involvement in an arson offence which caused $268,500 damage, yesterday received a lesser suspended sentence for five other offences committed about the same period. The girl, a state ward, had pleaded guilty in January to the five offences, which were committed at, or while on the run from, the girls' training institution at which she resides.

These charges were of being a member of an unlawful assembly at the institution on January 2, assaulting another girl, from the same institution while they were in the District Court holding cells on January 4, burglaries of dwellings on November 23 and December 4, and obstructing a constable in the execution of his duty on November 20.

Sentencing on these charges was deferred until the charge of arson, involving the burning of the Hornby Public Library in the Paparua County Council’s community centre building, had been dealt with. The arson was also committed while the girl was on the run from the

institution, on December 8. The unlawful assembly charge arose from a disturbance in the girls home during the evening meal on January 2. The defendant, when questioned about the incident admitted being one of its organisers and said it was part of a plan to break out of the institution. The misbehaviour in the dining room had been designed to cause trouble for the breakout, bid. Four other girls also appeared in the Children and Young Persons Court early this year an unlawful assembly or other offences, relating’ to the same incident at the home. They were dealt with in early January.

Judge Pain, in the Children and Young Persons Court yesterday imposed a deferred sentence on the five charges, directing that she come up for sentence within two years, if called upon. He said the five offences were relatively serious and the defendant’s conduct deserved some penalty. However, it was extremely difficult to impose an appropriate sentence because of her age and because she was already under the guardianship of the Director of Social Welfare.

The Judge said the girl was undergoing long-term residential training, involving curtailment of her liberty. There was no further penalty he effectively could impose. He said a suspended sentence had been imposed for the arson offence. If a stage was reached in future in which she was called up for sentence on the arson charge, it would be appropriate then for the other five offences to be considered, as they really related to the one episode. Miss P. D. Costigan, who appeared for the girl, sought a suspended sentence in view of the circumstances of the case and the fact that she would remain in institutional care.

Miss Costigan said the girl regretted her involvement in the offences. There had been a “breakthrough” in her conduct since a “locked door” programme had involved her in intensive contact with staff at the institution. Her behaviour and general attitude had improved. Miss Costigan said that, before this improvement, the girl had adopted an aggressive attitude to maintain her status with her peer group. She had found it difficult to back down.