Twenty hours work for kicking youth

Press, 31 May 1986, Page 5

Twenty hours work for kicking youth

A youth aged 16, who kicked a younger youth in New Brighton Mall on the evening of March 7, but who earlier this month was freed of implication in the boy’s subsequent death, was sentenced in the Children and Young Persons Court yesterday for assaults on the deceased and another youth on the same evening.

The defendant and two other youths, also aged 16, had earlier faced a charge of manslaughter of the younger youth, James Edward Love, aged • 14, who died in hospital -3 days after the incidents in the mall.

However, at a preliminary hearing of this charge, the Crown prosecutor, Mr D. J. L. Saunders, sought the youth’s discharge on the charge of manslaughter of James Love.

This was sought after evidence of a pathologist that a haemorrhage that caused his death was one associated with a malformed artery. A microscopic examination showed previous older haemorrhages in the area of the mid-brain, and there were indica-

tions that blood vessels in the boy’s brain had leaked at some time in the past. After his discharge on the charge of manslaughter, the defendant pleaded guilty to a charge of assaulting James Love, and to assaulting another youth aged 16. Judge Frampton placed him in the care of the Social Welfare Department for a year, and directed that he do 20 hours of community work.

This course had been recommended in a socialwelfare report which had been called for, for his sentencing. Defence counsel, Mr K. N. Hampton, agreed with the recommendation for sentencings. He said the assaults had occurred after words were exchangegd between two groups of youths. The defendant’s assault on the elder youth had involved one punch to the back of his head. The assault on James Love, he had been instructed was a kick in his stomach area, and medical evidence showed no injury or bruising received from his blow.

“This was at the stage before James Love received some more vigorous treatment from other associated persons,” Mr Hampton said.

He said the defendant was in employment, and came from a good and responsible family. The Judge said he would deal with the matter on the basis that the defendant had been involved to a minor degree in the two assaults, and he was a first offender. It was unfortunate and tragic that a victim of one of the assaults later dided, the Judge said.

He said he was satisfied, after hearing evidence at the depositions hearing, that the defendant’s involvement did not contribute in any way or degree to the boy’s death.

The social welfare officers’ report indicated that the defendant was unlikely to offend again. The other two youths, charged with assaulting James Love with intent to injure him, denied the charges at the preliminary hearing earlier this month. They will appear later for a defended hearing.