CRIME PUNISHED

Dominion, Volume 18, Issue 194, 12 May 1924, Page 10

CRIME PUNISHED

NUMBER OF PRISONERS SENTENCED The Chief Justice (Sir Robert Stout) and Mr. Justice Chapman passed sentence on a number of prisoners in the Supreme Court on Saturday morning. Mr,. P. S. K. Macassey represented the Crown. BREAKING AND ENTERING. Miroi Uripini a Maori who had been found guilty by tho jury of breaking and entering and theft at Lyall Bay, was sentenced to twelve months’ reformative detention. His Honour the Chief Justice remarked that apparently prisoner was a hard working honest man while he remained at work, but when out of employment ho frequented hotels, wasting his time and neglecting his. family. He was liable to 14 years’ imprisonment. REFORMATIVE TREATMENT FOR THEFT. When Francis Osman Burke, who had been found guilty on a charge of theft from the person, was placed in tho dock Mr. J. A. Scott said that with the exception of two old charges, neither of which involved dishonesty, Burke had been a law-abiding citizen and there seemed no doubt that he was under the influence of liquor at the time. His Honour: I suppose he would never have been in this position but for his drinking habits? Counsel reminded the Court that it was not alleged against the man that he was an habitual pickpocket, and perhaps it was an isolated case. The Chief Justice: I cannot grant probation because this man got into the box and swore falsely-committed perjury—and even got his wife to do the same. . . The poor woman, no doubt, wanted to get her husband off, and he did wrong to influence her inthis way. . . Drink, no doubt, has been his undoing, and in order to see if it can be got out of his system I will sentence him to eighteen months’ reformative dotention. YOUTHS AND CRIME.

“You have been guilty of a cruel crime for which I might have inflicted the lash,’’ said Mr. Justice Chapman in passing sentence on a well-set-up seventeen-year-old youth named Owen Richard Healy on a charge of committing rape at Palmerston North. “I propose, however, to treat you perhaps too leniently on account of the fact that you are -young and that apparently you have given no further trouble. . .. I must, however, recognise the serious nature of the offence you have committed, and you must be punished for overthrowing and violating a weak woman. . . You will be detained for reformative purposes for a period of five years.’’

RISKED SEVERE PUNISHMENT. Henry Julius Kessler (for whom Mr. H. F. O’Leary appeared) was arraigned on a charge of breaking and entering at Blenheim. Counsel explained that the man wan separated from his wife at the time, and as he had tried every means of obtaining certain necessary papers which really belonged to him, as a last resort ho had broken into tho premises at night. lie understood the police report was favourable and that tho. whole trouble arose from the domestic difference between the man and his wife, Mr. Justice Chapman remarked that prisoner had run the risk of severe punishment for what ho had done, and it was doubtful if the man’s character was of the very best. However, it did not seem that'he had entered the house for the purpose of deliberately stealing something that did not belong to him, but papers, etc., which he believed to be his own personal property. “I will not sentence .you,’’ said His Honour, “but you will bo as a prisoner at large for the next twelve months, and if the police report unfavourably on you you. will be sentenced on this charge- . . You will therefore come up for sentence if called upon within twelve months.’’ ’ BREAKING UP A “GANG.” George William Johnston (represented by Mr. AV. Perry) and George Ryan, who was not represented, came before Mr. Justice Chapman for sentence on n charge of stealing a motor car and travellers’ samples. Mr. Perry said his client was a youth who did not enjoy good health, and his present lapse was largely due to the fact that he could not, on account of his health, get all the work he desired. Counsel was bound to inform his Honour, however, that prisoner had had converted another car while awaiting sentence, and it was open to question whether the hoy was really responsible for his action or not. Probably the experiences lately resulting m his appearance in Court would have the desired effect of bringing the boy to his senses. In regard to Ryan, a statement was given to His Honour by prisoner, in which he stated that ho had bad “chances before. but never had the sense to take them.” but if given a chance this time, he would behave himself. His Honour said Ryan was apparentlv the loader of the “gang.” and evidently had no great difficulty in enlisting the other recruits. “I can only take your case in the light of the circumstances, and the facts . . .

I have no guarantee that yon have even now acquired the sense to take the advantage of an opportunity., and must use some means of instilling a little sense in you- You will be sentenced to throe years’ reformative treatment.

In dealing with George Johnston, His Honour thought that prisoner could not surely expect probation when ho liaa deliberately committed an identical act. while the present charge was hanging over his head. The term would not be so long, however, but His Honour was mainly aiming to break down “gang” system to which these boys bad resorted. Charles Hugo Johnson (represented by Mr. D. C. Mazengarb), another lad was was charged with stealing travellers’ samples, having been associated with the other boys, was ordered to come up for sentence if called upon within twelve months. His Honour remarked that he agreed entirely with the jury in acquitting the youth on the charge of stealing the motor-car, lint finding him gniltv of theft, and, as the jurv had stated, it seemed clear that prisoner had found limsclf in a position from which it was difficult to recede.