PENALTIES FOR CRIME

Dominion, Volume 27, Issue 16, 13 October 1933, Page 13

PENALTIES FOR CRIME

Comments by Mr. Justice Blair BREAKING AND ENTERING r Prisoners who had pleaded guilty to a variety of offences in the Police Court were sentenced, by,Mr. Justice Blair in the Supreme Court yesterday. " ! Alfred Arthur Stanley and Bruce Anderson, who appeared for sentence on two charges of breaking and entering with intent to commit a crime received sentences of four years’ hard labour and two years’ reformative detention respectively. i .Mr. S. V. Fitzherbert, who appeared for Stanley, said that prisoner was one of those unfortunate men who bad been out of work for a considerable time. He had been in hospital suffering from a nervous breakdown for six weeks, and had only come out about a fortnight before the crime was committed. His Honour commented that Stanley was apparently progressing in the school of crime. The offences with wjiich prisoner w’w at present charged wgre. very very grave indeed; in fact, thqy were among the gravest offences on the criminal calendar. They were not ordinary cases of breaking and entering, because prisoner had broken into places when people were inside. In ong instance Stanley had actually gone into a room where people were sleeping, and had stolen a man’s clothes wit_h the object of getting his kgys. One could never tell what damage might be caused if an intruder frightened a nervous woman. It might hayq fatal consequences. Tn regard to Anderson, his Honour said that although prisoner had accompanied Stanley, he thought it extremely unlikely he was the ringleader. Nevertheless the position so far as he was concerned was very grave. Tn imposing a sentence of two years’ reformative detention, his Honour said lie took into consideration the fact that accused had no previous convictions.

Prison for Three Monfils’

Three months’ imprisonment was the sentence imposed upon William Greening, who had pleaded guilty to. a charge of attempted breaking and entering and a charge of breaking and entering and theft at Wairoa. “You might just give me a chance; I will be a better citizen to the country,” said prisoner when asked if he had anything to say. His Honour said a report stated that accused had stolen some money once before from a fellow-employee and had been given an opportunity to repay it out of his wages. He had also brought a very much younger man than himself into the present offence. The court dealt very severely ■ with cases of this kind, but his Honour was prepared to give accused a chance.

“Act of Foolishness.”

Describing accused’s act as one of foolishness and thoughtlessness, his Honour convicted and discharged Frederick Walter Perry, who had pleaded guilty In. the Police Court, .Wellington, to forging a motor-driver’s license. His Honour said he did not intend to impose any penalty and ordered accused to pay £l/1/- costs.

Six Charges of Theft

“It looks to me as if the country if safer when he is under lock and key,” said his Honour when sentencing Raymond Claude Hogg to two years’ hard larbour, to be followed by a term of reformative detention not exceeding three years on five charges of breaking, entering and theft at Hastings and. one charge of theft at Napier, the sentences to be concurrent with the one accused was at present serving. . • . His Honour said that although prisoner was only a young man he had a number of previous convictions. He had been given, a chance once, and was gjven three years’ probation. ’He broke the terms of his probation order and was sentenced to a term of reformative detention. After that he was sentenced to a term of imprisonent for a series of breaking and entering offences, and was at present serving a term of imprisonment.

A Difficult Case. '

Expressing the view that the case gave him a great deal of concern, his Honour imposed a sentence of two years’ detention in a Borstal institution in the case of each of three Maori youths, Toro Whakateka. John Ivan Ryder, and Patu Rongounui, who appeared on charges of unlawful carnal knowledge of a female under 12 years of age.

Mr. E. P. Hay said lie had been instructed that the circumstances under which accused were living with other Maoris made it more likely for them to commit an offence of this nature than a European. It was thought the best action to take would be to place accused under the strictest supervision. His Honour said a short term of imprisonment might be a sharp lesson to the three accused, but it might not do them much good. If. on the other hand, they were admitted to probation, they might consider that .the court was not protecting Maori girls. Under the circumstances he thought it best to convict them to a Borstal institution for a term not exceeding two years.