CHILDREN'S COURTS

Evening Post, Volume CXI, Issue 4, 5 July 1926, Page 5

CHILDREN'S COURTS

CHILD'S IDENTITY REVEALED

AUCKLAND PAPER CONVICTED AS WARNING.

(By Telegraph.—Press Association.) AUCKLAND, 4tli July.

The publication of a photograph, and of a report of proceedings at a Child's Welfaro Court, which disclosed the identity of a boy charged before that Court led to two charges of breaches of section 30 of the Children's Welfare Act being made again it tho Auckland "Star" yesterday. Mr. 8. L. Paterson appeared for tho Crown and Mr. Rogerson for tho defendant, who admitted the publication. Mr. Paterson said there wero two charges, each laid under section 30 of the Children's Welfaro Act, which pro- | hibited the publication of any parti- j culars from which the identity of a child brought before tho Children's Court could be learned. "It will be seen from the section that the provisions are very wide," said Mr. Paterson, "and absolutely prohibit the publication of the name of a child or any particulars by which he may be identified. The proceedings in the Court must bo so framed that nothing is given which will lead to the identity of a child appearing at the Court. It is _ new section, and this is the first case brought before tho Court nnder it. The publication of the report in question and of the photograph which indicated tho identity of the boy constitute offences.' I am instructed by the Department not to press for a heavy penalty, or any penalty at all. The case is brought more for the purpose of making the provision of the Act' generally known." Mr. Rogcrson said he wished to mention one or two facts. "We all support the provisions, which are in the interests of children, and appreciate their object," he said, "but I would like to point out that prior to the publication of the report and photograph there had been Police Court proceedings against tho father. These were fully reported and disclosed the identity of the parties, including the boy, so that all the information wa3 then placed before the public. In the report of the Children's Welfare Court nothing was given that tho public were not already aware of. Reporters for years had been in the habit of reporting cases of this nature, and as this is the first case of its kind and the Department not to press for a heavy penalty, this matter may be met with merely a conviction." Mr. Cutten, S.M.: "Yes, I think that is reasonable, because the Act is a new Act. Under tho Act reports can be published with the consent of the Court, but under no consideration can there be published particulars which will enable children to be identified. I thought it right that tho papers should bo advised they could have representatives present at the proceedings, because I think the public should be represented. I think in the present ease, the Act being a new one, that it was a , Mr. Paterson said that if a conviction was recorded on one charge ho was prepared to withdraw the other. His Worship: "Very well. I wi|l enter a conviction on one charge and order the defendant to pay costs."