CASE OF CAR-THIEVES

Evening Post, Volume CXXVII, Issue 102, 3 May 1939, Page 10

CASE OF CAR-THIEVES

It is hard to see why ihe so-called "conversion of motor vehicles should not he classed as simple theft and treated by the Courts accordingly. The stealing of a vehicle is to rob the owner of its use and possession exactly the same as the stealing of any other article, and the anomaly in the law and the comparative leniency of the authorities in dealing with convicted culprits seem only to have led to a marked increase in this form of crime. There was therefore every justification for the Grand Jury at the opening of the Wellington Supreme Court sessions this week, in pursuance of its privilege, to draw attention to the increasing frequency of cases of this kind and to recommend that the existing laws be reviewed with the object of increasing the penalty. There are very special reasons for drastic action in this direction. There is, first, the danger of irresponsible persons seizing motor vehicles, and

through lack of knowledge not only damaging the vehicle itself and causing loss to its owner, but also of driving in a manner that is a constant menace to other road-users. There have been many instances of accidents, fatal and otherwise, caused in this way. Again there is the use of stolen gars by criminals for the purpose of making a quick getaway from the scene of crime. There is further the stealing of cars by persons in a state of intoxication. It is unfortunate that this form of offence —"converting" motor vehicles—is largely confined to youths and young men, as reports show, but that is no reason for leniency. Whatever. form of punishment is inflicted, it should be designed as a sharp deterrent against any repetition of the offence and as a warning to others.