MERCIFUL JUDGE

Greymouth Evening Star, 19 June 1926, Page 5

MERCIFUL JUDGE

THE NIEPER CASE,

ACCUSED GRANTED PROBATION.

The ex-manager of the Greymouth branch of Messrs Wilson, Canham and Co., Bert Somerville Nieper, again faced Mr Justice Adams m the Supreme Court yesterday afternoon, having been remanded earlier this week for sentence on charges of the theft of £674 8s 5d from his employers, his guilt being admitted. The interest in the case was shown by the number of spectators in Court. Mr F. A. Kitchingham represented the Crown, and Mr IV. J. ’Joyce appeared for accused. In answer to his Honor, Mr Joyce said he did not wish to add anything further to his previous plea on behalf of Nieper. “I have had very much more difficulty than usual in coming to a conclusion as to what ought to be done in this case,” commenced his Honor, delivering judgment. “The offences to which accused has pleaded guilty were committed by him as a servant in a position of trust. In such cases it is the usual practice not to grant probation. The question as to whether probation should be granted in cases wherein by law it is possible to grant probation, is one which must be decided upon the circumstances and the facts of the particular case. In this case, accused’s conduct, up to his most recent employment, and while in the . employ of the same firm for a long period before the offences to which he has pleaded guilty, was evidently exemplary, and it is evident that he not only carried out his duties, but earned a liigh reputation and the respect and confidence of his employers. The difficulty about all such cases is that it is by such means that the opportunity is presented to commit these offences. I have considered all the circumstances brought before me, and the numerous letters from prominent citizens, some of whom are known to me. I mention that merely ,by way of showing the opportunity I have of appraising reclr value. All of them speak in the highest terms of accused. Then there is the fact that practically all of the actual defalcations seem tb ha.ve been discovered bj his own voluntary confession. Probably nearly all of them would have been beyond the possibility of discovery but for his confession. He has shown a sincere desire to make as complete restitution as may oe possible to him in the future. There is, further, the fact that matters connected with the company —which 1 shall not mention —probably had an influence upon him. 1 propose, therefore, to treat this as an exceptional case, and to admit accused to probation. There are five separate indictments, but that is because of an obvious precaution taken by the Crown. All the offences are of the same class, and were committed in the same employment. I shall treat them as one, and admit accused to probation for three years.” The Registrar, in reply to a question, said that the costs totalled £l6 6s (witnesses’ expenses £l2 2s and counsel’s fee £4 4s). His Honor ; “Is accused in a position to pay the costs?” Mr Joyce : “If your Honor will allow him a week he can pay them.” His Honor : “He will ha’ve to pay the costs of the prosecution within a week, and to pay so much per week to the Probation Officer, to be applied in partial restitution of -the moneys appropriated. The only question is, as to the amount which I ought.to direct him to pay. I understand, that the position is that he is to be employed and is to live with his father, so. that there does not seem tb be any special reason why the amount should not be fixed at the sum mentioned by his father (£2 per week).” Mr Joyce: “I have had several earnest conversations - with his father, and he thinks it can be done.”

His Honor : “Vef-y well. The amount will be fixed at £2 per. week. ”