SUPREME COURT DECISIONS

Greymouth Evening Star, 18 May 1938, Page 7

SUPREME COURT DECISIONS

CH.CH. PRISONERS SENTENCED SHOP-THIEVES IMPRISONED [PITR PRESS ASSOCIATION.] CHRISTCHURCH, May 17. Prisoners were sentenced in the Supreme Court to-day by Mr. Justice Northcroft. Anthony George Bouterey, for subornation of perjury, received a. term of two years’ hard labour. Edward Dardanell de Malmanche. for house-breaking and theft, was admitted to two years’ probation. Albert Edward Lindeloff, for burglary and assault, causing bodily harm, was sentenced to 12 months’ imprisonment, and to IS months’ hard labour, the sentences to be concurrent. George Marks, for carnal knowledge, received 12 months' hard labour. Frederick Eggelton. for an unnatural offence, was sentenced to two years’ reformative detention.

John Alfred Rhodes, for false pretences, was convicted and discharged. Colin Walter Henry Schiavi, for carnal knowledge, received four months' hard labour. Hugh Lowther, for receiving stolen property, received t,wo years’ hard labour. Tom Hazard, John Searle, Rawei Arthur Wilkinson, Herbert Francis Hempenstall, Harold Thomas Stringer, Herbert Arthur Currie, and Harold Herbert Stackhouse, for theft of goods, were each sentenced to six months’ hard labour. George Campbell, for failure to stop his car after an accident, was fined £lO. His license was cancelled, and he was disqualified as a driver for two years. Four men appeared for sentence on a charge of stealing sheep. They were Stanley Dudley Keats. Clarence Burnaby, Maurice Roy Beaven, and Stanley Frederick Robert Scott. They were admitted io three years' probation. The Judge said he did not propose to discriminate among these persons. Charges of sheep stealing were difficult to detect, and were regarded as serious. It was rare for men to be placed on probation for this offence, and, were it not for the sympathetic report of the Probation Officer, he would not think of admitting these persons to probation. As it was, they had stolen to relieve the needs of their distressed families, and, though it must not be taken that he condoned stealing by families in such circumstances, he proposed to take the unusual, but merciful course of placing them on probation.

MOTORIST CONVICTED CHRISTCHURCH. May 17. Kaspar Gray Webley. city building contractor, aged 39. was found guilty in the Supreme Court, to-day for having driven a motor-car negligently along Marshland Road on February 24, thereby causing the death of Joseph Quinn. Webley was remanded for sentence. Mr. Justice Northcroft, in summing up. said that evidence of the accused’s consumption of liquor on the day of the accident had been brought by the prosecution, a hotel barman having refused him more drink because he considered that he had had enough. It was for the jury lo determine whether Webley was in a fit state to drive, and it was also for the jury to say whether CO miles an hour along Marshland Road was a reasonable speed.

SIX MONTHS’ IMPRISONMENT CHRISTCHURCH, May IS. Found guilty of negligently driving a motor-car. causing death. Kaspar Gray Webley. building contractor, was this morning sentenced by Mr. Justice Northcroft to six months' imprisonment, with hard labour, and he was debarred from holding a driving licence for five years.

MOTORIST’S NEGLIGENCE. INVERCARGILL, May 17. In the Supreme Court to-day before Mr Justice Kennedy, a charge of negligently driving a motor-car at Waihoaka on April 10, thereby causing the death of John Wilfred Hayes, and a further charge of being intoxicated •while in charge of a motor-car. and by an act or omission causing death, were preferred against Clarence Herbert Hibbs, who pleaded not guilty Evidence was heard up to the luncheon adjournment, but when the Court resumed this afternoon Mr G. .T. Reed, counsel for accused, asked leave to withdraw the original pleas, and said Hibbs would plead' guilty to the charges against him. Hibbs entered the witness box. and admitted tho offences, and, without leaving their scats, the jury returned a verdict of guilty on eacli charge. Hibbs was remanded for sentence. The following presentment was made by the Grand J/iry: “This Grand Jury views with concern the ease with which liquor was apparently procured by the accused and his companion on a Sunday.”

forecasting competition. WELLINGTON, May 17. , An appeal against the Magistrates dismissal of an action brought, against Stewart John France, who invited householders to enter a. forecasting competition on Wellington Rugby games, was upheld in the Supreme Court by Mr Justice Reed, and the case was remitted to the Magistrate with the opinion of the Court that the man should be convicted. His Honor agreed with the Magistrate that the scheme was not a lottery, but it did not come within the definition of a bet, being in effect, a wager of 1/- to £2O. Costs were not allowed, counsel for France explaining that France borrowed on his life insurance to float the scheme and paid out more than £27. The proceeds were something more than £4, so he lost about £23. It was also stated' that the case was in the nature of a test case, very important to the Crown because had the Magistrate’s decision remained the door would have been opened.

IMPRISONMENT CANCELLED. HAMILTON, May’ 17. That a defendant who was charged with keeping liquor for sale had not been warned in the Magistrate’s Court that he had the right of trial by jury led to the abrupt termination to an

I appeal heard before the Chief Justice (Sir Michael Myers) in the Hamilton Supreme Court to-day. The appellant, Herbert Mowat Young, boardinghouse keeper, of Te Kuiti, was represented by Mr, N, S. Johnson. His appeal was against a conviction in the Magistrates Court at Te Kuiti on January 18 and the sentence of one month s imprisonment for keeping liquor for sale. The respondent was Sergeant T. Campagnolo, for whom Mr. H. T. Gillies appeared. Cross-examined by Mr. Johnson, Sergeant Campagnono said that Young, who had been previously convicted for breaches of the Licensing Act had not been informed in the Magistrate s Court that he had the right of trial by jury. His Honor: Oh! . Mr. Johnson: That is ,a point 1 desire to make. His Honor: It is a serious matter. The Court adjourned and counsel conferred with his Honor in Chambers. On the Court resuming Mr. Johnson said he did not desire to call evidence for the appellant. His Honor said that no reference to Young’s previous convictions had been placed before the Magistrate. Seeing that there were two previous convictions, the Magistrate clearly had no right to deal with the appellant as he did The appellant should have been given the option of being tried before a jnrv and he was not given that option. Although a. conviction might have been good on the evidence, the penalty was wrong; but it was amendable bv the Supreme Court. His Honor said lie was satisfied that the conviction was perfectly a proper one. His regret was that, through a technicality, through no fault of Mr. Gillies, Young escaped the sentence of imprisonment that his conduct so well deserved. A man who deliberately flouted the law and carried on after being fined deserved no consideration or sympathy from the Court. His Honor warned the appellant to give up his illegal business. The sentence of one month's imprisonment was cancelled and the appellant, was fined £EG.