SUPREME COURT

Northern Advocate, 7 February 1928, Page 5

SUPREME COURT

SERIOUS CASES.

PALMERSTON N., This Day.

The local quarterly session of the Supreme Court opened this morning. Mr Justice McGregor, addressing the Grand Jury said the criminal calendar was rather a heavy one, there being five persons for trial on five indictments, some at least of them being alleged in respect of grave and serious offences. Two of the cases were of the hind becoming altogether too frequent—motor accident cases. In each death was caused allegedly through a negligent act or omission on the part of the driver. “The law is quite clear,” said Iris Honour. “Any person driving a motor vehicle must exercise reasonable care, otherwise he is criminally liable if any person, passenger or otherwise, is hilled by his negligence,’ ’

True hills were returned in four cases. No bill was returned in the case wherein it was alleged that Alexander Kirh Mitchell had caused the death' of his wife through the negligent driving of a motor ear,—Press Assn.

CRITICISM OF SENTENCES,

OPINION OF MR JUSTICE REED.

AUCKLAND, This Day.

Addressing the Grand Jury at the Supremo Court criminal sessions, Mr Justice Reed said it was quite right and proper that the sentences of a judge should he subject to the criticism of newspapers. It would be an unhealthy state of affairs if a judge’s sentence or a judgment should be sacrosanct. Leading newspapers, with a sense of responsibility attaching to the views they express, seldom wantonly criticised sentences, knowing full well that they cannot be in possession of all that is known to the judge, but there had been exceptions.

His Honor mentioned a case in which he granted probation to a sharebroker, who' had misappropriated £l5O entrusted to him to invest. As a rule broaches cf trust were visited by a sentence of imprisonment, but in this caso representations were rnadc by the Probation Officer which induced him, with some doubt, to grant probation. He had imposed terms requiring complete restitution and payment of nil costs to which the country had been put.

At the Isamc session some men were charged with breaking and entering. One of them was convicted of receiving goods knowing them to have been stolen, and the stolen goods recovered from his possession were valued at £l5O. The police report showed that there had been a series of eases of breaking and entering and that the prisoner was the head of a gang of thieves avlio were known to be responsible for these crimes. “I sentenced him to two years’ imprisonment,” said his Honour, “and a local paper of some standing commented on the discreponcy of the sentences and actually used the argument that in each case the amount involved was the same and that in each case there had been restitution. Criticism of that sort,” said his Honour, “does no good. It even works harm amongst unthinking readers as tending to throw doubt on the impartiality ’of the Bench.”— Press Assn. SOUTHERN SESSION. FIVE CRIMINAL CASES. DUNEDIN, This Day. The criminal sittings of the Supreme Court opened with five eases for ttiail, including tw r o charges of indecent assault on little girls. A prisoner sentenced was Charles Alexander Moore,, theft of money from a dwelling, three years’ reformative treatment.—‘Press Assn.