EX-JUDGE’S WARNING

Nelson Evening Mail, Volume 76, 10 September 1941, Page 4

EX-JUDGE’S WARNING

CAPITAL AND CORPORAL PUNISHMENT PROPOSED ABOLITION DANGERS POINTED OUT A Bill has been introduced in the House of Representatives abolishing both capital punishment for murder , i and the infliction of corporal punish- ■ n ent for any crime, states Mr Justice Reed, a former Judge of the Supreme Court Bench, in a letter to “The Dominion.” I understand that this was a . plank of the platform of the Labour i Party, and that consequently it will be Treated as a policy measure and backed , by the full weight of the votes of that party in the House. It seems useless I in these circumstances to make any protest. However. I fee! that having 4 had more than 17 years’ experience on the Supreme Court Bench, during . A.hich time I also occupied for a period , of eight years the position of President t of the Prisons Board, my opinion may r be of some value; in any case I think it t j is my duty to point out the danger s which will arise fror.'. ‘the proposed f j legislation. s The only thing that can be said in _ favour of it is that it is a better t j method of dealing with the question 3 than that which has been adopted, ■j namely, procuring the exercise of IPs Majesty’s prerogative of mercy in one 5 ! of the worst, cases of murder and rape v* that has ever happened in New Zeae land, and by the same method in tiie prisons case overriding the decision of the Court of Appeal upon the only issue before it, namely the sentence. In neither case were there any mitigating circumstances. If the warder in the prisons case had died from his injut ies presumably hi., assailants would i— j have escaped the gallows. Whether c that would have been so or not, the e position is clear as to the future. T t “DANGER OF LEGISLATION” ‘ | Among the prisoners confined in 0 Mount Eden gaol are the worst in New e Zealand, including more than one mur. e derer serving a life sentence. If the 1 proposed legislation passes it will con- ’• : stitute a license to any murderer to maim or murder any warder that dis--1 1 pleases him, with the knowledge that a the limit of any penalty that can be " limpised is a sentence of life imprison- , ’rre-nt which will be served concurrent- ( ly with the life sentence he is already . serving. With all respect it is farcical c , jif it were not so serious. If the only * reason for introducing this legislation is to comply with pronouncements made in seeking the votes of electors ! there appears to me to be a perfectly _ ; good explanation for change of mind, namely, that they were made when the party was without experience, and that \xith experience it was now found that in the interests of the community such legislation would be a mistake. The Government already has had to jetison some of its planks for the reason, I suggest, that experience has ? shown their impracticability. No one ; can blame it for that. But I underv stand that that is not the only reason; that in fact the present proposed legisV j lation is thought to be beneficial and 1 ’ necessary. In view of the fact that • ne Bill in some form will probably go through I have endeavoured to secure a modification in order to assist in the protection of young children from | sexual offenders. For that purpose I wrote to my friend the Attorney-Gen-eral suggesting that the prohibition of a sentence of corporal punishment I should not apply to such cases. I regret to say that he cannot see his way to j comply with my suggestion, and has referred me to a report in England by ’ a Departmental Committee or. Corporal Punishment. This committee reports against corporal punishment being in- “ fijeted in any cases except for assaults 1 on warders in gaols. The report does T not specifically refer to cases of sexual assaults on young children, but it would 1 appear that the only exception is as _ [ stated. a EXAMPLE OF BRITAIN p • A Bill was introduced into the House of Commons to give effect to the report, j nut was not proceeded with, probably _ i due to the fact that war broke out and a highly-controversial question such as , this was postponed. It might be sug- ” gested that the same course should be r adopted here. The report is lengthy. The evidence upon which it is based ' is not set out, but the general effect can be gathered from the comments. r A main issue was the question as to s ; whether corporal punishment was a ,1 : deterrent. It is stated in the report: i “We do not. of course, deny that it has u some deterrent effect. All forms of punishment have some deterrent influe ence, and it is arguable that the more ■> severe the punishment the greater the [ 1 deterrent effet. This alone, however, e would not be a sufficient ground for rei. ta.'ning the existing powers of corporal t punishment.” 31 It is considered that the point is - whether imprisonment would not be a - sufficient deterrent. The opinion of the *. judges of the King’s Bench Division y vas sought. A memorandum was fury* rished by the Lord Chief Justice which cl: showed “that the judges of the King's - Bench Division consider that corporal - punishment operates as a useful deteri lent and are of opinion that it is desir- - able to retain the existing powers to impose sentence of corporal punishment for”—(then follows a list of ofj fences). The memorandum went on to i suggest further offences for which corporal punishment might be imposed if as a matter of policy it was desirable to extend the existing powers. My I rwn opinion is that it is necessary to retain the power to impose corpoial punishment as a deterrent. 1 CRIMES AGAINST CHILDREN - . Some years ago in Auckland there i j was a wave of sexual assaults on young - j children,, A sentence of flogging was - j imposed in one case and I was assured - at the time by a responsible police olfis ter that it had a marked effect in checking the commission of those offences. I wish to emphasise the fact * that this class of offence is generally f premeditated: it is committed by the - Type of man who deliberately frequents * children’s playgrounds in the public * ; parks, or hangs about the streets with 5 the intention of inducing young children by the offer of pennies or sweets ' to accompany him to isolated places where the offence is committed. This ' tvpe of man is particularly dangerous to the children of people of small means whose only playground is the I üblic park or the street. If flogging ‘ for sexual interference with young j children is abolished the fact will soon , become known and th principal dej torrent to the pervert will be re- , With all respect I d r not think that . j the Members of the House, with the possible exception of the lady members. ar n sufficient!'* experienced to pi judge this question fairly, ancl 1 sugs ! gest that the views of members of I j some of tiie women's societies for the ,' pi otection of women and children , and similar women's societies should be given the opportunity of giving ; their views on the matter If the imt osition of flogging on an offender deI 'ers only one intending offender, and i thereby one child escapes surely such , \'x possibility overrides any consideration based on theory