SUPREME COURT

Otago Daily Times, Issue 22713, 28 October 1935, Page 2

SUPREME COURT

PRISONERS SENTENCED Several prisoners appeared before Mr Justice Kennedy for sentence in the Supreme Court on Saturday morning. SECOND OFFENCE Arthur Henry Beechey, an elderly man, appeared for sentence on a charge of indecently assaulting a girl, seven years of age, at Invercargill. The prisoner stated that he had work to go to and asked that he should he admitted to probation. His Honor said that the offence was not so serious as one on which the prisoner had previously appeared before the court and he would be treated in a different way. The prisoner would be imprisoned with hard labour for three months. THEFT AT WAIKOUAITI Walter Leslie Kedzlie and Frederick Loades appeared for sentence on charges of breaking and entering a shop at Waikouaiti by night and committing the crime of theft. In connection with the same crime, Maurice James Hurring appeared for sentence on a charge of receiving stolen goods knowing them to have been dishonestly obtained. Hurring, when asked if he had anything to say, said that on the night the crime was committed he was not in the vicinity. It was not till some hours later than he had known that the crime had taken place. He had a position to go to in the country, and asked that he should be granted the benefit of probation. He added that the amount of goods received by him constituted only a small portion. If his Honor decided to impose a term of imprisonment, he asked that the court take into consideration the fact that he had been in custody since August 12. For Loades, Mr J. B. Thomson said that a suggestion might be made that his client was the ringleader. He was, however, only 23 years of age, and the ages of the other two were 29 and 32. It was unlikely, in view of that and of their records, that the other two would have been corrupted by Loades. Counsel emphasised that the disposal of the goods had been shrouded in mystery. Loades in a statement had said that he had got rid of the goods. That probably approached the truth, for after the other two were taken into custody it would have required more nerve than Loades possessed to have disposed of the goods to profit. His wife had stated that they were as poor after the crime as before it. In view of the fact that he was younger than the others, that he had not been in trouble of this sort before, and that his past troubles had to a large extent been due to his upbringing and environment, over which he had no control, counsel asked for the greatest leniency the court could extend to him. Mr C. A. Hamer said that Kedzlie, after first pleading not guilty, had shown a readiness to make amends by fully confessing his guilt. Counsel asked his Honor to take into consideration the fact that the prisoner had been for two months in custody, that he had never before been, in serious trouble, and that he was only 29 years of age. The Crown Prosecutor, Mr F. B. Adams, said that it was true that Kcdzlie had furnished information to the police, and this was now accepted as a complete account of the occurrence. This had implicated him in the crime of breaking and entering, but had shown Hurring merely to be a receiver. Kedzlie had made the confession knowing that it would implicate himself and that this was necessary in order to remove from his fellow-prisoners the guilt of the major charges. Mr Adams added that the view of the police was that Hurring had confesed to the whole of his guilt. Referring to Loades Mr Adams said that the goods recovered were valued at only £1 16s 7d, but the. police view was that he had had in his possession the major portion of the stolen goods. The prisoner’s evidence in the lower court was perjury aimed at casting the guilt of the crime on others and at showing that Hurring took the initiative, whereas it had now been shown that he was merely a receiver. Not only because the others had each spent 74 days in custody, but also because of his leadership in the crime, Loades’s case demanded more severe treatment than the others. Offences of breaking and entering and theft of tobacco were found to be increasing considerably throughout the Dominion, not merely for smoking but also for trading, the suspicion being that there must be receivers of these goeds. His Honor said that Kedzlie appeared to have been drifting, and he had been giving way to drinking habits. He had a groat responsibility for the crime, but his Honor was able to take into account and view favourably the circumstances which had been stated by the Crown Prosecutor —he referred to the assistance winch the prisoner had given in clearing up this matter. The sentence, therefore, which he would impose was smaller than that which he would have imposed had he not heard the statement in the prisoner’s favour. The sentence of the court was that he should be detained for reformative purposes for a period of 15 months.

In sentencing Loacles, liis Honor said that lie had joined with Kcdzlie in breaking into the store at Waikouaiti. He shared with Kedzlie the responsibility for that crime. He appeared to have been drifting downwards, and the present act was the culmination of unsatisfactory conduct. He did not take into account the evidence which he had given in the lower court because that could be made the subject of a special charge, and he would not punish him then except for the offence on which he appeared. But' while he said this, he was satisfied that there did not exist circumstances which had induced him to treat the previous prisoner more leniently than he would otherwise have done. The sentence which would be imposed was a sentence which should be imposed. The sentence of the court was that the prisoner be detained for reformative purposes for a period of IS months. To Hurring his Honor said that he also, unfortunately, did not have that satisfactory record of conduct which he should have had, and ho had been drifting. He would take into account in his favour the prisoner’s disclosure, but it appeared that he had taken his active part in the division of the plunder. He would be sentenced to be detained for reformative purposes for a period of nine months. RECEIVING POSTAL NOTES David Littlejohn Brim ton appeared for sentence on a charge of receiving postal notes, knowing them to have been dishonestly obtained. Mr P. S. Anderson, who appeared for the prisoner, pointed out that the amount involved was only £2 5s 2d. Brunton was 32 years of age and was married, with two children. He was horn near Glasgow and, owing to, the death of his parents, was thrown upon, his own resources when he was only 14 years of age. He arrived in New Zealand 14 years ago as a nominated immigrant. His previous offences could be traced to drink. Mr Adams said that a serious feature of the case was the fact that the accused had given no assistance in tracing the real thief. His Honor said that it was clear that the postal notes were the proceeds of a theft committed when certain premises were broken into and entered. It was true that the amount involved was small, but he had to take into account the circumstances of the case. The prisoner appeared, like so many who had

already appeared before the court that day, to have been drifting, and, in addition to his drinking habits, the probation officer referred to liis associates as being undesirable. The prisoner would be detained for reformative purposes for nine months.