DETECTION OF CRIME

Poverty Bay Herald, Volume LX, Issue 18257, 28 November 1933, Page 5

DETECTION OF CRIME

NSW ZEALAND’S RECORD

ANSWER TO CRITICISM

FEW CRIMINALS ESCAPE

(Per Press Association.) WELLINGTON, this day

A ifply to criticisms of police methods in New Zealand, made by Miss B. E. Baughan, at the annual meeting of the Christchurch branch of the Howard League for Penal Reform, was given by the Commissioner of Police, Mr. V\. G. Wohlmann, in an interview. Miss Baughan advocated the establishment of a criminal investigation department and the use of dogs to assist in the detection of crime, as well as criticising the Police Force generally. “Statistics of crime, in New Zealand do not bear out- the criticisms of the New Zealand Police Force,” the commissioner said. “The percentage of airests to offences .reported last year was 90.40. It would be interesting to learn of a force with a higher percentage. “Regarding the two recent murder cases to which she refers, wouid it not be wise, and perhaps even fair, to .first wait for evidence of failure belore pronouncing judgment? ’ he asked. “Apropos of the C.1.D.,” the commissioner continued, “the trial of many im portant cases of crime in this Dominion has disclosed detective work of a quality sufficiently high to draw favorable comment from even the highly-organised force which has been referred to as a pattern. This comment lias come from men who know.”

In jnegahd to undetected jmurders, Mr. Wohlmann pointed out that last year 15 murders were committed and 13 arrests made. The other two cases were the casting away of infants, an extremely difficult crime to detect. The commissioner admitted that it would be helpful to have high-powered motor cars and wireless sets, as they did in other countries, and if another £20,000 a year was given to the police it might be possible to do something in that direction, but what would the taxpayer say about it? he asked. MISS BAUGHAN’S ATTACK UNTRAINED DETECTIVES “It is immunity from arrest, not immunity from the gallows, that is responsible for the increase in the number of murders in New Zealand,” declared Miss B. EL Baughan, during a strong attackon present methods of crime detection adopted in the Dominion. Miss Baughan said that it was not surprising that the Ituawaro and the Riccarton murderers had not been found. The New Zealand police system was sucli that an ordinary constable was only asked to be able-bodied and to have passed the fifth standard, and from that no doubt excellent body of men alone were the detectives chosen. The detectives now received no training, although some time ago it had been the custom to give them a little. In England the C.I.D. had daily gatherings in which instruction of various kinds was given, crimes were reconstructed, and the men were shown what clues to suspect. In the Dominion the police worked, on theories; now it seemed that one theory had been abandoned at Ruawaro for another one. A country that could not catch murderers was the country where murders would increase, for such was a country where it was safe to murder.

Professional thieves argued that they were only “nabbed" at the twentieth time, and the chances were that when they came out they would be successful again nineteen times, so why stop stealing? That was why crimes were increasing among young people. ‘T think we are very stupid in the way we are not up to so many of our offenders,” added Miss Baughan. “They are so much cleverer than we are. Criminals of late have used mechanical devices, whereas most of our police have to go round on bicycles. The authorities say that the provision of swift transport facilities as in England would be too expensive. As a matter of fact, why we don’t use dogs I could not say. A good dog could sometimes do the work of finding a body much more successfully than forty policemen. If we get a shocking murder and the person responsible cannot be found, we should use our intelligence to use the intelligence of a dog.”