PUNISHMENT OF CRIMES

Taranaki Daily News, 13 February 1933, Page 7

PUNISHMENT OF CRIMES

SENTENCES AT CHRISTCHURCH, THEFTS FROM EMPLOYERS. By Telegraph.—Press Association. Christchurch, Feb. 11. Ivy Myra Goodin, married, aged 25, was sentenced in the Supreme Court "to a month’s hard labour for receiving stolen goods. Mr. Justice Reed said that it was time to call a halt in the extension of probation in cases of thefts from shops and stores. Other sentences were as follow: Horace Joseph Crofts, aged 20, carnal knowledge, was convicted and . ordered to come up for sentence if called on within a year. Thomas John Morris, charged with shopbreaking with theft and receiving, was sentenced to twelve months’ reformative detention. Cedric Charles Kiddey, for attempted housebreaking and theft, received two years’ Borstal, detention. Charles Edwards, for sending a false telegram, received . twelve months. Archibald William McCorkindale, for theft was given twelve months’ reformative detention; Walter Thomas, for forgery, two years’ probation;. Wallace Percy Eather, for indecent assault, two years; Charles Edgar McPeak, for the theft of £l3OO, fifteen months. In the assurance thefts case Mr. Lascelles for the prisoners said that it was unfortunate that in the office there wassuch free access to the cash box. There was no audit of the cash box and the premium registers were not checked, and the two men fell into the clutches of the system when they were little more •than youths. In 1925 they attempted to break off the practice, but were unable to do so. If there had been a check the thefts would have been discovered years ago. The offences occurred manly et a time when the world gave itself to pleasure. They saw too much of race meetings and cars and simply frittered the money away. They had a salary of which they increased to £lOOO, said his Honour. This was a shocking case. It was not his business to say anything concerning how the books of the company were kept. It seemed extraordinary, however, that the thefts were not discovered before. It seemed only reasonable that th responsible persons in the firm should be aware how their employees were spending their money. There was really no excuse for the prisoners. If they had started young.they could have pulled up. They intended to rob their employers as long as they could. It was necessary to inflict a punishment which would serve as a deterrent to others who might be in the same position.