YOUTH GREW UP IN IGNORANCE.

Star (Christchurch), Issue 17906, 23 July 1926, Page 9

YOUTH GREW UP IN IGNORANCE.

COMMITTED FIVE SEXUAL OFFENCES. In sentencing a young man, Selwyn Baker, seventeen years of age, on five charges of indecent assault, Mr Justice Adams to-day said that it was his duty to protect young girls from men who had not sufficient control over themselves. It was stated in evidence that the prisoner had suffered from a complex of ignorance. The prisoner was represented by Mr Thomas, who said that the Minister for Justice had informed the Juvenile Court that it had jurisdiction to deal with the case. Counsel asked that the case should be referred to the lower Court. Ilis Honor said that the difficulty was that the prisoner was not now charged with the offence in the words of the section in the Justices of the Peace Act. He had pleaded guilty, and now came up for sentence. Air Donnelly, Crown Prosecutor, said it was a question whether his Honor would be justified in taking the course suggested by Mr Thomas. Mr Thomas said that that course was justified under section 22, but as it might be advisable to argue the point further, perhaps it was better at present to leave the case as it was on the point raised, and to go into that question later. Ilis Honor agreed to that course. Dealing with the facts, Mr Thomas said that the prisoner had taken no interest in games* while a boy. He was an extraordinarily fine musician, and was organist in a large church in this city. , He reached the age of puberty without taking exercise. Tie did not realise the physical change that took place in him. The result was that he was affected mentally more or less, lie now fully understood what he had not understood before. There would he no chance of his committing the offence again. He was not the .type of ordinary criminal, although his offences were very reprehensible. Counsel asked for probation, especially as two clergymen would do everything they could to keep the prisoner on the right track. The officers of the church in which he was organist, if he was granted probation, would reinstate him. Ilis Honor said that his duty was to protect the children of the community. Mr Thomas: It may never happen again, and no harm was actually done. It looks like the action of a young rpan absolutely ignorant of sexual matters. Mr Donnelly said that the prisoner had had a good character previously, but the offences extended over two months. The protection of children on the roads must be considered. The Rev. E. E. Malden, vicar of St. Chad's, Linwood, said that before the offences the prisoner’s character had been completely good. The psychology of the case rested on a cqjnplex of ignorance. The prisoner’s farther did not toll the prisoner enough when he reached puberty. lie probably was over-developed sexually. It was often found that musical people were overdeveloped sexually. It was a form of madness. It might be cured when the cause was removed. In witness’s experience, when the position was fully ‘ explained, there was no recurrence of » the offence. Ilis Honor said that the offences j were very serious as far as the ptiblic were concerned, especially in respect to

girls. The duty of the Court was not only to be as merciful as possible to prisoners, but also to protect the public. Everybody would agree that young girls were the section of the community that need protection most. They required it especially against offences arising from want of sexual control on the part of young men and of men generally. His Honor was not able to say that the present case should be dealt with under the. Child Welfare Act of last session, a very beneficial measure. He would leave open any question of the construction of that Act, as it had not been fully argued. The prisoner would be detained in the Borstal Institute for a term not exceeding two years, the minimum term fixed. There would be an opportunity in the institute for medical examination and expert testimony, and the prisoner would be in the hands of the Minister for Justice. ASHBURTON BURGLAR. John Ronald Lynch, twenty-one years of age. who broke into the dwelling of Henry C. Percy, Ashburton, and into an office in and stole cash amounting to about £35, was sentenced to-day to be detained for reformative treatment for a period not exceeding three years. Mr White said that Lynch had been out of work, and had to pay his board : and lodging at an hotel. The police concluded that he was responsible for : a series of burglaries in Ashburton, but there was nothing to show that that was so. There was employment waiting for ’ him in Invercargill, where he had his home. . Mr Donnellv. Crown Prosecutor, said 1 that the conduct of the police was not • open to criticism. Lynch had shown I great skill and daring in breaking into > the shop. The police found that Lynch ; had been in Ashburton, had not been ’ working, and had no apparent honest way of getting money. He admitted 1 two burglaries, and since his arrest the 1 burglaries had ceased. The Ashburton sergeant simply said that there was 1 some probability that Lynch had something to do with them all, although ' there was no legal evidence of it. In view of the number of those offences, and of the skill and ability shown by ‘ Lynch, probation would be taking the ‘ matter further than was safe in the in--1 terests of the public. Lynch was sen- ‘ tenced as stated above.

THRICE AN HABITUAL CRIMINAL. Svdney Smith, who broke into the dwellings of Charles Newell and Leonard Bennington, at Ellesmere, and stole goods, was sentenced to twelve months’ imprisonment on each charge, the sentences to be cumulative. For the third time, he was declared an habitual criminal. He was convicted seven times previously for theft and breaking and entering. STOLE CHEWING GUM. Edgar Henry Miller, the letter-car-rier who stole chewing gum from a bag in the mail-room at the General Post Office, was represented by Mr Lascelles. Mr Donne U-v said that the offence was serious, but much less serious than others by postal officers. It seemed a case for leniency. Mr Lascelles said that Miller was eighteen years of age, and that he had been suspended by the Department. He wished to stand alone on the charge. lie took only 6s lOd worth of samples of chewing gum sent through the post. Although he was a postal officer, his offence was one of the most trivial in its class. Miller was admitted to probation for twelve months.