JUDGE TAKES SERIOUS VIEW OF BREAKING AND ENTERING

Wanganui Chronicle, 9 November 1950, Page 2

JUDGE TAKES SERIOUS VIEW OF BREAKING AND ENTERING

“This class of offence has got to be stamped out, and I feel that I have a public duty to impose a sentence that will show that the courts are determined to prevent people from going in for this sort of thing with impunity/’ said Mr Justice Hay, in the Supreme Court, Wanganui, yesterday, when sentencing three young men on charges of breaking and entering.

James Baxter, labourer, aged 22, who appeared for sentence on five charges of breaking and entering and theft, and three of theft, was sentenced to two years’ reformative detention on one charge, and was con* victed and discharged on the others.

Peter Ray Packer, labourer, aged 19, for sentence on four charges of breaking and entering and theft, one of theft and another of receiving, was sentenced to 18 months’ reformative detention on one charge, and was convicted and discharged on the others. Donald John Taylor, farm worker, aged 22, was sentenced to 12 months’ reformative detention on one charge of breaking and entering, and was convicted and discharged on the others. COUNSEL’S SUBMISSIONS. “In determining the motives which caused prisoner to enter into this irresponsible course of conduct it is necessary to trace in brief his unfortunate background,” said Mr K. R. Horsley, for Baxter. An incident when he was only 13 years of age created a deen impression on his mind. He was a difficult and backward child and finished his schooling when in Standard II at the age of 12. He had always been a good worker, and was making his first appearance in Court. The breaking and entering was undertaken more in a spirit of adventure than with any criminal intent, said counsel. Mr J. S. D. Tizard, for Packer, said that there were the same mitigating circumstances as in the previous case. Prisoner had just reached the age when he had passed beyond the jurisdiction of the Children’s Court. He was one of a family of 10 and lost his mother six years ago. “I do submit most strongly that as this is a case of a boy onlv 19, involved in a series of offences over only a short period, that the Court may extend its clemancy and graint probation,” said counsel. “A hig factor is that he, himself, is genuinely penitant.” Taylor was also a young man and his background was somewhat similar to the others, said Mr Tizard. He was the second youngest of a large family and had been without the benefit of a father for the past six years. He had spent a great deal of his time working among older men in the country. All previous employers spore highly of him and said that he was an exceedingly good worker. Taylor’s present employer was prepared to take him back. “There is not a great deal that, can be said in cases such as this.” submitted the Crown Prosecutor. Mr N. R. Bain. “Prisoners have no past re-: cords that can be taken into account." Cases of breaking and entering by young men were all the more serious when there was so milth work available. The crime was entirely unnecessary and some punishment should be Imposed which would act as a deterrent. COMMENTS BY JUDGE. “It is a sad duty which a judge is called on to perform to see three young men standing in the dock for sentence,” said His Honour. “I can assure you that I do it with the gravest sense of responsibility.” The Court must consider that these were young men with their lives ahead of them, but it must also consider what was in the best interests of the public. His Honour added. Breaking and entering was a serious matter and, unfortunately, in these days was all too prevalent. The Court must see that something was done to protect the public from these depredations. His Honour said that he had given very careful consideration to reports placed before him by the probation officer, and also to what had been said •by counsel, but regretted that reformative detention was the only type of punishment which could meet these offences The crimes were carefully planned, and ruthlessly carried out. Baxter was responsible for the most individual offences and had eight charges against him relating to three separate occasions. The Court, therefore, felt that h.e was the worst offender. and that his background did not excuse him. Packer had committed six offences, relating tn two occasions. and was somewhat lesser in the objective scale than Baxter. Taylor was responsible to an even lesser degree because he had committed four offences on one occasion. “I don’t propose to determine who was the ring leader, if there was one.” said His Honour. "Ml were aware that what they were doing was wrong.”