CASE OF THEFT

Waipukurau Press, Volume XXVIII, Issue 199, 18 August 1933, Page 7

CASE OF THEFT

NAPIER SOLICITOR SENTENCED TO AN EXEMFLAKY TERM Remarking that he regarded the case as a very serious one indeed, Mr Justice Reed, in the Supreme Court, Wellington, yesterday, imposed a sentence of five years’ imprisonment upon Albert Lionel Bailey, solicitor, aged 39, who had- pleaded guilty at Napier to the theft of moneys totalling £2lll Ils lid, committed in the employ of Humphries and Humphries, solicitors, Napier, forgery ami uttering, and a charge of fraudulently procuring a certificate of title to land. If was mentioned that restitution of about £5OO had been made, leaving a net shortage of some £l6OO. "It is much more serious when the offender is a lawyer,” his Honour said to prisoner. "You knew perfectly well what your position was, and apparently for some three years you deliberately set out stealing this money, which, at al] events, reached some £1660. And .in addition to that you endeavoured to conceal.it by forgery and fraudulently procuring and issuing a certificate of title. Generally the circumstances I regard as extremely serious indeed. I should not be doing my duty unless I passed exemplary sentence.” Bailey was sentenced to five years’ imprisonment on the major charge, to two years for fraudulently procuring a title, and to twelve months for forgery, the sentences to be concurrent. Mr W. Perry, who appeared for prisoner, said the origin or cause of Bailey’s offences was to be found in the fact when he returned from the war, and at the time he married, he was to a certain extent in debt. Unfortunately his wife suffered serious illness, and in the first .two years of marriage his liabilities increased by no less than £3OO. He then had resource to money-lenders.

It was not until October, 1930, that an offence was committed, and in Februarv preceding, prisoner’s house was partially destroyed by the earthquake, the first mortgagee taking it over six months later. Counsel asked the court to take into consideration the fact that prisoner had made a full disclosure of the facts, and had made every attempt to clear the matter up. The position now was that his family was destitute, he had sacrificed his professional career, and counsel submitted he had already incurred very great and very grave punishment.