Supreme Court Imprisonment For Attempted Rape

Press, Volume CV, Issue 30977, 5 February 1966, Page 24

Supreme Court Imprisonment For Attempted Rape

A man imprisoned for three years for rape in 1962 was sentenced in the Supreme Court yesterday to two years' and a half imprisonment for attempted rape last August. He is William Angus Tito, aged 29, a truck driver, who was found guilty by a jury earlier this week of the attempted rape of a girl near Victoria Park, on Cashmere Hills, where he had driven her in his car, after offering her a lift home. “Three years’ imprisonment for rape in 1962 has not deterred you from committing a further offence of the same nature,” said Mr Justice Macarthur. in passing sentence on Tito. Mr R. L. Kerr, counsel for Tito, had submitted that the offence was “not one of the worst of its sort,” and that the ghi had suffered no physical injury. The break-up of Tito’s marriage through the desertion of his wife had brought instability to his life, said Mr Kerr. But he now hoped to obtain a divorce, and marry another woman, who was prepared to stand by him. Since there was now prospect of the stability hitherto lacking in Tito’s life, a lesser penalty might be imposed than otherwise, Mr Kerr said. His Honour conceded that the present offence was not as bad in its general circumstances as the former, and that Tito had a good work record, with much in his favour in a probation report “However, my primary duty is the protection of young girls from offences of this nature,” said his Honour. “I am not justified in awarding a lesser term than 2j years' imprisonment.”

An assault, with knife in band, by Ronald Nicholas Tiki must be regarded as a bad case, requiring him to be under some form of control, said his Honour, when Tiki, aged 30, a metal polisher, appeared for sentence. A jury found Tiki guilty of assault earlier this week, although acquitting ham on a major charge of threatening to kill. “Fortunately, you did not use the knife to any effect,” his Honour said to Tiki. • Tiki was placed on probation for a year, on condition that he pays £75 towards the cost of his prosecution, and takes out a prohibition order. “In all the circumstances, and having regard to the fact that you are a first offender, I think I am justified in not sentencing you to imprisonment,” his Honour said. Mr K. N. Hampton, for Tiki, said that he was of part Maori and part Mexican blood, and a man of volatile temperament, who had led “a colourful and somewhat itinerant life.” Since coming to New Zealand from Queensland last year he had proved a satisfactory tradesman and had been in no trouble. He had already suffered from his Court appearance in that he might have lost a metalpolishing contract at the Cathedral of the Blessed Sacrament in Christchurch, which would have been worth £lOO to him. “He has been told that he eould not carry out the contract until the present matter had been cleared up,” Mr Hampton said.