FLAW IN THE CRIMES ACT

Dominion, Volume 13, Issue 140, 9 March 1920, Page 6

FLAW IN THE CRIMES ACT

« COUNSELLING AND PROCURING . OFFENCES.. By Telegraph—Pref! Association. Auckland, March 8. Decision was given by Mr. Po.vnton, S.M.. in the Police Court to-day in the case in which Gordon Stewart Mason was charged with having attempted to steal m Tho evidence showed that accused admitted having urged another man to enter a house and take the money, describiiiL' the position of the money, the movements of tho inmates of the house, and Hie best wav to enter the premises. The said that apparently there was a serious omission in tho Crimes Act regarding counselling and procuring the commission of offences. Bv common law it was a crime to instigate or urge on others the commission of crimes, and it did not require that crime should have been committed or attempted to make the offence of counselling complete. This, however, nnfortunatelv. was no longer law in New Zealand. , where tho Crimes Act repealed all laws relating to crime not included in its provisions.. Bv its terms tliertS was i no offence of counselling for theft, arson, and numerous other crimes, unless crime has actuallv been committed. It was certninlr nn unintentional omission, because the New Zealand code was not intended to relax the law for preventing crime, but.' if anything, to make it more effective. The Justices of the Peace Act. 1908. (section 53) provided for the punishment of persons inciting others to the commission of summary offences, l>ut tin's section also referred lo acts already committed.. There could not have- been a clearer case o'f incitement than that under consideration, but owing to the present state of the law accused could not be punished either for attempting or for counselling.