NEWSPAPER CRITICISM

Evening Star, Issue 19784, 7 February 1928, Page 6

NEWSPAPER CRITICISM

A JUDGE AND HIS SENTENCE IPeb United Press Association.] AUCKLAND, February 7. Addressing tho grand jury in the Supremo Court, Mr Justice Heed said it was quite right and proper that the ■sentences of a judge should be subject to criticism in tho newspapers. It would be an unhealthy stare of affairs if a judge’s sentence or judgment should be sacrosanct, leading newspapers with a sense of responsibility attaching to the view they expressed seldom wantonly criticised sentences knowing full well that they could not win possession of all that was known to the judge, but there bad been exceptions. His Honor mentioned the case in which he granted probation to n sharebroker who had misappropriated £l5O entrusted to him to invest. As a rule breaches of trust wore visited by a sentence of imprisonment, hut in this case representations were made by the probation officer which induced him with some doubt to grant probation. He had imposed terms requiring complete restitution and the payment of all costs to which the country had been put. At the same session some men were charged with breaking and entering. One of them was convicted of receiving goods knowing them to have been stolen, and stolen goods recovered from his possession were valued at £l5O. The police report showed that there had been a series of cases of breaking and entering, and that the prisoner war the head ot a gang oi thieves, who were known to he responsible lor these crimes. “ 1 sentenced him to two years' imprisonment,” said His Honor. ” and a local paper of some standing commented on the discrepancy of the sentences, and actually used the argument that iu each case the amount involved wa% the same, and that in each, case there had been restitution. A criticism ot that sort does no good; it oven works harm amongst unthinking readers as tending to show doubt of the impartiality of the Bench.”