EXTENUATING PLEAS.

Gisborne Times, Volume XXVI, Issue 2263, 7 August 1908, Page 2

EXTENUATING PLEAS.

DRINK THE CAUSE OF CRIME.

JUSTICE EDWARDS’ DICTUM.

[Press Association.]

AUCKLAND, August 6. In sentencing some prisoners at the Auckland Supreme Court- yesterday afternoon Mr. Justice Edwards laid down the principle that tile fact that a mail was drunk was no extenuation for crime. Daniel O’Keefe, a young man, admitted having stolen from a dwelling, and Dr. Bamford, who appeared for him, urged that the benefit of the First Offenders’ Probation Act should be extended to his client. Counsel admitted that- O’Keefe had been convicted under the Police Offences Act twice before, once for drunkenness and once as a rogue and vagabond at Palmerston North. The prisoner, an explanation of his present offence, stated that he was under the influence of liquor at the time. His Honor: A honest man when he is sober does not become a thief when drunk.

Dr. Bamford. however, submitted that there was no other explanation of his client’s conduct, and he pointed out that O’Keefe, after committing the offence, immediately repented. His Honor did not tiee his way to admit O’Keefe to probation. 'The benefits of the Act were for those who yielded to sudden temptation, or perhaps under the influence of need, hut there were no such redeeming features in tho present instance. The fact that OTveef'e got drunk early in the morning, before committing the offeree, was an aggravation, not an extenuation of his crime, and an the interests of the public prisoner should he placed where lie could not get drunk. A sentence of one year’s imprisonment would he imposed. Walter David Scott, brought up for sentence on two charges of "false pretences, also pleaded drunkenness as an excuse, hut His Honor again classed this as an aggravation, not a palliation, of tho offence, and the prisoner, having previous convictions against In m, was sentenced to 18 months’ imprisonment on each charge the sentences to be concurrent.