JUDGE ANSWERS CRITICISM

Hokitika Guardian, 9 February 1928, Page 1

JUDGE ANSWERS CRITICISM

A UFFSTTON (IF SKNTK.Yf'F..S. A FCK LAN I). Feb. 7. (Time and punishment, tin* lunelions of judge and jury, and the rights of newspapers in regal'd In public comment, were 1 amoiigsl the subjects dealt with bv Air dust ice Heed in bis address to (lie Grand Jury ai the opening of the Supreme Cniii'l sessions today. The object to he aimed at. said his Honor, was the suppression of crime. Once it- was said that this could only lie effected by inflicting severe penalties. hut students of criminology had discarded entirely this view. The modern view was to endeavour to reform the offender whilst not neglecting the important consideration of deterring others from criminal offences. Sometimes, circumstances were such that lo follow the general rule to inflict such a degree of punishment as might he a deterrent- would be to sacrifice common sense to a pedantic adherence Lo a rule or practice. It was that class of ease that, without complete knowledge caused uninformed persons to criticise what they were supposed to regarcl as the inconsistency of sentences.

■‘lt is quite right and proper that tln> sentences of a judge should he subject to the criticism of newspapers,” continued Air Justice Heed, who referred to some comment hv a local paper of standing which had commented upon the discrepancy on -sentences he had passed in two eases where the amount involved lmd been the same (misappropriation by a sharebroker and breaking and entering by the head of a gang of thieves), hut where one prisoner had got probation i„KI the other two years’ hard labour. The paper had used the argument that as restitution had been made in each ease, the sentences should have been the same. . “Criticism of that sort does no good and even works harm amongst unthinking readers as tending to throw doubt on the impartiality <>i the Jlonch,” he said. The most difficult class of ease to know what to do with, concluded His Honor, was of a person found guilty of causing the death of another liy the negligent driving of a motor ear. He had tried dozens and had found that juries were loth to find a verdict that might result in imprisonment.