SHARE’S SENTENCE

Hokitika Guardian, 12 November 1929, Page 3

SHARE’S SENTENCE

APPEAL BY COUNSEL. (By'Telegraph—Per Press Association.) AUCKLAND, No vender 11. Before sentence was given, his counsel (Air Singer) made an eloquent plea on Share’s behalf. He repudiated a report in one Aucklaftd newspaper that the defence was a vilification of the girl. Never at any stage was there an attack on the girl’s character. The prisoner was a.T.B. subject, and counsel suggested that the complaints from which Share was suffering may have had something to do with this unfortunate affair. Accused was now in a position not only degrading hut one which had brought ruin to himself, his wife, and his family. Share at this stage leaned over the dock with his handkerchief covering his face and sobbed quietly. Mr Singer, continuing, said: “In this court to-day are accused’s wife and his son, a lad olf sixteen. His wife is a simple Indian woman whose affections have not waned and who has stuck to her husband just as a true ,wife should. His son is also a T.B. patient. I would ask that the penalty which you are forced to impose be 'made as light as your Honour possibly can ” -

THE JUDGE’S COMMENT. “Prisoner at the bar,” said Justice Sir W. Herdman. “ I propose to say little that will add to the indignity of the position you occupy. You have had the advantage of an extremely able defence, and your counsel’s cross-ex-amination on the girl was conducted with admiral taste. Upon the evidence from which there was no escape, you were found guilty of an offence which is highly punishable and which no plea can excuse. If other medical practitioners behaved as you did, it would be unsafe to allow women to enter a doctor’s surgery alone. I have authority to order you to be flogged, but in this instance I don’t propose to exercise ;that power. Your good name has gone. Ahy reputation that you had as a professional man has vanished. You have brought everlasting disgrace upon yourself and a New Zealand jury has declared to you to be a sexual pervert. This is the serious result of your misbehaviour and in itself is a formidable punishment. But not withstanding that, it is my duty to assess the punishment in accordance with the law. This is not a case of rape. You did the girl no phy-

sical injury and the jury recommended you to mercy. Taking all those circumstances into account, I think that

a-sentence of three years imprisonment with hard labour will cause you and others like you to understand that respectable young women cannot be tampered with, with impunity.