MENTAL DEFECTIVE

Hokitika Guardian, 2 June 1930, Page 7

MENTAL DEFECTIVE

CASE- BEFORE: SUPREME COURT

AUCKLAND, May 29

The much discussed Mental Deleo.tives Act Amendment Act, 1923, was referred to in the Supreme Court when Stanley, Allred, \ laloux, who had pleaded guilty to eight offences agfiilist young hoys and girls was brought before Mr Justice Herdman for sentence. ~ .7

Mr Northcroft, for Vialoux, said the prisoner had been under observation in the Auckland Mental Hospital. The superintendent, l)r. Buchanan, repoued that he came within class seven of the definition of “mentally delective person,”' as described by" the A t of 1928, namely, persons socially defe - tive, that is persons whqr, suffer hem

mental deficiency associated with antisocial conduct, and who by reason of such deficiency require supervision for their own protection or in the public interest.

His Honour said he had no power to send a prisoner to any institution. Mr Northcroft: He is only merely a person of anti-social habits but also mentallv deficient.

His Honor: But can he he certified f Mr Northcroft: It does seem proper, if some suitable machinery i:s being devised to deal with such eases, that this man should not he treated as an ordinarv criminal.

His relatives wish him to he placed in an institutou so that he may not repeat the offences. His Honor: 1 may say that in many such eases the accused’s mental equipment is not what it ought to be. Mr No:thcroft: The Act intends that special provision shall he made for such cases. .

His Honor: And that has not been done ?

Mr Northcroft: That is so, The Act was intended to deal with persons not mentally delective. r l 1 1 is man is both mentally and socially defective. It would be unfortunate if, because the State has not gone further and provided special institutions, this man should not have the benefit of treatment.

Mr Meredith, Crown Prosecutor, said the difficulty was that the same arguments could he used 011 behalf of a number of offenders. The preferable our.se would be to impose a term of reformative detention. H s Honor said that Dr Buchanan’s report was that prisoner was mentally weak and sexually perverted, hut not so mentally weak that two doctors could certify him as insane. The case was like many in the 'past. With the coneurren e of the probation officer he had dec ded. to impose a sentence of not more than five years reformative treatment. The Prisons Board, which would have iuri diction over the prisoner, included Mr 'l'. G. Grnv, a distinguished alienist, and po-siblv after considering his case it. would be able to arrange for his transfer to a mental hospital. An order for the ennoression of prisoner’s name was refused.