Dentist Sentenced to Three Years' Gaol

Sun (Auckland), Volume III, Issue 698, 25 June 1929, Page 1

Dentist Sentenced to Three Years' Gaol

PENALTY FOR THEFTS JUDGE'S SCATHING COMMENT; “Your general character may have been good, but your character so far as honesty is concerned during the past five years has been bad; and if you have been reported to be an honest man you have had a reputation which was unfounded.” Thus Mr. Justice Kennedy in the Supreme Court today in sentencing Walter Morley, dental surgeon, aged 39, to one year’s hard labour, to be followed by two years’ reformative detention for theft of £24S belonging to Frederick John Rayner. Stating that he would not attempt to justify the offences, Mr. Inder, on prisoner’s behalf, directed attention to some phases of the case. Morley had the reputation of a clean-living man, apparently without any vices. He neither drank nor gambled, and was held in esteem by his associates, and in addition was a hard and capable worker. He was more weak than a criminal in the rough sense of the word. Placed in a position where misappropriation of moneys was easy, he found he was not strong enough to resist the temptation. Counsel reminded his Honour that the man would suffer other penalties besides those which the Court would enforce-—he had lost his professional status, the respect of liis friends, and had brought disgrace on his wife. These would weigh more heavily on Morley than the Court’s penalty. He had just started to build up » practice himself, and was doing; well, but now, of course, that was gone. Morley had given the police every possible assistance, said counsel, in suggesting that the case was one in which reformative treatment should be imposed. REGRETTABLE CASE The Crown Prosecutor, Mr. V. FL Meredith, agreed it was a regrettable case, in which Morley and those associated with him would suffer severely. There was little to be submitted in his favour, however, counsel declared, in view of the fact he had been receiving an adequate salary and had been in a position of trust. During the whole time he held the position^ ; there had been steady defalcations ex- | tending from 1924 to the present time. ! It was not a case where a man had been suddenly pushed. The thefts were not only systematic but extensive. “The thefts have extended over a period of years and have been, continuous and systematic,” declared his Hon- ; our, in passing sentence. You have abused the trust reposed in you.” It. was true in his case the detection and the publicity and the loss of his professional prospects was part of the punishment and would be no light punishment. All these things were risks that he deliberately continued to take for no fewer than five years. Through those years he apparently thought it was worth while taking those risks. Nor could the Court overlook the fact that the thefts were remunerative to him; the amounts taken were considerable. His Honour sentenced Morley to one year’s hard labour, to be followed by two years’ reformative detention, on each of nine charges, the terms to bo concurrent.