PUBLICITY AND CRIME.

Taranaki Daily News, 24 January 1921, Page 6

PUBLICITY AND CRIME.

. SUPPRESSION OF NAMES COMMENTS BY MAGISTRATE. The magisterial attitude toward the Act passed last session, giving magis- J trates the power to forbid the publica-] tion of the names of convicted first of-1 fenders, was briefly sketched the other day in the Christchurch Magistrate’s Court. Nellie Sham, alias Nurse Youngman (Mr. Alpers), was , charged (1) with obtaining, on December 23, 1920, from the New Zealand Farmers’ Co-operative Association, Christchurch, goods and wearing apparel valued at £l5 18s 2d, by falsely representing herself to be Mrs. M. Doyle, of Leeston, who had an account with the association; and (2) obtaining on the same date other goods and apparel from the association, to the value of £l4 13s fid, by falsely representing herself to be Mrs. J Cameron, of Scargill. She pleaded guilty to both charges, and elected to be deat.l with summarily. Detective-Sergeant Gibson said that when he interviewed the accused she admitted the offences. She said that a daughter was to be married, and she wanted her to “look nice”. All the property had been recovered. Mr. Alpers appealed for leniency, and referred to the previous good record of the defendant, who was suffering from “ner&s”. He asked for an order prohibiting publication of the defendant’s name in the press reports.

Mr. McCarthy said the Legislature had invested magistrates with the power to make an order prohibiting the publication of the names of offenders, and it was not for the magistrates to say that the Legislature had done wrong in this, and to neglect to exercise the powers under the order which the Legislature had authorised. If the making of the order was wrong the law must be altered. It was not competent .for magistrates to say that not in any case would they make such orders. Should one be made in the present case? The accused had hitherto borne a good, character, and had home, husband and children, and had made restitution. He did not think that the Legislature meant these applications to be granted in every case. In one case- of shoplifting he had made such an order, but he did not think this was a case where the order should be made. It was not a case for imprisonment, although shoplifting and false pretences were very common. Accused would be convicted and fined £lO with costs on one charge, and convicted and discharged on the other.