PIHA CHARGES

Waikato Times, Volume 124, Issue 20819, 1 June 1939, Page 10

PIHA CHARGES

SENTENCE IMPOSED McKAY, FOUR YEARS’ GAOL TWO YEARS FOR COMPANION PLEA ON TALBOT’S BEHALF (By Telegraph.—Press Association) AUCKLAND, Thursday Total sentences of four years’ Imprisonment with hard labour on Gordon Robert McKay, wool and skins dealer, Sydney, and two years’ imprisonment with hard labour on James Arthur Talbot, Sydney, were passed by Mr Justice Fair In the Supreme Court this morning. On the charges of wilfully setting fire to a dwelling, owned by Florence Jessie Thomas, at Piha, on February 12, McKay was sentenced to three years’ Imprisonment with hard labour, and Talbot to 18 months’ imprisonment with hard labour. For Improperly Interfering with the dead body of Patrick Shine on February 10, McKay was sentenced to a year’s imprisonment with hard labour, and Talbot to six months’ Imprisonment with hard labour. The sentences were made cumulative in the case of each accused.

For the final scene in the Piha case, the passing of sentence by Mr Justice Fair, there was a gathering of about 200 members of the public. A feature of His Honour's comment in passing sentence was the manner in which he brushed aside the plea by McKay’s counsel that the fact that there had been a conspiracy charge should be disregarded in assessing penalty. His Honour said it would be unreasonable and against commonsense to' eliminate considerations relating to that charge, even though the accused men had been found not guilty by the jury. Plea on Talbot’s Behalf Mr Terry, speaking on behalf of Talbot, said that perhaps the most dramatic feature of an unusual and unprecedented trial was the emphasis with which the foreman of the jury recorded their recommendation in the verdict against Talbot. The term “ very strong recommendation to mercy,” coupled with record deliberations lasting five and three-quarter hours, warranted the belief that the jury was of the opinion that Talbot’s connection with the crimes involved the minimum degree of culpability. Counsel suggested that the totality of the testimony amply supported the obvious implication of the jury’s rider. Comparatively young, Talbot laboured under the disadvantages of little education, counsel continued. He began work as a hawker, was later a storeman, and later still became involved in the association which had largely contributed to his present unfortunate position. The jury had negatived the charge of conspiracy, and His Honour had undertaken to give the fullest weight to their favourable recommendation. Talk of Insurance Leave to appear for McKay with Mr Noble, who had represented McKay throughout the trial, was granted to Mr G. P. Finlay, who said he had been asked by McKay’s family to make certain representations. The case had been made the subject of a flood of publicity. He mentioned this because there had been talk of Insurance and insurance companies, which he invited His Honour to exclude from consideration. His Honour: Prisoner was not convicted, but he was charged along with Talbot with conspiracy to defraud. The jury evidently thought the evidence left some doubt as to whether Talbot was aware of the full nature and performance of his acts, but there was one inference to be drawn, that they were acting with intent to defraud someone, and that to a very serious extent. That is the only reasonable inference from the evidence. I feel I should let you know that I feel bound to take that into consideration. Mr Finlay: Does Your Honour suggest that the case should be dealt with as though this prisoner had been convicted of intention to defraud? llis Honour: I am driven to infer that the acts were committed with some such purpose. 1 look at it from a commonsense point of view, drawing what inference as should properly be drawn from the facts.

Mr Finlay said he need proceed no further with that aspect.

First Offence With respect to the charge of interfering with human remains, Mr Finlay said it was the first crime of the kind in the country’s century of history. and one that would probably not be repeated. There was little need to discuss the question of a sentence that would art as a deterrent of a crime so uncommon that the legislature had fixed as a maximum for the worst type of such offence a penalty of two years’ Imprisonment with hard labour. The crime of arson included many types, ranging to that in which human life was endangered, with a penalty running to life Imprisonment. Here it was a matter of burning a small batch, with no danger to anyone. Much harm had been done, added counsel, by an undue measure of ill-informed propaganda. It would be a surprise to the public to learn that this man had no record. This was his sole offence against the law in the 43 years of his life, except for an offence against the gaming laws of New South Wales. His Honour: ‘‘lt seems to have been a serious offence. He was fined £400.” Mr Finlay: *1 understand Ihe penally is £3 a skin, and 80 skins would make that sum. Referring to McKay’s present offence, counsel said there was some premeditation, but also a degree of clumsiness and lack of caution, which demonstrated that the man was not of the criminal class. The crime bore all the marks of tlie thundering amateur. There was a disingenuity and simplicity about some of bis acts which, coming after a long and blameless family life, pointed to an act of madness having a psychological origin. Hr* was a friendless stranger in a strange, land, who had shown no policy of crime beyond this one mad adventure. Coun-

sel asked that the punishment be such that the maa would not end his terra

without hope of winning rehabilitation “Impudent Scheme” “There is no doubt that these two offences were part of an impudent scheme, deliberately planned by the accused McKay, probably to defraud companies with which he was insured for some £40,000,” said His Honour. “They were carefully planned and carried out with boldness and some measure of cunning. Although, as IVSr Finlay had said, there was a certain degree of clumsiness and Irek of foresight which shows that the accused McKay is not an expert in crime, there is no doubt that If he had been successful he would have obtained control of the greatest part of the large sum of money for which he was Insured,”