Hide Article Text (OCR)
THE WESPANIZZA CASE.CONVICTION CHALLENGED.Leave to Appeal Sought.In the Criminal Court recently a Jury convicted Peter Panlzxa (1®). on a char®* or having unlawfully received a motor cycle, the property of Keith James Hardle. well knowing It to have been stolen The jury added to their verdict a strong recommendation to mercy on account ot the prisoner’* youth Psnlzza had been i charged with stealing and receiving the I cvrle. he was acquitted on the count ol theftCounsel for the defence lt;Mr. R D Lane) urged that the accused be released on recognisance* to come up for sentence If called upon. Counsel expressed the view that the contamination of prison life might possibly play havoc with the accused's character, as he was very youngThe Chief Justice said that be had no intention of discharging the accused onbond*. “The jury's recommendation tomerry. Panina was based on your youth.” continued His Honour, and indeed, having heard the evidence. I must say that I can see no other ground on which It could have been based li was very evident that. If you did not actually steal the motor cycle, you certainly received It well knowing It to have been stolen. And you did not scruple to commit perjury in this Court with a view to evading the consequence* of your action.Not withstanding your youth, your efloeta to cover up your tracks by registering the cycle at first In the country under another name, and then in PerUi under your own name, and by attempts to tamper with the licence, seem to suggest that although this Is your first conviction. It Is not necessarily your first offence. In sentencing you to 12 months' imprisonment, with hard labour. I consider that in the circumstance* I am giving full weight to the Jury's recom-iUon.”for the d In the central offlc* of the Supreme Court, nolle* of an application by Panina for leave to appeal to the Court of Criminal Appeal against his conviction and sentence The application is based on the grounds —lt;1) Th»t counsel for the defence was refused access to the accused during the course of the trial, and for the purpose of re-examine t too was unable to obtain Instructions. «a» as to uneapected evidence in reference U retracing of writing oa a motor licence. ib as to unexpected grounds for Identification ot the motor cycle, the subject matter of the charge. (c as to search made to locate a person from whom the accused pur- ( chased the cycle, and (d) as to the value of the cycle sold compared to the value of the cycle purchased(2 That the teamed trial Judge was wrung In law in permitting a witness to be called by the Crown and to give further evidence of Identification of the motor cycle after the close of the case Ice the defence(3i That the learned trial Judge misdirected the Jury on the evidence(4) That the trial resulted in a miscarriage of Justicelt;5» That the learned trial Judge misdirected the Jury on the law lt;e That the learned trial Judge admitted evidence of Alexander Morgan Attken which was hearsay evidence and not evidence of the knowledge of the said Alexander Morgan AltkenIt is also maintained in support of the application that the veHi-i •«-*« -» rom-nromlae verdict and therefore no verdict.” and was against the weight of evidence.The application for leave to appeal against the sentence is based on the ground that the sentence was excessive, having regard to the fact* and the jury's recommendation to mercy
Newspaper Details
Perth West Australian
Perth, Western Australia, AU
Fri, May 14, 1937
Page 10
Full Page
Clipped by
Anonymous
AU 01 Dec 2018
Other Publications Near Perth, Western Australia
Perth Western Mail
Perth West Australian Sunday Times
Perth Swan River Guardian
Perth Sunday Times
Perth Sparks Fortnightly
