Architect For Sentence (Press, 7 August 1962)
This is a Generative AI summary of this newspaper article. It may contain errors or omissions. Please note that the language in the summary is reflective of the original article and the societal attitudes of the time in which it was written.
Summary: Architect For Sentence (Press, 7 August 1962)
On 7 August 1962, William Thorrold Jaggard, a 48-year-old architect from Palmerston North, was committed to the Supreme Court on multiple serious charges, including 11 counts of indecent assault on males and one count of attempted assault. The case was characterised by the presiding magistrate, Mr D. G. Sinclair, as particularly severe, with a maximum penalty of seven years' imprisonment applicable. The offences occurred between January 13, 1956, and 2 August 1962, involving young males aged 17 to 29. Detective Senior Sergeant F. A. Gordon provided insights into the nature of the crimes, indicating that the majority of the assaults took place in a bar-like setting set up in Jaggard's rooms. Jaggard admitted to all charges, which spared the victims from the distress of recounting their experiences in court. A police search revealed indecent literature and photographs in Jaggard’s possession, including a biography he authored titled "Confessions of a Homosexual." Incredibly, a list of 93 local youths and men was found with Jaggard, each entry noted with a numerical code and date that suggested the degree of indecency encountered by these individuals. Although possible additional charges could have been brought against him, the current charges were deemed sufficient for prosecution at this stage. Detective Gordon highlighted the gravity of the situation, noting that Jaggard had exploited his respected position within the community to perpetrate acts of indecency, particularly against vulnerable youths who had sought his guidance for career advice. Gordon stated that the indecent activities had reportedly been ongoing for 32 years, based on Jaggard's own admissions. He condemned Jaggard's actions as intentionally manipulative, illustrating a methodical approach to seducing young men over the years. Defending Jaggard was Mr H. Y. Gilliand, while Jaggard was remanded in custody pending further proceedings. The case stands out not only for its distressing content but also for the significant breach of trust involved, given Jaggard's professional standing in society.
Important Information
The text on this page is created, in the most part, using Generative AI and so may contain errors or omissions. It is supplied to you without guarantee or warranty of correctness. If you find an error or would like to make a content suggestion please get in contact
The text on this page is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 New Zealand