The three boys who admitted carrying out the $1.3 million Harrington Sound School arson were committed into care for two years yesterday.

But the Government were staying tightlipped about exactly where they would be placed.

Both Family Magistrate Carlisle Greaves and Prosecutor Patrick Doherty described the hearing as a housekeeping manoeuvre after the court had blundered by sentencing the three under the wrong act in February.

But yesterday Mr. Greaves said the new sentencing was cosmetic because the end result was the same -- that the trio would be placed into a home. When the teens were sentenced under the wrong act last month the Government had to free them because there were no facilities to handle arsonists.

But a Government spokesman refused to say if progress had been made on building new facilities at Southside or reveal where the children would be put.

A spokeswoman said yesterday: "We have no further comment on that.'' Acting Minister of Health and Family Services Milton Scott said yesterday: "While in the Director's care, each of them will undergo a comprehensive assessment.

Young arsonists sentenced under new law "This will include evaluations by a forensic psychologist and clinical social workers.'' He said the expert findings would be reviewed to help set up an intervention plan for each youth.

He added: "Residential Treatment Services has an established practice of encouraging the continued education of all its residents.

"This means that, as far a possible, these youths will remain in their school setting and be escorted to and from school.'' After yesterday's sentencing defence lawyer Mark Pettingill said an appeal was possible.

He said: "We will have to see what the Director of Child and Family Services is going to do -- we will see in due course.'' During the hearing Saul Froomkin had argued that the court should not view themselves as a rubber stamp confirming the earlier decision.

He said: "These offences occurred over a year ago -- this has been held over their heads all that time.

"They have been before the panel at least five times and the matter was before the Supreme Court. For 15-year-olds this is not only a traumatic event but a deterrent.'' He urged probation and said if the boys were backsliding they could be brought back before the panel.

He said: "No useful purpose could be served by putting them into the care of the director.'' Fellow defence lawyer Delroy Duncan described the process as an odyssey and urged the panel to bear in mind the educational needs of the three boys.

He said: "There is no evidence, not even a scintilla of a repetition.'' And Mr. Pettingill argued that community service would have been the right road for the February 1999 fire.

He said: "It would be a great idea to have them paint a school building, that would be very apt.''