Article image
Article image
Article image
This article displays in one automatically-generated column. View the full page to see article in its original form.


A.t the Supreme Court on Tuesday, , Charles Petersen and Karl Brun were indicted for having on the 27th May assaulted one Hugh Hewitt and robbed him ; of the sum of. L 6. ’ The prisoners, who were defended by Mr.'Stringer, pleaded “Hot Guilty.” The facts, as alleged by the prosecution, were that the prosecutor having fallen in the street went into the washhouse of the Somerset Hotel and removed some portion of his apparel. Whilst doing so, the prisoners came in and assaulted the prosecutor, ultimately rifling his clothes and taking away the money he had in hip pockets. The evidence given before Mr. Guinness in the R.M. Court was repeated in substance by Joseph Gale, Hugh Hewitt, Robert Shearman, James Quid, and the evidence having been given of the given of the men speeding money at the hotel at Tinwald, Mr. Stringer submitted that there was no evidence to go to the jury of the corpus delicti being traced to the prisoners. His Honor said that.there was the evidence of the witness Gale who saw the robbery. This was evidence enough, surely, to'go to the jury. Mr. Stringer called evidence. Joseph Shearman deponed that on the 26th May he lent the prisoners a LI note each. They said they were going to get their wages next day from their employer, Mr. Clark, at Tinwald. Both men paid for drinks after this in silver. Mr. Stringer addressed the jury for the defence. His Honor summed up. The jury, after a short deliberation, returned a verdict of “ Guilty ” against both prisoners. His Honor said it was a most startling thing, though no one could doubt that the jury had arrived at a right conclusion in returning the verdict they had. He should like to have some suggestion from the prisoners as to how they could havfcT come to do such a thing as this, one of the most serious crimes known to the law. It was a most painful thing to him tQ

have to pass sentence upon young men like these, because he had the power lo send them for penal servitude for life. The prisoners had nothing to say. His Honor said that he was unable to find any reason for giving them a short sentence. His duty to the public compelled him to give each of them a sentence of three years’ penal servitude.

This article text was automatically generated and may include errors. View the full page to see article in its original form.
Permanent link to this item

Bibliographic details

THE ROBBERY AT THE SOMERSET HOTEL., Ashburton Guardian, Volume 1, Issue 123, 8 July 1880

Word Count

THE ROBBERY AT THE SOMERSET HOTEL. Ashburton Guardian, Volume 1, Issue 123, 8 July 1880