BLUFFED

Auckland Star, Volume XLVII, Issue 64, 15 March 1916, Page 2

BLUFFED

DEHSOTIVE AND BOOKMAKERS INCIDENT AT OTAHUHU TROTS. 'Bdrbre , Mr. P.V. Frazer, S:M., to-day, Gilbert Walker -was charged that, being a bookmaker, he made bete on Alexandra Park Taceeouree last Wednesday. Detective Hammond gave evidence that at vwious times between the second-ejnd seventh races 'he saw Walker standing between the loos.e-.boxes cloee to the outside totalisatpr, and noticed people, sometimes up*to-a&- many->as forty, go up to 'him just prior to the running of the races, and make motions of giving him money, while he appeared to be making eatries. After the seventh race witness approached Walker, who ran away off the course on to Greenlane footpath, where witness overtook him. Walker denied that he was betting, and eaid that the had not been on the course, but eventually witness persuaded him to go to the police room on the, i the .-old formula that>i;'jtihej: I !isiew&rde wanted, to-seo him." There witness pereuaded Walker To submit" to be" searched. At first Walker refused, when informed that witness had no warrant of arrest, but eventually he consented, Sergeant Lanigan being present at the time, and also a military sergeant-major- who was using the police room for recruiting purpoees. Witness found on defendant £140, of which £111 was in notes, £11 10/ in gold, and £3 5/9 in silver, while therß was also a. betting money-order telegram from Gisborne for £4, with instructions about the Te Aroha races. .There was also a clip of paper with memoranda on it about a race won 'by Reggie Huon, and indicating that he had taken a number of bets on that race. -In reply to Mr. Lundon (for defendant), witness stated that though defendant at first refused to submit to a search he finally consented without physical force being used. Frederick Williams, the military man who waa in the police room when the search of Walker was made, stated that after Walker declined to submit to search on hearing there was no warrant for his arrest, Sergt. Lanigan took Walker by the shoulders and Detective Hammond held his wrists. The detective then said that Walker would have to submit to a search. No physical force was used, but when Walker saw that a search would be insisted on he gave in and consented to be searched. . .His Worship: It seems to mc from the evidence of this witness that the evidence as to what money the defendant had on him was improperly obtained, owing to a chow of force having been made. That throws the case back on to- the fact that the only evidence that can be taken against defendant is the evidence that he has been seen ou the course being visited by thirty or forty people, and making motions as if he were taking money. There is also the suspicious circumstance that when he was spoken to he denied that he had been on the course. In reply to Mr.London, his Worship stated that he could no,t dismiss the case i without hearing defendant's own cviI dence. The defendant went into the box and specifically denied that he made any bet on the racecourse that day, and that he only looked through the gate now and again to see the races in which he was interested. Under cross-examination by the Chief Detective the defendant admitted that between the races he went on the course between the loose boxes, and that he had a large sum of money on him, which he partly explained by stating that he had got a man to put £2 on the tote for him on Wildfire that paid £29, and then £20 on Waverley that paid 26/. He admitted that the notebook produced was his and the notes were in his writing, but he declined to explain the notes beyond.saying they were not connected with the present charge. HIS ""Worship decided.that the evidence as to the money and memoranda was obtained by s show of force and was consequently not admissible. Walker had surrendered rather than .consented to the search. The evidence.had, however, become so confused in his mind with the properly - admiseable evidence that he could not fairly separate the two, and consequently, he would dismiss the charge without prejudice, ■which would enable the police to bring it on again if they desired to do so.