EXTENSIVE THEFTS.

Auckland Star, Volume LIX, Issue 269, 13 November 1928, Page 7

EXTENSIVE THEFTS.

FROM CITY STORES.

SHOPLIFTERS HEAVILY FINED

NARROW ESCAPE FROM GAOL.

Looking thoroughly ashamed of themselves, Mrs. Mary Madeline Jessie Thompson (35) and Mrs. Ada May Edgecomb (45), both described on the charge sheet as domestics, appeared before Mr. F. K. Hunt, S.M., at the Police Court this morning on a number of charges of theft from five of the largest city drapery store?.

Together they were charged with stealing goods worth £17 15/ on November 2, goods worth £50 on October 26, and on October 19 goods worth £38 from the one Queen Street shop.

Mrs. Edgecomb, alone, was further charged on four informations with the theft of goods totalling £44 from four different establishments.

In all charges the women pleaded guilty.

Caught in the Act.

"These two women, who were with another woman, were detected in the act of stealing from a large Queen Street shop on November 2," said Chief Detective Hammond. "They were all detained, and. the two accused were found iu possession of stolen goods. The third woman is not charged, because nothing was found on her. Wheu detectives searched Mrs. Edgecomb's house they found stolen goods worth £150. Both these women admit having been systematically thieving from city shops for the past few months. I daresay much more stuff has been stolen than we have found. Much of it is damaged by rough handling. Neither has been In any trouble before."

The court orderly then produced for the magistrate's inspection two large suitcases full of all kinds of ladies' wear.

Story of 111-health.

Counsel for Mrs. Edgecomb said that his client had been deserted by her husband some time ago, and had divorced him. Since then she had brought up her child and looked after it well. She had also kept herself in fine status in the community. None of the stolen property had been worn or disposed of—it had been simply kept to look at. "She has been in very bad health for some months and fell to this sort of thing without any purpose," added counsel. "She has been examined by a well-known doctor, who gave a certificate (produced) stating that she is suffering under great mental stress. Four months ago she was unable to work." A strong plea for the imposition of a fine, rather than imprisonment, was then made, counsel pointing out that it would be a most serious thing if Mrs. Edgecomb was eent to gaol in her present state of ill-health. The publicity which the case would get would be a Bigger punishment than anything else.

Concerning the case of Mrs. Thompson, the circumstances were somewhat similar, although she was not in such a state of ill-health as her companion. Her husband had deserted her some years •ago, and she had always been in poor circumstances, although sne had kept her two children well by hard work. It was almost impossible to explain why she should have committed the thefts. For a long time past, in addition to her position as a housekeeper, Mrs. Thompson had existed on small sums received from her husband.

Mr. Hammond then drew the magistrate's attention to the extensive shoplifting of both women, which meant a serious loss to city firms. Heavy Fines Imposed. Mr. Hunt: I have had a report from, Major Gordon, the probation officer, about these women. They can thank Major Gordon that I am not sending them to gaol for two months each. The Major says that if Mrs. Edgecomb went to prison she would probably die, and it is solely' on that account that I am not sending her to gaol. I must treat them both alike, eo I cannot very well send Mrs. Thompson to prison. Probation is no punishment in these cases. On each of two charges Mrs. Edgecomb is fined £20, while Mrs. Thompson i* fined £20 on one charge.

Chief Detective Hammond: A months imprisonment would have been verr light.

"Of course," said the magistrate, "tb» last time a woman was given, a month for shoplifting it had the effect of keeping shoplifting down for several months. . In each case 10 days were allowed im which to pay the fines.