BACK IN PAWN.

Auckland Star, Issue 17, 21 January 1932, Page 9

BACK IN PAWN.

FATE OF GOLD MEDALS. STOLEN FROM PAWNSHOP. TWO CHINESE FOR TRIAL. Stolen from one pawnshop and soon afterwards pawned in another was the fete of four gold coins mounted as medals, which were the subject of a •■targe of theft against two Chinese in jj lo Police Court to-day. Accused were on g iong and Fong Kin, both laundry®eD - They pleaded not guilty to Jjeaking and entering the premises of r " nc e Kissin, 354, Queen Street, and teaimg four gold coins, value £6. They e represented by counsel. dow enc ? e h°wed that the shop winnf ti &S , olui d smashed on the morning been e + ei Itl1 tl 27, and the medals had tn «, n * Inquiries by the police led 6 arrest of accused. D Pt " a Volu ntary statement made to F on „ u ® Moore at the police station, WorLj • he was a laundryman, and attnmi j n Dom inion Road. He had cousin i!^ 06 mee ti n gs at Epsom. His Strpot' v ° Was a la-undryman in Queen for li;' < ' -him four coins to sell ivinrtr, 111 ' ;\_ ecus ed denied breaking the SL^ 6 *' 4 . h « 1 hi » eoing w hen h e tried to sell the deniprf 0 % accus ed, when interviewed, Later the coins, given f6, . ed that the coins were F n° mhy a E "opean. coinT " r ev '^ ence showed that the the mu e P awne d at a shop near where took P lace - Kin tlie coins' 1 "® tlle win dow and stealing *Jg?? M°ore said he had made who WBe u quiries about the European of the have had possession traop° lnS ' n °t b een able Counl, 3 " 5 SUch Person. that tlm acc used submitted to sptifi / aSe Was n °t sufficiently strong nf the fi !°r Var(l for triaL The conduct tu ij P accused in taking the coins doors J! vne( l at a shop only a few OVe the premises from which.

they were stolen was certainly not what might have been expected of a guilty man. The otlies accused had also given a perfectly credible account of the manner in which he had come into possession of the coins. Detective Sergeant Kelly said that the man who pawned the coins had stated definitely that they had been in his possession for two years. There were alternative charges of receiving the property. The presiding justices, Mr. L. S. Riekerby and Mr. H. T. King, dccidcd that there was a prima facie case, and committed both men for trial. Bail was allowed in sureties of £100 each.