"NOT GUILTY."

Auckland Star, Volume LXVI, Issue 164, 13 July 1935, Page 10

"NOT GUILTY."

THEFT ,0F MONEY CHARGE.! JUDGE'S VERDICT JUSTIFIED. (By Telegraph.—Press Association.) WELLINGTON, Friday. In the case the King v. Lucinsky, arising out of a charge of the tlieft of money which had been hidden on farm premises, the Court of Appeal held that there was no evidence on either of the counts to go to the jury and tliat the trial judge was correct in directing the jury to return a verdict of not guilty on both counts. The question whether or not an accused person could be found guilty of receiving coin or bank notes when the particular coin or bank notes had been changed before being received by accused was in the opinion of the Court dependent upon the facts in each particular case. Lucinsky pleaded not guilty to charges of stealing £240 in money, the property of Marian Lucinsky, and alternatively of receiving £240, well knowing it to have been dishonestly obtained. Mr. Justice Smith, who heard the case at the Supreme Court, directed the jury to return a verdict of not guilty on both counts, which the jury did, and afterward, at the request of counsel for the * Crown, his Honor reserved for the consideration of the Court of Appeal the question of the correctness of his direction that in law an accused person could not be found guilty of receiving coin or bank notes when the particular coin or bank notes had been changed into other coin or notes before being received by the accused.