STORE BURGLED

Auckland Star, Volume LXXII, Issue 167, 17 July 1941, Page 14

STORE BURGLED

HIKURANGI CRIME

MAN GUILTY OF THEFT

Sequel to a burglary of J. R. Scott's store at Hikurangi on March 19, and the theft of over £30 in cash and a quantity of goods, John Henry Wilson, a labourer, aged 28 years (Mr. Vialoux) was charged in the Supreme Court, before Mr. Justice Callan and a jury, with breaking and entering, and on alternative counts of theft and having knowingly received, stolen goods.

Evidence was led by Mr. G. S. R. Meredith that the burglary took place, and that when two suit cases owned by accused were seized by a detective in New Plymouth on March 2S they were iound to contain a pack of playing cards and a pair of tennis shoes identified by the shopkeeper as having .come from his shop, as well as other things of the same character as sold by him. Further evidence was given of marks of a car having been ditched near the store at Hikurangi, and in an interview with a detective the accused admitted that he had driven through Hikurangi that night and that his car had been ditched, but he denied knowledge of the burglary. He disclaimed ownership of the goods identified by the shopkeeper but said they were given him for keeping by a man whose name he declined to divulge.

In a statement from the dock accused said he drove a young lady from Whangarei to Hikurangi on the night of the burglary- On his way back to Whangarei he picked up a man on the road and drove him to Whangarei. As he was leaving the man, he noticed the latter had left some goods in the car and called out to him about it. The man called back that he would send an address to which the goods could be delivered.

Mr. Vialoux stressed the absence of any evidence connecting accused directly with the burglary, reliance being placed entirely on the circumstantial connection of shopkeeper's marks on goods that did not really identify them as goods stolen on March 19; the marks might equally apply to goods bought at the shop about that time.

His Honor pointed out the coincidence of a large variety of goods that could have come out of the burglary being in accused's possession. Also it was sufficient that the disclaimer of ownership was not made to the detective at New Plymouth, who did net know of the burglary at the time, but was made later.

After a retirement of more than two hours the jury returned a ver♦u* °/ on the second count mat of theft. Prisoner was remanded for sentence.