FRAUD ALLEGED.

Press, Volume LXII, Issue 18725, 23 June 1926, Page 17

FRAUD ALLEGED.

♦ WOMAN COMMITTED FOB TRIAL. At the Magistrate's Court yesterday, Margaret Durkin was charged ivith obtaining goods by fraud. The police alleged that she had purchased three coats, valued at £2l, from ' Ballantyne's, and charged them up to one of their customers. Messrs A. D. Ford and P. H. Christian, J.P.'s, were on the bench. I/e----tective-Sergeant J. B. Young prosecuted, and Mr Hutchinson appeared ior accused. „ I Ward, saleswoman at Ballantyne and Co., Ltd., stated that she had sold three coats, valued at £2l, to a woman. Later she had been asked to identity a woman in Armagh street, but she had not seen the woman. She had been shown a photograph of accused, and when she wfts pointed out she knew who it was, and there was no doubt in her mind. During the sale of the coats she had seen a good de.al of the purchaser, and she was sure that accused was that woman. Detective N. W. Bayliss stated that on June 10th, in company with the previous witness, he went to accused's house. They knocked at the front door and a woman answered their knock, but Miss Ward stated that she was riot the woman to whom she had supplied the goods. Later they again visited the house, but had received no response to their knocking. They were just about to leave when accused came round the side of the house. Ho asked her where the goods were that sho_ had been trying to sell.- Accused denied this. C. Payton, licensed dealer, stated that during tho last six months fcho had a customer, named Scott, calling at her business. "Witness identified accused as the customer. On three or four occasions she had sold her goods, most of which were practically new. S'ho had known accused for about eight years, and during that time accused had had three different names. For the last fivo years witness knew her as Scott. Mr Hutchinson- stated that ho had cross-examined at length on the question of identification, as the whole evidence depended on tho evidenco of Miss Ward. On tho evidenco that had been advanced there was no case against accused, as it was almost three* months later that tho saleswoman had been asked to identify accused. The question of identification was one that must always bo scrutinised with tho utmost care. There was no incriminating evidence against accused with the exception of that of identification. Ho submitted that under the circumstances the Bench should dismiss the case. Accused reserved her defence and was committed to the Supreme Court for trial. Bail was granted in self £oo, and ono surety of £SO.