WOMAN'S FORGERY

Press, Volume LXIV, Issue 19466, 13 November 1928, Page 13

WOMAN'S FORGERY

CHEATING HER HUSBAND. JUDGE REFUSES TO SUPPRESS NAME. [THE PRESS Special Ssrrlce.] DUNEDIN, November 12. That orders for the suppression of names were made only in very exceptional circumstances, and that he certainly could not see any exceptional circumstances in the case before him, were the remarks of Mr Justice Macgregor this morning when Mr White made application for the suppression of the name of Catherine Halpin, who came up. for sentence on a charge of forging an entry in a Post Office Savings Bank book. Mr White said that accused was 38 years of age and a respectable married woman with one child seven years of age. This was the first time she had been before the Court, and what she had done was more foolhardy than showing criminal intent. It was obvious that the bank book had been forged. The book belonged to her husband, who gave her £ls to bank. Instead of putting the money in the bank she sent it to a relative in Australia who was desperately in need of money. The only person she had intended to deceive was her husband, who was just as upset about the matter aB she was. Accused's name had not been published, and he wished to renew an application for its suppression. Ho considered it was purely a family affair between husband and wife. His Honour said accused get credit for £ls. It was forgery. Mr White: She did it to show her husband the book. His Honour said that if the fraud had not been discovered accused would have got £ls out of the Post Office. Mr White: It is inconceivable that it would not have been discovered. His Honour: That is not the question. Mr White said it would mean disgrace not only to henself, but also to her husband and child. "That is almost inevitably the effect of crime," said his Honour, "and part of the penalty to be paid for crime." Mr White said there was no intent to defraud the Department. His Honour: I don't agree with that. The Crown Prosecutor (Mr R. Adams) said accused had not been as frank with the police as she might have been. "I am sorry I cannot see my way clear to order the suppression of the woman's name," said his Honour, She had committed forgery. She was an intelligent woman, and she must have known perfectly well what she was doing., At the same time she had not l>een guilty of any offence before, and he did not wish to send her to gaol, or even to order probation. Accused was ordered to pay the costs of the prosecution (£1 Is) and to come up for sentence if called upon within two years.