PROBATION FOR YOUTH

Press, Volume LXXII, Issue 21866, 20 August 1936, Page 17

PROBATION FOR YOUTH

"SWEEPSTAKE WINNER” m COURT GUILTY OF OBTAINING CREDIT BY FRAUD ; (mass ASSOCIATION XUUEOaAIC.) ' DUNEDIN, August 19. In the Magistrate’s Court this mom* ing. Erhest Arthur Trimear Johnstone, aged 22, was charged with obtaining taxi-hire credit by fraud. The original charge of being idle and disorderly was withdrawn. Chief Detective Young stated that the charges arose from a statement that accused had won £30,000 in the Irish Sweepstake. It was alleged that accused caused a telephone message to be sent to the Otago “Daily Times” that a Dunedin plasterer named Johnstone had won this sum. The following morning a representative of the Dunedin “Evening Star" saw accused, who, in reply to a question, said the report in the “Daily Times” was correct. Asked when he learned the news. Johnstone was alleged to have stated that he had received a telegram the previous night from a Timaru friend. He naturally received considerable attention, and commenced to borrow, obtaining £lO from his employer and later another £lO before going, to Timaru, allegedly to collect the ticket, with a promise to return on the Monday. He stayed in Timaru for a week, being royally entertained. When doubts arose he returned and was later arrested on the vagrancy charge. The present charges arose from the fact that on the Sunday night accused hired two taxis to take a party to Waikouaiti. The chief detective stated that accused appeared in the Children’s Court. Timaru, in 1928, being committed to the care of the Child Welfare Department, and spending some time at Weraroa farm. In 1952 he was charged with theft at Wanganui, and ■was returned to Weraroa. For accused, Mr White said there was nothing to prove that accused originated the idea of the win. If he had done so, he had had the opportunity to get hundreds of pounds and disappear. but all he did Was to borrow a small sum and avail himself of the glamour afforded by publicity. His return to see his employer was riot the action of a criminal. The fact that there was no suggestion of any other charges indicated that Johnstone had not been responsible for the original hoax. His employer was willing to take him back. Mr Bartholomew, S.M., in admitting accused to probation for two years, stated that accused was a problem case, somewhat unbalanced. fc He doubted whether accused would do much good outside institutional control, but in view of his age, he would give him a chance. The magistrate added that he could not refrain from remarking that it was unfortunate that the local press so readily lent. themselves to the hoax. The statements might have been accepted to a conslderrb’e degree, but in the case only a small sum was involved. Had the amounts been larger, the press could not have absolved themselves of a considerable degree of responsibility. An order for the restitution of taxi'■nre at the rate of 2s 6d weekly was made.