CONVICTION QUASHED

Press, Volume XCVI, Issue 28435, 15 November 1957, Page 10

CONVICTION QUASHED

Youth’s Appeal Allowed

A conviction and sentence of Borstal {raining against Colin Malcolm Hardaker, aged 19, on a charge of breaking and entering and theft was quashed by Mr Justice Adams in the Supreme Court yesterday.

Hardaker appealed against the conviction and sentence for an offence in which he was alleged to have taken part with five other young men on September 2. The hearing opened on Wednesday and was concluded yesterday, after Hardaker and his mother had given evidence. Mr C. M. Roper represented the Crown as respondent, and Mr B. J. Drake appeared for the appelI lant.

It was alleged by the Crown that Hardaker, in company with the five other young men, had gonef in a rental car to an electrical shop in Belfast; Three of the men had entered the shop and taken money and goods. | Giving further evidence, Hardaker said that on the way he had I wanted to get out of the car, but jhad insufficient money for the taxi fare home. He did nothing 1 to encourage the three men in the back scat to get out. ‘‘l thought that by staying in the car I was aK right and was not committing any offence,” he added. Handed £1 Back To Mr Roper, Hardaker said that he was handed a £1 note but it was handed back because it was said that one of the other men, Sherlock, would give him one. ‘‘l did not want any money that was taken from that place.” However, Sherlock had lent him £1 the next day. Appellant denied telling a detective he knew the £1 had been stolen. Mr Drake: Could you have stopped the other three from committing the offence? —I don’t think so If I had tried I would most likely have been left on the side of the road. Evidence on appellant’s behalf was given by his mother, Eva Grace May Field.

Appellant could not be found guilty unless it was shown that in some way he encouraged the commission of the crime, said his Honour. He was not convinced of this beyond reasonable doubt. “I think it probable that his presence in the car was of no importance at all for good or evil in connexion with the offence. If he had been man enough the offence might never have been committed.”

The worst feature of the case was the appellant's receipt of the sum of £l, his Honour continued. But the charge of receiving the money had been dismissed in the lower Court.