SUPREME COURT Motel Proprietor Denies Receiving Stolen Goods

Press, Volume CVI, Issue 31336, 5 April 1967, Page 7

SUPREME COURT Motel Proprietor Denies Receiving Stolen Goods

A motel proprietor at South New Brighton, Kevin Aubrey Anderson, aged 44, stood trial in the Supreme Court yesterday on a charge of receiving £7OO worth of stolen goods from Smith’s City Market, Ltd. at various times last year. Anderson, the Crown alleged, was a dealer in stolen property, and had substantially furnished his motels with the goods specified in the charge. They included furniture suites, beds, divans, mattresses, refrigerators, a washing machine, a clothes drier, electric heaters, toasters, and jugs—part of £5OOO worth of goods said to have disappeared from Smith’s City Market. Anderson (Mr C. B. Atkinson), in pleading not guilty, gave evidence that he had realised the goods might be stolen when he read of theft charges against employees of Smith’s City Market, but said he had not known the goods were stolen when he bought them.

The goods, said Anderson, had been bought from an employee of Smith’s City Market, a man called Downs, who had said he could get a discount of 25 per cent from his firm. By not reporting that he had the goods, but “sitting on them," said Anderson, he thought, after conversation with a detective, that he would be guilty of theft, and indicated such a plea—but not to receiving stolen goods. The trial, before Mr Justice Macarthur, will continue this morning. Crown Case

The case would turn on whether Anderson, at the time the goods came into his possession, knew they were stolen, said the Crown Prosecutor (Mr C. M. Roper) in his opening address to the jury.

As to that, when first interviewed by the police, Anderson had said: “I’ve been waiting for you.” Furthermore, said Mr Roper, the man Downs, formerly employed by Smith’s City Market as a truck-driver, would say Anderson told him he needed furnishings for his new motels, that he (Downs) arranged to “get the goods for him,” and that Anderson well knew when he received them that they were stolen, and paid Downs only half the retail price. “Money was paid to Downs from time to time. No receipts were asked for, or given,” said Mr Roper. “Downs was obtaining hundreds of pounds worth of property for Anderson, but it is significant that Downs was only a truck-driver.

“You might well wonder whether any employee would be permitted to purchase such a vast accumulation of property, and obtain discount on it.”

Yet Anderson, questioned by the police, maintained that he had bought the goods in good faith from Downs, who he believed was obtaining discount for the goods as a staff member of Smith’s City Market. Anderson must have been aware, said Mr Roper, that he was not getting accounts for the goods, as was the case with other goods, such as carpets, that he had purchased legitimately. Finally, if the jury accepted the evidence of DetectiveConstable B. M. Simon that Anderson, when details were about to be entered in the police charge book, had admitted he knew the goods had been stolen, then that could be taken as a confession of guilt, Mr Roper said. Evidence Of Transactions

Terry Robert Downs, in evidence for the Crown as outlined, said Anderson was to pay him half the retail price of the goods obtained. Anderson bad said he was short of money for payment, but he (Downs) had said “it would be all right as long as payment was made by Christmas.”. Downs said he stole the goods from the Smith’s City Market bulk store, where there was no check at all, and periodically delivered them to Anderson’s motels, once in company with the firm’s home-appliance department manager, Wilson. When he was first arrested, said Downs, before there had been newspaper publicity about the case, he told Anderson that “his property was still quite safe.” “That was as I thought,” Downs said. “Anderson was very worried. I assurred him the property in the motels would be all right.” Under cross-examination by Mr Atkinson, Downs, who said he was a former schoolteacher, described how he began employment at Smith’s City Market in April last, and began stealing goods three weeks later, in conjunction with three other staff members, including Wilson. Downs said he was aware that £5OOO worth of goods had been discovered missing from Smith’s City Market. He himself had pleaded guilty to the theft of about £2OOO worth of goods—£7oo worth of which had been delivered to Anderson. He had already served

six months’ imprisonment for this, Downs said. But he knew nothing, said Downs, about the other £3OOO worth of goods. “Some Sort Of Story”

Downs agreed that the scheme adopted for disposal of the £2OOO worth of goods he stole was to tell “some sort of story” about staff discounts and privileges. Mr Atkinson: I put it that when you mentioned discount to Anderson you said 25 per cent and not 50 per cent? Downs: I thought I had said half price. In fact, I’m very sure of that.

Downs, to further questions, said that Anderson was in business building garages, and became known to him through building him one. He met Anderson by chance one day in Smith’s City Market Anderson said he was looking for furnishings for his new motels. When Anderson mentioned he got 15 per cent discount for purchases by cash, he (Downs) told him he could get goods for him “more cheaply.” This was for “half price,” said Downs, but he was not sure whether he had mentioned staff discount to Anderson. Downs said he made a delivery of £4O worth of beds and mattresses to Anderson, and looked over his motels. They made up a list of requirements. Downs agreed that goods had been delivered to Anderson’s motels in working hours, in a Smith’s City Market truck, and the goods carried in by two employees of the firm. On the third such delivery, said Downs, Anderson had inquired about the goods, and had then been told the “real source” of them. Mr Atkinson: Until he asked, you at no time told him where the goods were coming from?—No. What made him ask?—l don’t even recall how the matter came up. If Anderson genuinely thought you were using staff privileges, the presence of the manager of the homeappliance department at the second delivery would certainly allay any fears he may have had?—lt would. Police Evidence

Detective Constable Simon said that Anderson, when first interviewed, had admitted being “suspicious” of the goods bought from Downs, but said he did not think they were ‘stolen. Later, when he learned they had been stolen, he just “sat on them.” Anderson had said he had purchased the furnishings from Downs because the latter could get 25 per cent discount, as a Smith’s City Market staff member. At the police station, Anderson, although making no written statement, had said: “I knew the stuff was stolen. I’ll plead guilty tomorrow.” Cross-examined, witness said that investigations into the thefts from Smith’s City Market began not from a complaint by the firm, but from disclosures by an informer. Witness conceded that after reports of the thefts in the newspapers, Anderson might well have expected the police to approach him. Detective Constable Simon said Anderson had admitted knowing the goods were stolen before having a private discussion with a 'Detective Sergeant Rodgers, not afterwards. Accused’s Evidence

Anderson’s cross-examina-tion by the Crown Prosecutor completed yesterday’s hearing. Anderson said he had treated Downs as an honest man, and saw nothing odd, from a business point of view, in Downs getting hundreds of pounds worth of goods at substantial discount “Some firms are willing to sell to anybody, whether it’s their own employees or not,” Anderson said.

Mr Roper: They don’t like to sell at or below cost do they? Anderson: No. In re-examination by Mr Atkinson, Anderson said he had had no information from Downs that the goods were being sold to him “at or under cost.”