SUPREME COURT Man Acquitted On Charge Of Theft From The Person

Press, Volume CIX, Issue 32067, 15 August 1969, Page 19

SUPREME COURT Man Acquitted On Charge Of Theft From The Person

An Invercargill freezing worker, John Irving Liiico, gave evidence In the Supreme Court yesterday that after drinking with a stranger in the Clarendon Hotel on the morning of July 12, the same man "came at him” in the street, snatched his wallet, containing $l6O, from an inside jacket pocket, and ran off.

Standing trial before Mr Justice Wilson and a jury, on ■ charge of theft from the person, was Leo Patrick Prendergast, aged 45, a painting contractor (Mr J. E. Butler), who the Crown said was the thief.

The Crown Prosecutor (Mr W. S. Smith) submitted that the jury, on the evidence, should have little difficulty in convicting Prendergast—

but the jury, after a retirement of 40 minutes, found him not guilty, and he was discharged. Defence Submission Mr Butler, addressing the jury in the accused’s defence, had said that Mr Liiico had initially been hesitant about his identification of Prendergast as the man who had taken his wallet—and with another man at the scene, who had not been called as a witness, nor even interviewed by the police, there was an element of doubt the case which justified an acquittal. “Better a guilty man go free than an innocent one be convicted,” Mr Butler said.

Mr Liiico, who told the jury he was 56, and had come to Christchurch for “a few days break,” described how he had drunk at the Clarendon Hotel with a stranger—whom he identified as the accused—and left by himself about 12.30 p.m. Describing the taking of his money, Mr Liiico said: “This chap came at me. He tapped me, and took my wallet I tried to fight for it, but I had no hope. Before I could stop him, he ran away."

Mr Liiico said he “couldn't actually say it was the accused” who had taken his wallet, but to his Honour said he was sure it was the man he had been drinking with—whom he identified as the accused—an answer he repeated later to Mr Smith.

Another man who had been with the accused had said: “It’s aU right Jack,” and had also run off. Under cross-examination,

Mr Liiico agreed that he had been drinking at the Dominion Hotel that morning, where he had had about four Soz beers, and at the Clarendon Hotel, where he had had about three drinks before being joined by the accused, with whom he had had four more.

Mr Butler: So you had had about 11 Boz beers?—That must be right You could not be too sure that it was the accused who took your wallet? It could have been the other man?— No, it was the accused. Further Evidence James William Hecker, a barman at the Clarendon Hotel, gave evidence identifying the accused as the man who had been drinking with Mr Liiico. The accused, he said, had left soon after Mr Liiico. Detective Constable W. J. Nicholl said that Prendergast, when spoken to at an address in Fortune Street, Mairehau, the following evening, had admitted being at the Clarendon Hotel about midday with a man named Carrington and another man whose name he

did not know but he thought came from the West Coast. The accused, said Detective Constable Nicholl, had declined to go to the police station to take part in an identification parade, and when arrested later that night had said he would say nothing but “take the matter to the Supreme.”