Undercover police work in recovering artefacts

Press, Volume CXIV, Issue 33665, 15 October 1974, Page 2

Undercover police work in recovering artefacts

(New Zealand Press Association) AUCKLAND, October 14. A man admitted receiving stolen Maori artefacts worth $105,000 when he appeared today before the Chief Justice (Sir Richard Wild).

aged 36, a factory-hand, denied the same charge, that between August 7 and 30 he dishonestly received 22 Maori artefacts belonging to George Albert Woolier. Craig, represented by Mr P. A. Williams and Mr M. B. Williams, is appearing before the Chief Justice and a jury of two women and 10 men. Opening the Crown case. Mr E. R. Winkle said that early in August Mr Wooller’s apartment in Remuera was broken into. Although Mr Woolier did not live on the premises, he stored valuable Maori artefacts there. His valuation of the stolen items was $105,000.

Evidence was given of an undercover policemen’s ■ part in recovery of the artefacts. Desmond Forrester Dud-; son, aged 29, an unemployed machine operator, was remanded in custody until Friday for sentence. Dudson, represented by Mr G. C. Gotlieb, also admitted a further charge of being armed with a pistol for felonious intent. He was ; remanded to the same date for sentence. William George Craig,

-! An undercover policeman tjlet it be known that he was ; in the market for the stolen i i items and he got in touch ! with Craig and a price of $24,000 or $25,000 was disr cussed. Mr Winkle said evidence ! would be that the policeman i met Craig in a hotel room . and Craig became suspicious . because one of the notes had t a rubber-stamp mark on it. > Craig left the room but later > rang the policeman to say it ■ was all right, that it was a : teller’s stamp and that he ! would send a man up. > After Dudson had taken > the artefacts into the room, detectives kicked the door

down and Dudson was arrested. Craig was arrested soon after that in a car parked nearby. CROWN ALLEGATIONS The Crown alleged that Craig had control over the

stolen artefacts because he was able to negotiate their disposal. It also alleged that he knew they were stolen because of the publicity given Ito the theft, and an admission made when he was arrested. The price of $24,000 was so much less than Mr Wool-, jler’s value that only someone! who knew the true value! would offer that price, said Mr Winkle. The evidence of Mr Wool-! ler, a retired company direc-1 tor, was read to the Court by consent of both Crown and defence counsel. The : Court was told that Mr Wool-! ler was unwell. His evidence said that he owned an apartment block! and kept the artefacts and ! art objects in the top apartment. The items stolen included the artefacts, a bronze sculpture, a gold trinket box, a gold honey-comb statue, and a double magnum of champagne. |