ALLEGED BOOKMAKER ACQUITTED

Dominion, Volume 14, Issue 123, 17 February 1921, Page 5

ALLEGED BOOKMAKER ACQUITTED

AN AUCKLAND CASE JUDGE SAYS EVIDENCE IS SINGULARLY WEAK By Telegraph—Pre«« Association. Auckland, February 16. A charge of having carried on the business or occupation of bookmaking on January 22 was made against John Weston (Mr. Hogben), who was tried before Mr. Justice Stringer and a jury at the Supreme Court. The Crown Prosecutor (Mr. Meredith) conducted the prosecution. Tho selection of the jury occupied six minutes, three of the panel being challenged by Mr. Hoghen and eleven being stood aside by the Crown Prosecutor. Air. Meredith briefly outlined the ease for tho Crown. Detective-Sergeant ILimmond said he had known accused for seven or eight years, and had never known him to follow any other occupation than that of a bookmaker. In company with Detective Fitzgibbon, witness went with a. warrant to room 12 in His Majesty’s Arcade at noon on January 22. It was possible for anyone in the room to see them coming. Witness knocked at the door, and there being no reply, he obtained n ladder and looked over the fanlight. Weston was in his office, and the light wont out. Witness called upon accused to open the door, which he did. In the office behind the clubroom was a desk on which _ was an open-face watch, an important i.em to a bookmaker betting on the starting price. A large collection of writing and printed matter relating to racing; and bookmaking was found in r " 0 ’”; There was also found a quantity of printed leaflets dated Auckland October 30 1920. They read ns follows: L a sir,—Not wishing to beg to state that I ™ fol owing the occupation of an electrician at W usuaj „ M ,«. . Work ‘Y'SS continuance of same in the new depart; numf—Yours respectfully, John -Weston. Durim- the half-hour the detectives were J&iu urgent telegram arrived from Trantham, giving the result < number of men came in, but seme H irn on seeing the detectives, went away Two of,them came in to put DLTIICuIJ’ • 4-V> r> 4- Hriv fit money on horses running that day Wellington, and wHnese made n b etwHh them. The detective /o , inH l eused's te enhon but t wns^ wpd two days later that nccu * H teleX”>4- ” trical engineering b ’' s .'” pn f], o -premises Several men found on mo n gave evidence. cp<unan was readT -| IP statement of a e< , f to the effect t I>e made with accused f” hnvc a Mvi si(ed h’m - p ; nflflrP „ing tlm Counsel for the <i ’ . , |, lfi Aet jury, emphasised a - .\ llPlla t, laid whteh came into force in who ™ nnt la-d XXiS required, and con fpnbirps )n t i, n there were four c. ■ bnr)1 _, bookmaking busing Jr Hy t h ; rooms or on his person io show Im had any mcord of any bets made sines Aimust. y Thirdly, he must offer to make bet; and there wns a total alsenco of that accused had at any tmm let atone since August, offered to make bets Lastly, ho must issue circulars or double charts stating with whom or where ho bets and flie odds, but Iheie was no suggestion that these were issued and the mere fact of them being on the promises did not infer that they veie available io the public. TBie watch was broken, and had not gone for years. Summing up, His Honour said'+ha.t however the jury might differ in their opinions of the law, .the Act. made bookmaking unlawful. He was bourn, to say that the evidence tc establish that accused had carried on an unlawful business since August was singularly weak. It depended on the result of a search that disclosed various articles which were inferred to be the paraphernalia of bookmaking. Counsel for the defence had put his points well, temperately, and with a good deal of force, and his observations wore worthy of careful oonsiderktion. The evidence was far too flimsy to justify the conclusion that Weston was systematically carrying on the business of a bookmaker, for if such was the’case there should be no difficulty in proving it. After a retirement of half an hour the jury found Weston not guilty, and he was discharged.