“HOLD MY COAT”

Dominion, Volume 18, Issue 192, 9 May 1924, Page 8

“HOLD MY COAT”

ROBBERY IN STREET MONEY VANISHES FROM . POCKET 1 A uovel method of robbing a pedestrian was alleged by the Crown in the Supreme Court yesterday, when Francis Osman Burke (represented by Mr. J. Scott), appeared before the C.hiefl Justice (Sir Robert Stout), and a jury of twelve, on two charges of theft from the person, to which he pleaded not guilty. Mr. Frank Turner was foreman of the jury. Mr. P. S. K. Macassey (Crown Prosecutor), said that at about 5.30 p.m. on December 19, a man named John Singleton was proceeding past the corner of Ghuznee and Whitaker Streets, when he was approached bv a negro, who asked him to hold his coat while he Jit a cigarette. Tins was done, and when Singleton arrived home, he found that he had been relieved of five pound notes which had been in his breast pocket at the time the coat was placed over Ins shoulder for a moment by the negro. About 8 o’clock the same evening, a man named Israel Galhor was entci'ing the Jewish club when a man, who would be identified as the accused, produced a bottle of beer and asked if Galhor had a. corkscrew. While Galhor was explaining that it was not his custom to carry such things, a negro named Christopher Martis, who had since absconded from justice while awaiting trial, accosted the man with the remark, “Held my coat while I show you how I saw a chap arrested to-night.” Galhor submitted to the coat being placed over his shoulder during the demonstration, after which, on going into the c ‘ u b, he found that his pocket book had vanished. Counsel said that tho defence intended to endeavour to prove an alibi. but although prisoner s counsel had intimated that an alibi would be set up, it was strange that this had not been done in the Lower Court Evidence would be called that would’ prove the identity of the two men. .. Evidence was called on these lines. In his evidence, Burke stated that he had been in a citv hotel on the day in question from 10 a.m. to 4.30 p.m. He remembered seeing Martis, whom he only knew by sight, m the bar, in company with anol her man named Cburtenay. and a man named Smith, who resembled witness m build. He had nothing to do with these men during the day. Mr. Macassey: Did you know Mare tis? . , ' Witness: By reputation only. What was his reputation?—“d was not that good that a man should be seen speaking t) liim.” In addressing the jury, Mr. said that Singleton had failed to identify Burke. It was reasonable to suppose that the other man who was seen with Martis and Courtenay, was the man who was with these men at the corner of Ghuznee and M breaker Streets, and not Burke. In regard to the later incident, counsel said that Galhor had been practically shown the man to be identified, and there had been no identification parade. _ , Mr. Macassey said the Crown s evidence remained unshaken. Tn summing up. Dis Honour said that even if Burke had been present with three other mon—although not actually performing + -ho robbery—he was equally to blame. The jury returned after an absence of nearly an hour and a half, with a verdict of guilty on the second count, and announced that they had lisagreed on the first charge. Prisoner will be dealt with on the one charge to-morrow.