Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image

THE GODDARD CASE

COLLECTION OF FINE FURNITURE SEIZED (Australian Press Association.) London, March 1. Sheriff’s officers who visited Goddard’s house at Streatham to levy distress in respect of £2OOO fine held a warrant to seize the furniture. Goddard’s counsel, acting for the wife, states that the furniture is Mrs. Goddard’s, who 'has no income and is unable to find the money. When the Judge sentenced Goddard he said if the fine was not paid on the completion of the sentence he would remain in gaol until it was. The conviction of ex-Station Sergeant Goddard, of the London Metropolitan Police, and Mrs. Meyrick, and an Italian named Ribuffi on charges of corruption in connection with London night clubs, was one of the sensations of the news last month. Mr, Justice Avory, in summing up for over two hours, said that it was useless to parade Goddard’s record in the force when the prisoner had to admit that for years he had systematically amassed money by a breach of the regulations, that he had monetary transactions with keepers of disorderly houses, and betted with street bookmakers, whom it was his duty to arrest. Goddard was admittedly in possession of bank notes, numbered successively, which came from the accounts of Mrs. Meyrick, Ribuffi, and Anna Gadda. It was a crucial question whether the notes came into hia possession by chance. The Judge' pointed out that Goddard rented different safe-deposits in 1923 and 1925, and moved the bulk of the notes to a new depository under a false name in 1928. Dealing with Goddard’s answer to the charges, the Judge saidAhat, according to his statement, everything he touched turned to gold. If he backed a horse it almost always won. If ; he only invested money in sweetstuffs to be sold at Wembley, if he dealt in foreign currency and when he dealt in copyright songs, he always niade thousands. No doubt the jury would think these stories a gross exaggeration.. His story of the characters of Meyrick and Ribuffi was not such as to make it'improbable they would commit the offence of bribery. The jury after 2 hours 45 minutes’ absence, found all the accused guilty. Goddard was sentenced to eighteen months’ hard labour ■ on each of four counts, the terms to be concurrent, fined £2OOO, and ordered to pay the costs of the prosecution, estimated at £2OOO. Mrs. Meyrick and Ribuffi were each sentenced to fifteen months’ imprisonment . with hard labour. / .

This article text was automatically generated and may include errors. View the full page to see article in its original form.
Permanent link to this item

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/DOM19290305.2.9

Bibliographic details

Dominion, Volume 22, Issue 136, 5 March 1929, Page 3

Word Count
408

THE GODDARD CASE Dominion, Volume 22, Issue 136, 5 March 1929, Page 3

THE GODDARD CASE Dominion, Volume 22, Issue 136, 5 March 1929, Page 3