INDICTABLE CHARGE

Dominion, Volume 34, Issue 195, 15 May 1941, Page 7

INDICTABLE CHARGE

Summary Hearing Sought REFUSED BY MAGISTRATE

A request by Air. A. B. Sievwright that, to save expense and the time of the Court, an indictable charge of breaking, entering and theft against Edward Crampton, labourer, aged 19, be reduced to one of theft, and dealt with summarily, was refused by Air. Stout, S.AI., in the Magistrates’ Court, Wellington, yesterday. The magistrate said that the charge brought was purely a matter for the police and that the Court could give them no direction. To proceed with the charge in its in dictable form, said Air. Sievwright, would involve the Court in a considerable amount of typing and expense to the country, and a 10l of waste time for the Court officials.

The magistrate: 1 don’t think you need worry about that. 'The officials are there to do their duty. When Air. Sievwright asked the Court to give a direction regarding the possibilities - of the ebarge being dealt with summarily, the magistrate replied that it was quite wrong of him to make the suggestion, as it was purely a matter for the police. If they were satisfied that the indictable charge of breaking, entering and-theft should proceed, then it was not for the magistrate to give any direction. The police had made no application that the charge be reduced to one of theft. Mr. Sievwright: I understand the police have no objection to Hie charge being dealt with summarily. Detective-Sergeant Murray told the magistrate that Mr. Sievwright had been making representations to him throughout the morning about having the charge reduced, but Mr. Sievwright had no authority whatever for saying that the police desired to have the matter dealt with summarily. Air. Sievwright: That, is not what 1 said. 1 said I understood (he police bad no objection, if your Worship would give a direction. The magistrate: You know perfectly well that the Court cannot give such a direction. The ease will proceed as a charge of breaking, entering and theft.

The police evidence was dial on May 1 A. Al. Fox’s jeweller’s shop in Willis Street. Wellington, was broken into and four watches and a gold chain stolen, to the value of £l7/13/-. Some time later accused tried to borrow. £1 from a pawnbroker’s sitop. offering as security a ivatch identified as one stolen from Fox’s shop. In a statement to the police accused denied having broken into tile shop, stating that tie bail purchased the watch six months before.

Accused pleaded guilty and was com initted to the Supreme Court for sentence. Bai] was allowed.