SUPREME COURT.

Evening Post, Volume LXXVII, Issue 110, 11 May 1909, Page 8

SUPREME COURT.

CRIMINAL SESSIONS. TRUE BILLS. ffhe Grand Jury returned true bills against the following, in addition to the list given in lasfc> night's issue: — "Alexander .McMillan, forgery and uttering, Wellington. Ailhur New, alias Curtis, theft, Wellington. Alfred Burjasde, alias Jas. Pearce, breaking, entering, and theft, Wellington. Fred. Annitage, theft from the person Wellington. Cbas. Buchanan, attempted criminal" assault, Wellington. Alfred James Cook, robbery, Otaki. Rohert '-Seeds, assault, with intent todo bodily harm, Wellington. John Wooife, theft from the person, Wellington. ■Bernard* Smith, criminal assault, Wellington. NO BILL. Withrregard to the following charge )Df> bill was returned : — Edmund Meehan, criminal assault. TO-DAFS PROCEEDINGS. The case in the Criminal Sessions of the Supreme Court was opened before Mr. Justice Chapman to-day. The prisoner was one, Alfred Burnkle, alias James Pearce, and the charge, to .which, he pleaded not guilty, was that of breaking and entering on the 23rd' March last into the rairway station at, Ngahauranga by night, and stealing a mackintosh coat, a vicuna overcoat, and a* pair of gloves, belonging to Richard jiearney. * \ Burnicle, a man of middle age, wasxepresented by Air. Webb. The foreman of the jury was Sir. W. E. Bethane. Richard Kearney, staiiomnaster at ■ Ngahaujanga, said he left the station after midnight on the 23rd. On his return next morning he found a hole in the window opposite the fastening, which was undone. He missed his mackintosh, and blue overcoat, and saw them again in the lower court. He did not linow the prisoner. Moneys were paid to him at the station. To Mi\ Webb •. Witness noticed a stain of blood dose to where the break in the .■window was. The safe was locked. There was nothing valuable lying obout. Witness did not notice any candle grekse lying about or anything to show indications of a light being used. The court then adjourned till 2.15. '■This afternoon, Herbert Ames, accountant «at the railway station, Ngahauranga, gave similar evidence. He told Mr. 'Webb that in addition to the blood-stain on the pane there were footmarks on the , window-sill. Thos. Clapham, licensee of the Ngihanranga Hotel, remembered seeing the prisoner in the hotel on. the night of ihe> 22nd March. Afc ■closing time witness asked- -him to go. He was not drunk. He had had a drink or two. jMc iWebfo : You refused to allow him to stay there- the night? — Witness: He did not ask for a, bed. "Did he have any drinks? — No; he had no money. Did you rsfuse-to give him a bed because he had no - money ? — No ; it was closing time. He -wasn't a boarder. •Wniiain Hiskjp, barman at the City Hotel, remembered seeing the prisoner in the bar of the hotel about 7 o'clock on the 23rd March. Witness bought an i overcoat from the prisoner, paying 7s 6d' for it. •Detective Andrews deposed to arresting the --prisoner, and finding the pair of gloves, produced, in his possession. The prisoner said, "T have not been to Nga~ hanranga, and I don't know the coat." The detective had recovered this fyom the last witness. On the prisoner's right hand was a slight scratch. He had" not found the other coat, though he had been searching for it. This concluded the evidence for the Crown. The prisoner desired to make a statement before Air. Webb addressed the jury. Mr. Myers protested. His Honour held tha-t counsel must address the jury first. He proposed to follow the precedent set by previous Judges ' in such cases. Mr. Webb then addressed the jury. (Left -Bitting.) CHRISTCHURCH SITTIN&S. fET TELEGKAPH — PBESS ASSOCIATION.! ■OHBISTCHUBCH, 10th May. ' The Grand Jury found a true bill in the iWestport murder case. CHEISTCHURCH, This Day. In the Supreme Court to-day, Christopher Isaac Denby, stationmaster at Leeston, was charged with the theft of a lady's dress and other material sent as a parcel by rail. The defence was that at no time had there been any j fraudulent intent on the part of accused, ( bat only a grave error of judgment. | His Honour said accused had distinctly j admitted what the law called theft, and the defence was almost an insult to the intelligence of the jury. The jury retired to consider its verdict. A charge of perjury against Lucy Riley is proceeding.