A JURY'S VERDICT

Evening Post, Volume CII, Issue 81, 3 October 1921, Page 8

A JURY'S VERDICT

QUESTIONS FOR THE COURT OF

APPEAL.

The Court of Appeal—Mr. Justice Sim (Acting Chief Justice), Mr. Justice Stringer, and Mr. Justice Hosking—gave consideration to-day to the case of Rex v. Roscoe and Holland. At the last criminal sessions of the Supreme Court, Roscoe and Holland were charged with, the theft of goods to the value of £76 from the Empire Manufacturing Co., and the main point raised by Mr. C. A. L, Treadwell, who appeared for the defence, was. that the accused fully intended to make out a docket and to pay for the. goods. After hearing evidence, the jury returned the following verdict: "We find both the accused guilty, witE a strong recommendation for leniency, on account of insufficiency of proof that they did not intend to pay for the-goods." His Honour Mr. Justice Reed said tha.t lie could not accept verdict in that form, and instructed the jury to retire and reconsider its verdict upon the particular point. Mr. Tread-well submitted that the verdict was one of not' guilty. Finally, a, verdict of guilty, with the strongest recommendation to mercy, was returned. Mt. Justice Reed then stated a case for the Court of Appeal, in order that there might be full consideration of the points of law involved in the questions of whether his direction to the jury had been correct, and as to whether counsel's submission "that the first verdict should stand and prisoners be discharged was tenable. ' In the Court of Appeal this morning, Mr. W. C. MacGregor, K.C. (SolicitorGeneral) appeared on behalf of the Crown, and Roscoe and Holland were represented by Mr. H. H. Cornish (who iappeared on behalf of Mr. C. A. L. Treadwell). ' . ■ Aftei- hearing legal argument, the Court reserved its decision.