SUPREME COURT: CRIMINAL SITTINGS

Evening Star, Issue 17350, 12 May 1920, Page 6

SUPREME COURT: CRIMINAL SITTINGS

(Before His Honor Mr Justice Sim.) Wednesday, March 12. —Sentences.— Frederick George Smith was brought up for sentence on four charges of theft, and John Alexander Metcalfe on one charge.—• Mt Irwin said that Smith was manned, with one child at* present. He served at Gallipoli when only 18 years old, and had seen considerable war service. When he came back he was employed as a porter inthe railway .service. Up to the time of this offence nothing was known against him. The war service seemed to have somewhat impaired his health. It must be admitted that the thefts were serious, but none of the goods were used by his wife—they were simply left at his home, and there was no attempt to dispose of them. All the goods were recovered, and others that the police had not' found owners for.—Mr "F. G. Gumming, Probation Officer, said that Smith had been at sea, and his record was very good. He (Mr Gumming), believing that if the man were given a chance ho might reform, recommended that he be admitted to probation. There would he no trouble about getting him work.—Mr Hanlon spoke for Metcalfe. This man, he said, was 25 years of ago, married, with one child just now. He had two years' war service, and it was generally admitted that his conduct had been particularly good until this lapse. Out of the stolen goods Metcalfe had taken no more than an overcoat.—The Probation Officer said that he recommended probation.—Tho Crown Prosecutor (Mr W. C. MacGregor, K.C.) said that the theft'was of a kit bag and contents. Prisoners-said they found it in the railway yard. Some of the things had apparently been used. Nothing was previously known against either man bv the police.—His Honor said ho had no difficulty about admitting Metcalfe to probation. As to Smith there was some difficulty, because the thefts had continued over a period of five months. [n view of all the circumstances, however, and the Probation Officer's recommendation, both men would be released on probation for a term of three years, each to pay £3 12s towards the costs of the prosecution.

Sydney Clive Humphreys, who had pleaded guilty to a charge" of attempting to commit bigamy, said in answer to the Court that it was antagonism between another person and himself which had prompted him to a3k the girl to marry aim. He intended to tell the girl everything, but on going to the house he found her ill with influenza, and did not like to add to her pain.—The Crown Prosecutor said that Humphreys was arrested on the day before the day fixed for the marriage. —Sentenced to. imprisonment for six months with hard labor.

Thomas Harry Hotton, who had pleaded guilty to forgery and uttering and theft, was represented by Mr Irwin, who said that Hotton was 22 years of age, and had borne a good- character up to the commission of these offences. Ho was a member of the Queen's Drive Boating Club, and went to Queanstown to compete at a regatta; and while there, being out of money, he forged the name of a mate to obtain money from the post office, and also stole money. The members of the club seemed to think these Jets were a mistake, and not likely to be reneated.— The Probation Officer 'reported that prior to this affair Hotton was of good character.—Mr Irwin said that restitution had been made in one case, and would bo in the other.—His Honor said that in view of the prisoner's good character generally the Court would 'be justified in releasing him on probation. He would have to keen to his work. The report was that he had worked only intermittently since the war. He would be released on probation for a term of two years, the conditions hewg that ho behaved himself, and paid £3 14s 6d costs of the prosecution, and made restitution of £ls" to the post office at once. —The Waimate Case.— The trial of Gladys Batcheior was resumed.

' Further evidence was «illed for the Clown, the witnesses being Detectivo Kemp,. Detective Hall, and William Hart (clerk of the court at Waimate). The Crown Prosecutor put in the state:;ifnt marie by prisoner on oath before the Magistrate at Waimate. Mr Callan did not call evidence, and he spoke for only a few minutes. He said that the Crown had declared that the object of the trial was not to get the girl punished, but to make her open her mouth. That object was now accomplished, whether the jury convicted or acquitted. It had been asserted that the girl broke her promise, and therefore the police had decided to prosecute, but the evidence they now used against her was thj depositions which she gave in fulfilmsrt of that promise. Without her own evidenco she could not be convicted. It was for the jury, having heard the circumstances under which that evidence was to say what course they proposed to take. His Honor, in addressing the jury, said it seemed to him that there was no evidence to support a conviction on the first count (counselling and procuring) nor on the second count (conspiring with others), and that the third count (permitting the offence) was the one to which the jury should give attention. If the prisoner's statement to the doctor and her statement before the Magistrate at Waimate were true, it seemed to him that prisoner was guilty on the third count, of permitting Hayne to do what he did. If the girl were acquitted on the present charge, she would be free to give evidence in the third trial of Hayne and Neylon, and if convicted she" would equally have no reason to refuse to give further answers. After the first trial of Hayne and Neylon it was quite obvious that this witness had been got at by somebody and induced to eleso hexmouth when the case came on again. That tours© could not be allowed to°suc-<-eed; consequently the present prosecution was _ initiated. He did not know what the jury would sav, but it appeared to him that it was thoir duty to convict on the _ third count. It was a case in which, if the jury convicted, only nominal punishment should he inflicted. Ho mentioned this so that the jury might not have any difficulty about that point. The jury retired at 11.45 and returned in an hour with a verdict of guilty on the third count only. Mr Callan said that in view of what His Honor had already said, ho had nothing to add.

His Honor : Have.you anything to say, Mr MacGregor? The Crown Prosecutor : Nothing at all. your Honor. > His Honor : In view of tho circumstances, I think it quite sufficient if the prisoner is sentenced to imprisonment till the rising of the Court. She is sentenced accordingly. The Court rose five seconds afterwards —probably the shortest term of imprisonment ever served. —Theft,—

Whilst tlie jury in the- W&imato case were out, John William Quan was arraigned f> and pleaded guilty to a charge of stealing a watch and chain, value 5? 12s, the property of John Edwards. Ha liad nothing to say. Ths Grown Prosecutor put in a long list of convictions, but said that since 1912 thera was nothing against the prisoner except a breach of probation. Prisoner enlisted, but was found to bs medically unfit. His itonor sentenced prisoner to three months' imprisonment, and declared him. again to be an habitual criminal. —Assault.— After lunch Charles John Eccles -was arraigned on two charges of indecent assault, and pleaded not guiltv. He was not assisted by counsel. The trial was proceeding eany in the afternoon.