RECEIVING STOLEN PROPERTY

Evening Star, Issue 19319, 4 August 1926, Page 3

RECEIVING STOLEN PROPERTY

LADY'S UNDERCLOTHING MISSING

YOUNG MAN CONVICTED

In the Supremo Court yesterday afternoon, Hugh Jiimos Collins was charged with the theft, on April 2S, of a black evening dress, a pair of black satin knickers, a pair of suede gloves, and a pair of silk stockings, the property of Mrs Catherine Elizabeth Thomson. On a. second count accused was charged with receiving tho above articles, knowing them to have been dishonestly obtained. Mr.E. J. Anderson appeared for the accused, who pleaded not guilty. Tho Crown Prosecutor (Mr F. 13. Adams) stated that tho goods had been stolon from the Carlton Hotel. The black dress and the gloves, although they had been missed from the hotel at tho same time as tho other articles, had not been found in the possession of tho accused. Tho jury would have to say whether tho accused had stolen both these articles, as well as the other two articles which had been found in his possession. The jury could find tho accused guilty on either of tho counts with which he was charged. Counsel related how the accused had given a Mrs Twist a present of the knickers and the stockings shortly after they had been missed from tho hotel. Ho suggested that the accused had come into possession of the goods either by stealing them himself, or by receiving them from some person who had dishonestly obtained them. When accused had been interviewed by Detective Russell on May 22 he admitted having given tho knickers and the stockings _to Mrs Twist, but he had denied having stolen them, and ho also refused to say where ho had got them, as ho “ did not want to drag anybody else into •this.” Counsel asked if this was a straightforward attitude. He submitted to them that either the accused was tho thief himself, or that he had got the articles from somebody else, 'knowing them to have been stolon. The accused had later said that tho articles had been given to him by a man named Griffiths, when he was'in the Empire Hotel. Unfortunately the police could not find Griffiths, who had been living at the same place as the accused. He submitted that tho accused’s explanation was such that they could not accept

it. . . Mrs Thomson, residing m Christchurch, said sho came to Dunedin orf April 27, and stayed at the Carlton Hotel. On the following afternoon sho wont to the Exhibition, leaving the door of her room open, because the key would not turn. When sho returned she found a black satin dress missing—■ it had been taken from the drawer of the duchesse. . The dress was worth ibout £lO. There were also missing d, pair of stockings worth about IGs, a pair of knickers worth 255, and gloves worth 15s. Sho had not since seen the dress and the gloves. She was shown by a detective knickers and stockings, which sho identified as belonging to her. Sho did not know the accused. To Mr Anderson: The door of her room was very close to the stairs. Alice Twist, a married woman, said she knew the accused, ■whom she met on April 13 in the Empire Hotel. Earlier in the afternoon she ha*i met him in the street. Not far from the hotel ho gave her a pair of knickers and some stockings in a parcel. Ho said the parcel was a present. He did not say where he got the articles. Next day she handed the articles to Detective Russell. At that time she knew accused as George Young. To Mr Anderson, witness said sho did not remember meeting accused at a quarter past-12 at the Shamrock Hotel. Pressed by counsel, witness said sho would swear sho ■wins not there at that time. She had had a few drinks, and could not bo sure if she opened the parcel outside the hotel or when she got homo Accused stayed at her mother’s place that .night. She had known him a couple of weeks. Accused came back a few days later, and told her he was sorry he had given her the presents, which were stolen. Detective Russell said he went to Mrs Twist, and asked if she could give any information about stockings and knickers which had been given to her by accused. She gave them to witness, who afterwards saw accused, and told him of the, charge. Accused said he admitted giving the articles to Mrs Twist, hut said ho did not steal them. Ho did not wim to bring anyone e.se into the matter. On the day of the trial in the lower court accused said to witness that he received a- parcel containing knickers and stockings from a inan named Griffiths in the Empire Hotel. STATEMENT BY ACCUSED. Accused went into the witness box and said that ho went into the Shamrock Hotel with men named Duggan and Griffiths on April 28. He met Mrs Twist there, and stayed with her till about 3 o’clock. Then ho went to the Oban Hotel, where ho saw a man named Sutherland. He went to the Royal Albert Hotel, staying there till 5 o’clock. Returning to the Empire, ho went into the sitting room and saw Mrs Twist with several others. At a quarter to 6 ho was, called out hy Duggan', and went into the public bar. Griffiths was also there. Griffiths had a parcel, and gave it to him, saying: “Hero’s a present for your lady friend.’’ He left the hotel with Mrs Twist, telling her he had a parcel for her. Mrs Twist made no comment when he opened the parcel and showed her the articles. She took the parcel. He went hack later to tell Mrs Twist ho was sorry he had given her stolen articles. When he made the statement about not washing to drag anyone else into the matter, he meant he did not want Mrs ’Twist brought in, and said he would freely admit that ho had given her the parcel. In reply to Mr Adams, accused said he had gone under the name,of Georgo Young when living with Duggan and Griffiths. Ho admitted that he was convicted at Auckland in 1922 of being a rogue and vagabond, and admitted that he was convicted, at Hamilton in 1922 for robbery with violence, receiving three years’ reformative detention for the latter. Ho was now serving three months’ imprisonment for theft at Invercargill. In answer to further questions accused said ho had not received any other such parcels from Griffiths. He had never been to a pawnshop with Griffiths and Duggan. He had made an effort' to get Duggan to give evidence. Mr Adams explained that- Duggan had served a sentence, and had lately been released. COUNSEL’S ADDRESS. Mr Anderson said it was admitted accused had in his possession the knickers and the stockings. Accused had admitted’to his “record,” but he had not been shaken as far ns his explanation was concerned in regard to now he became possessed of the articles. Learned counsel submitted there was no guilty state of mind to accompany the receiving of the two articles hy accused. As far as the drees and the gloves ■ were concerned, there was not a particle of evidence to connect acc .t.M witn t .cm. There were the facts h.i Duggan was convicted of theft .r m ihe Gar.-ten on the same day, and l-iuu Gri. 1- - was wanted. There was a reasonable susp.cion that accused was inveigled into the affair by the other two men. Learned counsel submitted that the jury could not satisfy itself beyond all reasonable doubt that accused went into the Carlton Hotel and stole the articles.- Accused’s statement in the box was a reasonable one.

1 AN ALIBI. , Mr Adams, in addressing the jury, ; said that accused in his defence had put : forward what was practically an alibi, Tho only evidence in regard to his movements wns that of tho accused himself, and * one ■woukl have expected him to have called f>omo evidence iu i corroboration.

CONVICTED OF - RECEIVING. His Honor, in summing up, said ho did not think there was sufficient cvide ivo to convict accused in so far as the dross and tho gloves were concerned. Iu regard to tho knickers and too stockings, they must have been stolen from the Carlton. If the jury did not convict accused on the charge of thett of the latter articles, then it was open to it to convict him on a charge of receiving. The jury retired at 3.44 and returned at 4.40 with a verdict of guilty on tho charge of receiving stolon property, knowing it to have been stolen. The prisoner was remanded for sentence.