POLICE COURT

Evening Star, Issue 20033, 26 November 1928, Page 2

POLICE COURT

MONDAY, NOVEMBER 26. (Before Mr H, W. Bundle, S.M.) DRUNKENNESS. Two first offenders for drunkenness \vere each fined 20s, in default fortyeight hours’ imprisonment. BY-LAW OFFENCES. Nicholas Bouterey, charged with riding an unlighted bicycle, was fined 5s and costs. For driving a motor car on the wrong side of the street William Butler was fined 10s and costs. BREACH OF PROBATION. James Kent Cabral was charged with a breach of probation. He was represented by Mr C. J. L- White, and pleaded guilty. . Chief-detective Cameron said that when Cabral was previously before the court ho was allowed out on probation with great reluctance. He went away to the Oamaru district as instructed by the magistrate, and after he had been there some weeks his employer dispensed with his services. Cabral returned to Dunedin, but, although he lived very close to the probation officer, ho did not report to him. Cabral then went on to tho Clinton district, where ho was arrested. Mr White said the point ho wished to stress was that there was no deliberate evasion of the terms of his probation. It was a question of mentality, and Cabral did not seem to appreciate the position. Mr White thought ho should not be sent away merely for a technical breach. Favourable reports were received from Cabral’s late employer, and ho was admitted to probation for an additional term of six months to follow the term ho was now serving. The conditions would bo the same as in the previous ease, and he was warned by the magistrate that they must bo strictly complied with. THEFT.

George Pilling was charged with receiving £2 0s 6d from' Margaret Phimister on terms requiring him to account for it to A. and T. Burt’s, Ltd., and with fraudulently omitting to do so, thereby committing theft. Ho was further charged with failing to account for £1 6s Cd received from Emma Elizabeth Mooney under similar circumstances.

Mr J. S. Sinclair appeared on behalf of Pilling, who pleaded guilty. Chief-detective Cameron, said that accused was engaged by A. and T. Burt’s as salesman, and he was given an order book and a receipt book to give receipts for any moneys paid to him. He received genuine orders from Mrs Phimister for some electric light globes. Ho then put through, in addition on that order, an order for a griller without Mrs Phimister’s authority. He was using that griller at the htuse. Later Mrs Phimister received an invoice for tho globes and the griller, and she spoke to accused about it. He said he put the order through in that way so that he would get his commission. He receipted tho invoice as having received the money from Mrs Phimister for the goods, although no money really changed hands, as settlement for his hoard.

Somewhat similar circumstances applied in the other case. Accused put through an order in the name of Mrs Mooney, at whoso boarding house bo had been staying, for an electric iron without her authority. He later handed tho iron over to Mrs Mooney, and made out a receipt for £1 6s 6d. Ho actually received no money, but gave a clearance to Mrs Mooney in lieu of board. He was a married man, and had had some domestic trouble, with the result that he was separated from his wife. Ho was now employed as a salesman by another firm in town. He had not been before tho court previously for theft.

Mr Sinclair said that Pilling had been working for A. and T. Burt’s for some little time, his remuneration being commission on the sale of certain goods. Naturally ho had to interview many people, and he was expecting a number of commissions, so that if there was any sum owing to him for commissions, then Burt’s could have deducted those amounts from him. From the facts put before him Pilling had really expected that there would bq t a number of commissions coming to bim, so that in reality at the time ho negotiated those two particular transactions he honestly thought that the money would ho forthcoming in the way of commissions. Ho was hard up at tho time, and thought ho would settle with his landladies in that way, and that the money would be deducted from his commissions. In connection with tho transaction with Mrs Mooney, Pilling told one of tho managers at Burt’s that he was to be responsible for tho purchase price of the article, and his name on the order book showed that ho was to bo personally responsible. With regard to tho transaction with Mrs Phimister, Mr Sinclair admitted that Pilling should have told his employers about it. On tho first charge Pilling was convicted and admitted to probation for six months, conditional upon his refunding the £2 Os 6d and £1 6s 6d as directed by tho probation officer. He would be convicted on the other charge. DISORDERLY BEHAVIOUR. George Edward Mitchell was charged with behaving in a disorderly manner in a public place, and was fined 40s and costs. NO SILENCER. John Mitchell Paterson pleaded guilty to a charge of driving a motor cycle without an efficient silencer, and was fined 10s and costs. NO LIGHTS, For being in charge of a stationary motor car by night without lights George Richards was fined os and costs.

For cycling a night without a light Oswald Veitch was fined 6s and costs.

SEPARATION GRANTED

John Lambert M'Phce was proceeded against in respect to an application for separation, maintenance, and guardianship orders. Mr E. J. Anderson appeared for the complainant. Evidence was given by the complainant to the effect that the defendant had been so cruel to her that several times she had had to seek the protection of neighbours. Orders for separation, maintenance, and guardianship were made, maintenance being fixed at £2 5s per week. UNLICENSED DRIVER. Theodore Alien faced two charges of being an unlicensed motor driver. Sub-inspector Fahey stated that some time ago the defendant had been prohibited from driving for being intoxicated while in charge of a motor car. He had come before the court on March 19, and be had been prohibited from driving for twelvemonths from that date. Since then he bad been found driving. Mr E. J. Anderson, who appeared for the defendant, stated that he (tho defendant) had not been driving continuously. The defendant was fined £5 and costs on the first charge and 40a and costs on the second. MISSING BATTERY. A further, hearing was given to the case involving the theft of a motor car battery, the property of John Moore, a taxi driver. Some time ago evidence was given in court to tho effect that three men had engaged a taxi to carry them out to the St. Kilda termmus.In front of tho back seat of the car there was a battery, valued at £8 18s, the property of the driver. Some time

after setting down his passengers he found that the battery was missing. The charge against Miller (one of these passengers) was dismissed at tlio last hearing, and the case was adjourned in order to allow the third man (Campbell Dore) to appear. . Tins morning Mr B. S. a P' pcared for Dore and Mr J. 1. Ward for Edward Owen O’Brien. , Sub-inspector Fahey briefly reviewed the facts of the case, and evidence was <nvon by John Moore. “ Sergeant M'Entee said that the accused in their statements denied, all knowledge of the battery. Mr Irwin submitted that the taxi driver must have noticed Dore il ho had carried a heavy battery away from the car. There might he a certain amount of suspicion against all three men, for they were all together, .and Dore and O’Brien had an opportunity of seeing it in the back seat. But Dore could not be connected with the battery at any time, and there was therefore no evidence againit him. Campbell Dore,. in evidence, maintained that he knew nothing about the missing battery. Mr Ward said that the evidence of the taxi driver Deemed to clear O’Brien, for he had gone as far as to say that whoever had stolen the battery could not have been O’Brien.

The Magistrate stated that there was no direct evidence against any of the three men, but in view of the • circuVn-. stances both the accused must be held responsible.' The theft must have been carried out at the instigation of one of them. Each of the accused was convicted and ordered to come up for sentence within six'months if called upon,