ALLEGED SHEEP STEALING

Evening Star, Issue 22336, 12 May 1936, Page 8

ALLEGED SHEEP STEALING

FATHER AMD SOU CHARGED HEARING IN SUPREME COURT Hearing was resumed in the Supreme Court this morning before His Honour Mr Justice Kennedy and a jury of the charges of sheep stealing against Alexander Willirun Robinson and John William Robinson, father and son. Both of the accused pleaded not guilty, the elder Robinson being represented by Mr G. T. Baylee, and the son by Mr W. H. Carson. The Crown Prosecutor (Mr F. B. Adams) conducted the case for the prosecution. The accused were charged with the theft of, on January 23, of 73 lambs, valued at £153 6s, the property of Robert Lockhead, of Balclutha. They were further charged with receiving the lambs, well knowing them to have been dishonestly obtained; with combining to defraud some person or persons unknown by a letter to Messrs Pyne. Gould, and Guinness representing that John Bobinson was entitled to sale of lambs; and with obtaining by false pretences from Messrs Pyne, Gould, and Guinness a cheque for £56 11s 6d on the pretext that John Robinson was entitled to sell 73 lambs consigned to Addington. The elder accused was charged with having received from John William Robinson 73 lambs, well knowing them to have been dishonestly obtained, and John Robinson was charged with, intending to defraud, obtaining goods valued at 14s 9d and £55 16s 3d in money on the pretext that he had a good title to a cheque for £56 11s 6d drawn by Messrs Pyne, Gould, and Guinness. Detective Le Sueur said he interviewed the younger accused, who admitted stealing the lambs from a paddock at Stirling, railing them to Christchurch, and receiving a cheque. The accused made a statement, which witness took down. Witness read the statement to the court. Later, the accused stated that his father was not implicated in the theft of the sheep. The father was interviewed by witness. When witness and a constable went to the house the father did not come when they knocked at the door, but through the window they saw him in a crouching position. They called to him to come out to see them, and Le did so. He appeared to be agitated. In answer to a question, he denied having received any money from his son. At the police station the sou repeated a previous statement that he had given the father £2O, and the father said ho received £lO from the son. The father then made a statement. Mr Adams asked the witness to read the statement. Mr Carson (appearing for the son) objected to the admission of the statement made by the elder accused. His Honour: It is admitted at present only against the person who made it. Mr Adams: In view of the objection, I would like to ask another question or two before the statement is read. To the detective: Was the younger accused still present when his father first admitted verbally receiving £lO from him ? Witness; He was. Was he still present when the statement was made?—No. Witness went on to state that he brought the younger accused to Dunedin, where Le made another statement. His Honour: When he made the statement he was in custody? Witness: Yes. Did you warn him ?—Yes. He seemed rather willing to make a statement to correct an earlier statement. On February 10, said the detective, the younger accused said he wished to see him. Accused, who asked to be allowed to make another statement, said he did not steal the sheep on his own account. He had assisted his father, and did not wish to take the whole blame. Accused then made a statement, a lengthy one, in which he said he admitted the theft of the lambs in the first place in order to shield his father. Witness went to Kaitangata on February 13 and told the father that the son had made a statement implicating him. The elder accused denied having written a letter to Pyne, Gould, and Guinness under the son’s name. Witness asked him to come to the police station at Kaitangata, and asked for a specimen of his handwriting. AVitness dictated two letters to the accused, who wrote them. He still denied having written the letters, and witness pointed out the similarity of the writing, and drew attention to mistakes in spelling. Accused, when told that he would be charged, then said: “ I did not steal the lambs. I should have kept out of it when I knew he stole them.” On the way to Dunedin in a car the accused said he did write the letters at the request of bis son. He volunteered to make a statement. Mr Carson again objected to the admission of the statement as against his client. His Honour: In all cases I am admitting the statements only as evidence against those who make them. To Mr Baylee, witness said the father was living in very poor circumstances. In the cottage witness noticed a number of consignment notes for turnips. Evidence was also given by Constable Irwin, of Kaitangata. This closed the case for the Crown. Both Mr Baylee and Mr Carson intimated that they would not call evidence for the defence. Mr Adams, in addressing the jury, contended that the proper inference to be drawn from the evidence was that both accused were guilty of sheepstealing. At this stage the court adjourned till the afternoon.