POLICE COURT

Evening Star, Issue 23146, 21 December 1938, Page 4

POLICE COURT

WEDNESDAY, DECEMBER 21. (Before Mr J. R. Bartholomew, S.M.) OUTCOME OF MATRIMONIAL TROUBLES. Myrtle Ellen Johnson was charged with causing a telegraph message to be sent on October 17 in- the name of Francis Dionisie Johnson without that person’s authority. The defendant, for whom Mr C. J. L. White appeared, pleaded guilty. Chief-detective Holmes said that the. husband of the defendant was a racehorse owner and had nominated _ certain horses and accepted the weights allotted. The acceptances were published, but the horses’ names were not included. He rang up the secretary of the racing club at Gore, who informed him that a telegram had been received the previous day reading “ Unavoidable cancel acceptance—F. Johnson.” Johnson had complained and police inquiries had revealed the fact that a telephone message had been received from MoSgiel requesting the telegraph operator to send the message. The voice was that of a woman. Defendant had admitted sending the telephone message and stated that she did so because she had determined that if her husband would not maintain her lie was not going to race horses if she could help it. It was an act of annoyance. Mr White said that defendant was a highly respectable woman. There had been constant strife during the married life of the couple. A case involving a complaint for maintenance was pending at the time, and the woman was distraught. She had not known that she was committing an offence against the law, but had voluntarily come from Wellington to meet the charge._ It was practically a family matter, said counsel, who asked the magistrate to consider adjourning_ the case rather than entering a conviction. Mr J. G. Warrington here said that, on behalf of the husband, he wished to intimate that there was no desire on his part to cause any prosecution. The Magistrate remarked upon the seriousness with which a charge of this nature was regarded under the Act. In this case, however, His Worship added, the circumstances were very exceptional and were the outcome of matrimonial troubles. No real harm had been done. In all the circumstances the case would be met by an adjournment for 12 months. An application for the suppression of defendant’s name was refused, SHOP-LIFTING CHARGES. Mary Nash, a young married woman, for whom Mr 0. G. Stevens appeared, pleaded guilty to two charges of shoplifting, one involving a cardigan and a set of women’s underwear of a total value of £1 7s 6d, and the other five pairs of men’s socks and a set of children’s underwear of a total value of 18s 2d. Chief-detective Holmes said that accused had visited a city shop and on leaving had been stopped and asked to go into the office. She refused and sat down on a chair, and while there dropped certain articles. The cardigan was subsequently found under accused’s fur coat. She admitted the thefts, and on her bouse being searched the articles named in the second charge were found. Accused had been before the court previously on charges of false pretences and shop-lifting. She had £lO in her possession when arrested.

Mr Stevens said that the fact that accused had £lO on her at the tithd would suggest that she was a kleptomaniac. Counsel submitted a report which had'been put in on the occasion of the previous charge. of shop-lifting. In the case of the false pretences the circumstances were also umisual. Goun-, sel suggested that a long term of probation would meet the case. The Magistrate said that the'case was a difficult one to deal with. The woman had been in trouble before, but the report which the. probation officer had submitted oh a previous occasion showed that she was of childish mentality. Shop-lifting was a serious offence, said His Worship, and had the accused been of normal mentality the matter would have merited a term of imprisonment. Considering the type of woman and her circumstances —she had a young child—the case could be dealt with in another way. Accused would be fined £2, with the alternative of seven days’ imprisonment,-on the first charge, and on the second would-be admitted to probation for a period of two years, a condition being that she must not visjt drapery or allied establishments unless accompanied by a responsible person. COLLECTOR’S THEFTS. John Clutterbuck, ager 24, pleaded guilty to the theft of divers sums of money totalling £2 18s Id, the property of Eric Edward James. The Chief Detective said that between January 1 and Juno 18 accused had been in the employment of, the complainant driving a milk delivery van. Part of his duty was to collect money from customers, and, he had collected the amount stated, and not accounted for it. Accused had been previously before the court for dishonesty. - Mr C. J. L. White; who appeared for accused, said that, although the man had been frequently before, the'court* he had not been charged with offences for dishonesty during the past two years. He had now a chance of making good, and counsel asked for clemency. The Magistrate said that accused had had many chances, but he (the magistrate) would take a risk and admit accused to probation for a period of two years, a condition being that restitution of £2 18s Id be made. SERIOUS CHARGE. William George Hayes Harpur (33), for whom Mr J. 6, Warrington appeared, pleaded guilty to having, .on December 11, at Chaslands, assaulted a child eight years of age. Tlie police evidence was to the effect that the child had met accused on- the road and had been playing with him. He had taken her into the bush and committed the offence. , , Mr Warrington said that accused was a married man, with three children, a good worker,' and a good husband and father. On the day in question he had had some liquor, and had lost his head, The child had in no way been injured, physically or mentally. Counsel asked that accused be given credit for a certain amount of self-control which he had exercised and for his frankness ,m admitting, the offence'and obviating the necessity for the attendance of the child in court. The Magistrate said that the incident was a very ugly one, and it was fortunate that no harm had been done; there had been all the possibilities for a very serious outcome. Children must he protected, ahd the court must take a serious View of such occurrences. Accused would bo sentenced . to three months’ imprisonment, with hard la.bour. SEQUEL TO A COLLISION. Douglas Alfrey Lane (Mr E. J. Anderson) pleaded not guilty to having

driven a motor car btt :J)iaeandrew read, Port Chalmers, or) November 23 without due bare and attention;. Sergeant Lean, who-conducted the case for the police, said-that the matter was the outcome of a collision between a Public Works Department ear driven by the defendant and a-Govern-ment bus, Mr Anderson said that defendant was a Publio Works engineer. He was driving a departmental car and had! struck another Government vehicle. When defendant got to the bend he saw the bus coming 'and had braked, but the car went completely into a skid. It was no fault of defendant’s, the basic cause being the state of tha tyres fitted to the car. The wet road surface, the freshly-laid' bitumen, plus the bad state of the tyres, had caused the . trouble, and counsel.- contended that defendant had not driven without proper care and attention;; ‘ Lionel Harris RathboUe, driver of the bhs, said that he saw a-Govern-ment car approaching the junction of Beach strciet and Macahclfew road. It was in the centre of the road and travelling at about 35- to 40'miles per hour. When the' driver saw the bus approaching he applied: the. brakes, but the wheels locked l and " the car was carried straight into the .bus.-which had conje to a standstill. Witness had been on his correct side and doing no more than 20 miles an hour. There wete five or six passengers in the bus, and one had received injuries from broken gloss. The.light was.dull and it had been raining. James Baillie, a fisherman, who was a passenger in the bus, also gave evidence. • * ■

It was stated in; evidence during tha hearing that .the tyrCs used ,on defendant’s car were unsafe. : Tyres used on: the cars of the Government \traffio inspectors .until they were judged 60 per cent, used had to be taken over; by the department’s garage bud further used, it was said. Mr Anderson, remarking on this state of affairs, contrasted it with the aims of the Safety Week campaign. Evidence was given for the, defence by the defendant, who gaye his speed as 25 miles an hour, and by .Maurice Ordish Fairhurst, Joseph . Stanley Berghan, and Cecil Charles Winders. The Magistrate said that -he, had formed a very clear opinion from tha evidence,'and, could not see that the accident had been due to emergency. All the factors of the, skid .should have been known to the , defendant, who should not have been bn the road with tyres such as those which were on his car. The driver had known.:,all this and had been acquainted with the condition of the road; In fixing the penalty he would consider the fact that defendant was driving a departmental qar. Defendant womd be, convicted and fined 10s, with court, costs -. (16s)' and witnesses’ expenses- (18s 7d).