REMARKABLE CASE.

Greymouth Evening Star, 24 March 1911, Page 7

REMARKABLE CASE.

AN EXCITED WOMAN’S STORY

[BT TELEGRAPH —PER PRESS ASSOCIATION.] AUCKLAND, March 23. A remarkable story of an alleged burglary and the arrest of the supposed housebreaker, and the subsequent retraction of the charge, was told to Mr E. C. Cutten, CM., at the Police Court yesterday. On the night of March 15th a woman named Mrs Sindley called a police officer to her house, and declared that she had seen a man enter by the window. The policeman and the lady entered the house, and she declared a number of household articles and a piece of jewellery were missing. The officer then made a search, but could find no one in the house. He went outside with Mrs Sindley, and a man was seen close by. He was pointed out by Mrs Sindley as the intruder, and Ve constable invited him into the house, where he searched him. In several pockets he found the articles identified by the woman as having been stolen. The man’s name was William Tozer, and he was taken into custody. Subsequently he was brought before the Court and charged with breaking and entering the house and stealing goods to the value of over £5. Then Sub-Inspector Hendry received a remarkable letter from Mrs Sindley, in which she said, “I wish to let you know that the statement I made about the man Tozer breaking and entering and stealing cerain articles was untrue, and I have no intention to go to the Curt and swear any lies. As at the time I made the remarks I did not know what was saying, I thought it only fair for all concerned to let you know. I am also notifying Tozer’s solicitor of the above facts.” When the case was called . on-- SubInspector Hendry said it appeared that someone had attempted to tamper with the ends of justice. The woman before calling the police, took a boy to her bouse ,and, peering through the fence, the lad saw the foot of a man disappearing through the window. Then, when the accused was arrested, she plainly accused the man in the presence of the officer. The hoy gave evidence and a jeweller’s traveller stated that lie had sold Mrs Sindley a brooch which was found on the accused. When Mrs Sindley was called she appeared very excited. * At first she emphatically refused to take the oath. “I’ll speak the truth without the Bible;” she said. She was at last persuaded by the Magistrate, and reluctantly responded, “I do” to the exhortation. Sub-Inspector Hendry: You (charged this man with stealing vour property? Witness: Yes, but it is not true. And you accused him of getting through the window? Yes, but that was a false statement. The Sub-Inspector : Very well; tell the Court your story. The witness: I met this man, whom 1 know and hate, in Upper Queen Street on that night, and whenever I see him be insults me, and I hammer him if I can. He ran away and came up to my house, and taunted me later in the evening, and I said I’d swear he broke into my house, and that’s what Idid. At . times, during, her evidence the witness l>ecarae widly excited, and, allernativelv, addressing I he accused and her husband, who was standing at the back of

the Court, she expressed the hope that she would be able to murder’ them both. The charged was altered to one of entering a dwelling house and stealing, instead of breaking and entering. Accused denied the offence. Mr Cutten said he thought nothing would be gained by sending the case to a jury, and he dismissed the case.