COMMITTED FOR SENTENCE

Greymouth Evening Star, 30 August 1932, Page 2

COMMITTED FOR SENTENCE

CLERK’S MISAPPROPRIATIONS Appearing on remand, at the Greymouth Magistrate’s Court, before Mr. W. Meldrum, S.M., this morning, Robert Duggan, single, was charged that on oi’ about January 4, 1932, at Greymouth, and on divers dates between January 4, 1932 and July 19, 1932, at Greymouth, being a classified officer of the New Zealand Government, second ; clerk at the Magistrate’s Court at Greymouth, did commit theft of sums of money, the property of the New Zealand Government, to wit, the Jus tice Department. Detective-Sergeant T, E, Holmes conducted the prosecution, accused being represented by Mr. T. W. Hannan. Harold Willis de Castro, Inspector in the Government Audit Department, stated that on July 25, 1932, he commenced an audit of the records at the Greymouth Magistrate’s Court. He knew the accused, who had held a position as second clerk of the Greymouth Court, and accordingly he was a classified officer of the New Zealand Government. Accused’s duties included recording all transactions of the criminal records. He was also in charge of the Maintenance .ledger, Magistrate’s Court Law Trust Account, the Supreme Court. Law Trust Account, and his miscellaneous duties included certain, minute book matters As a result of certain irregularities which came under notice of witness, he interviewed accused in his (witness’s) office on the evehing of July 25, when accused frankly admitted that certain accounts in the Maintenance ledger were not correctly stated. Witness proceeded with his examination, and discovered irregularities totalling £3BB 16/5. On August 17, 1932, at witness’s request Duggan called at the Courthouse, where witness drew his attention to a detailed list involving items, which at that, time amounted to £3Bl 13/5. The difference in that list and the one in the charge :siieet was the result of a subsequent (deficiency found.. The lists prepared were explained to accused, who carefully scrutinised the various items and stated that the deficiencies -were and that he would be prepared to plead guilty to the amounts shown. Witness produced the lists. He informed Duggan that he anticipated there might be further amounts to be added to the total, as witness’s investigation at that time, was not complete. On August 18 Duggan handed witness a typed statement concerning the amount of £3Bl 13/5, which witness produced. The irregularities commenced about January 4, 1932, and the records showed that these continued up till July 19, 1932. During the course of witness’s investigation, accused had given'him every assistance he required. Accused’s work showed that he had a thorough knowledge of his duties, and full restitution had been made to the Department. To Mr. Hannan: The actual cash deficiency at the time of audit was £23 12/6. That amount had been paid into the "Department. The Jarge amount mentioned in the charge, was accounted for by re-imbursements, peculations, and other monies taken. Accused would only need to take £1 for. six (lays per week, and provided he reimbursed, the official shortage after each day would be £l, but he would have misappropriated £6.

From what witness had seen of what had happened, that would be -consistent with what .accused had said in his statement. Accused had slightly over ten years of service in the Department. The total amount of cash he would handle in one year would be approximately £5OOO. It was slightly over £5OOO during the last year of accused’s service. To Detective Holmes: Accused had broken one account to meet the other, and that was how the total misappropriations had been made up. Detective-Sergeant Thomas Edward Holmes stated that on August 2, acting on instructions, he obtained a warrant foi* the arrest of accused. At his request accused called at the Detective Office, where after issuing, the usual warning, witness read over the warrant. Accused replied, “I have nothing to add to the statement I made to the auditor.”

To Mr. Hannan: Witness had. known accused for the past eighteen months. Apart from his own personal knowledge of accused, witness had made inquiries as to accused’s character. Apart from the present lapse, accus ed had borne a very high character. Accused pleaded guilty, and was committed for sentence, to the next sitting of the Supreme Court, at Greymouth. Bail was renewed as allowed previously, being self £lOO, and two sureties of £5O each.