WINNER OF £12,000

Greymouth Evening Star, 21 December 1934, Page 9

WINNER OF £12,000

4. ENGAGED IN A LOTTERY ? An information under the Gaming Act against “J.D.,” the winner of £12,000 in the recent Tasmanian consultation, was dismissed by Mr. E. L. Walton, S.M., at Wairoa, on condition that defendant undertook to donate £5 to the hospital. The defendant, Jack Devane, was charged that, on or about October 2, he engaged in a lottery, namely. Tattersalls Consultation, promoted in Tasmania, by holding ticket No. 160477 in the sweepstake. Mr. C. V. Chamberlain pleaded not guilty to the charge on defendant’s behalf. Sergeant McGregor stated that after reports had appeared in the Press that

a Wairoa resident had won £12,000 and was the holder of ticket No. 160477, defendant was interviewed by Constable Tuck, and admitted that he was “J.D.,” who was stated to be the holder of the ticket. At no time would defendant admit that he had bought : the ticket, but stated that it had been sent to him from Australia. This was confirmed in evidence by ' Constable Tuck, who added that when ho interviewed defendant the latter said that such.tickets could be bought anywhere in Australia, and that the ticket in question had been sent to him, but that he had not had it live 1 minutes before he deposited it in tne . bank. Mr. Chamberlain submitted that before the prosecution could succeed it must show that Tattersails was a lott tery. _

The magistrate remarked that he would be the laughing stock of New Zealand if he were to hold that it was not.

Mr. Chamberlain pointed out thaf if it were held to be a lottery defendant could be lined and excluded from all racecourses in New Zealand.

The magistrate agreed that because of the powers of the Racing conference defendant could receive a double punishment for one offence. If defendant gave an undertaking'that lie would donate £5 to the Hospital. Board, the information would be dismissed. Counsel for defendant intimated that the course would be followed. Another information charging defendant with having purchased a ticket in a lottery was dismissed for lack of proof.