THIEF SENTENCED

Greymouth Evening Star, 20 June 1936, Page 2

THIEF SENTENCED

CAUGHT AT GREYMOUTH. Unfortunately for George Alexander Low, 33, he committed a. theft at Grey • mouth, last Monday, practically under[ the eyes of Plain-clothes Constable, Clements. As a result, Low will s P the next six months at hard labour Paparua Prison. He appeared on i' 2 ’, mand, in the Magistrate’s Court, to-, dav, before Mr. H. Morgan, S.M. Accused was charged (1) That, at G mouth, on June 15, he committed the, theft of three suit-lengths, valued at C9/15/-, the property of Bennett and Co., Ltd.; (2) that, at Wellington, on June 11, he committed the theft of a quantity of cutlery, valued at £-0, the property of Gibson and Paterson. Ltd. Detective-Sergeant H. E. Knight stated that, on June 15, Plain-clothes Constable Clements was on patrol in Mawhera Quay, when he saw accused, whom he knew, leaving Bennett s shop, with something bulky tinder his coat. As a result of the enquiries made by the constable, he apprehended Levs, who had in his possession three suitlengths, which were identified by Bennett. Accused admitted the thett. and signified his intention of pleading guiltv. After his arrest, he stated that'he wished to disclose another matter, and made a statement, admitting the theft of the cutlery at Wellington. Enquiries confirmed his

statement. Accused pleaded guilty to both charges, and elected to be dealt with summarily. Detective-Sergeant Knight stated that the suit-lengths were recovered, intact. fn respect to the Wellington effonce, accused had stated that, on Juno 11, he made enquiries at the warehouse of Gibson and Paterson. Ltd., for certain linens. While an

assistant, was obtainig prices. Low removed the cutlery from the shelves. He was chased, and abandoned the cutlery in a lavatory in another building. A certain amount of the cutlery had been recovered, but the bulk of it was still missing. Someone else might have, taken it from the lavatory. In fairness to accused, it was his own voluntary statement that disclosed the Wellington offence. Unfortunately, he had a bad list of previous convictions. Mr. M. B. James, for accused, said that, in the light of Low’s record,’ it veas somewhat difficult to tender anything in mitigation of the present offences. Detective-Sergeant Knight had fairly stated that it was the voluntary statement of accused that cleared up the Wellington matter. He had been frank with the police, had given them every assistance, and had prevented expense. He was released on license on March 21. 19.16. and, despite every endeavour to obtain employment in Wellington, he was unsuccessful. At the time he committed the thefts, he was absolutely’ destitute. Shortly before that, he was married to a Wellington girl. Apparently, when ho was unable to obtain employment, the thought entered his head to steal goeds and sell them, and thus tide himself over a difficult period. The attitude of accused in connection with the present charges showed there was a possibility that, with the assistance of his wife, he might reform. His record extended over quite a number of years, but if he were given a chance now, and a short term of imprisonment, ho might yet make good when released. The S.M. said he could not let accused off with anything but a term of imprisonment, considering his lengthy list of previous convictions. He had entered upon a career of crime in 1915, and apparently was a menace to society. He could not be trusted to go straight. He had had opportunities of reformative detention, and had been let out on license, but had committed further thefts. Accused stated that he had been z married only a fortnight. His wife said that she would stick to him. and he would not offend again. The S.M. said he could not take the risk of letting accused off, without a term of imprisonment. Low suggested a long term of probation, but the S.M. said that he had lost his chance of probation. He (Mr. Morgan) would not be doing his duty’ if he did not give accused a term of imprisonment. He would take into consideration the fact that, but for Low’s confession, the police might not have apprehended him so quickly’ in connection with the Wellington charge. He would be senteced to six menths’ hard labour in Paparua Prison ,on each charge, the terms to be concurent, ,