Alleged Attempt To Kidnap : Case Dismissed

Greymouth Evening Star, 16 October 1948, Page 3

Alleged Attempt To Kidnap : Case Dismissed

(P.A.) WELLINGTON, October 15. Charges against two men of attempting to take away a nine-year-old girl from her parents were dismissed by the Magistrate, Mr A. A. McLachlan, S.M., in the Magistrate’s Court, Wellington, today. There was no motive, he said. There was very strange conduct, which the police could be commended for wanting to suppress, but the evidence did not constitute prima facie a case which would warrant the time and trouble which a trial would involve. It might support a charge of assault, but there had been a' technical assault only.

The charges were of attempting to take away Deborah Janet Todd, aged nine, with intent to deprive her parent, Bryan James Todd, who had lawful charge of the child, of possession of her.

Accused were Malcolm David Glasspole, a company manager, aged 31, and Aino Alexander Birch, a motor engineer, aged 29. They were charged jointly. Both pleaded not guilty.’ Senior-Detective G. E. Callaghan prosecuted, Mr W. J. Stacey represented Glasspole, and Mr A. J. West Walker represented Birch. To show the intention alleged, said the Magistrate, evidence of much more determination would be needed. Even supposing Glasspole had returned from America with an idea and conceived and prepared a scheme, if he abandoned it on his own volition, there was no attempt. The Magistrate remanded accused until Friday next on charges of being unlawfully in possession of firearms, and said the police could consider before then whether they would bring a charge of assault. Bail was allowed in accuseds’ own recognisance at £25 each. As he was dismissing the charge and not sending .it on, said the Magistrate, he felt at liberty to remark that it was shocking that people in New Zealand or even in the British Empire could be troubled by even the possibility of such a terrible and stupid action. Father’s Evidence

When the case was continued in the afternoon, Bryan James Todd, who said he was managing-director of the Associated Motorists’ Petrol Company, was the next witness. When Senior-Detec-tive Callaghan asked whether he was in a sound financial position, Mr Stacey objected. • “Sir, that is an inference that he is wealthy,” Mr Stacey said. The Magistrate: Yes, you had better leave that out. It is common knowledge, anyway. Todd stated that as he was walking home on an afternoon about a month ago, his attention was drawn to a green coupe car which was parked facing his house in Wesley road. He noticed two men standing near the car looking at the gate of his home. The two men were standing by the front mudguard. Witness walked past and hurried back to have a look at them. He wished to impress on himself their identity, and spoke to them. He said, “Well, boys, are you having some trouble with the car?” He did not remember their reply. Gn October 27 he attended an identification parade at Wellington Central Police Station, and saw a man whom he identified as one of the two men he had seen in Wesley road. Witness indicated Birch, in the dock, as the man. Later in the morning, at a further identification parade, witness said he identified the other man (Glasspole), whom he also pointed out in the dock. Witness also identified a green car at the police station. To Senior-Detective Callaghan, witness said there would not be fewer than 20 men in the parade, which was conducted by Chief-Detective E. H. Compton. Witness told Mr Stacey that he had not indicated to his daughter the manner in which she ought to give evidence. He had been careful not to do so. In Court the day before, his daughter had indicated a man whom she said was the man who had been standing beside the car. He had told her that was so—that that was Glasspole. Witness did not agree that on Thursday he took the initiative in pointing out the men in Court.

£12,000 Mentioned

Evidence that he had told Glasspole he believed he and Birch intended to get £12,000 out of the alleged intended offence was given by Detective William Couling Harner. Mr Stacey immediately objected, saying there was no evidence of any demand for money. The detective’s statement was highly improper. The Magistrate: There should be no reference to figures. The detective is, however, entitled to inform the accused of what'is being alleged against them. Mr West-Walker: This is the uncorroborated evidence of the detective. The Magistrate upheld the objection and ruled that in the depositions the figure should be altered to “a sum ot money.? Detective Harper said he did not use the word “ransom.” He had no information it was going to be ransom. The detective said Glasspole was rhe first interviewed in a house at Paraparaumu. He had said: “It wasn’t me, Bill. I don’t think I was in town yesterday afternoon.” Witness had told Glasspole that he had reason to believe he was the man who had tried to put a little girl in a car. It was also alleged that he carried a suitcase with him and that in it was a gun. The book dropped near where the girl was put in the car dealt with the type of retreading Glasspole did at his place of business in Lower Hutt. Accused had then told witness, “That’s right. I don’t know what came over me. Alex Birch had fitted new clutch -plates to the car, and they had gone up Bolton street to try them out. I didn’t hurt the girl, did I?” Witness said that under some papers in a suitcase in Glasspole’s room he found a .32 automatic. Beside it was a clip loaded with seven rounds of live ammunition. Also in the case was a box of 27 rounds of .32 ammunition. Accused had then accompanied the police to the detective office, where he told witness he had brought the ammunition back from America. In the suitcase was literature dealing with the same matter as the book found in Wesley road. Shortly' before 5 p.m., witness saw Birch at his garage in Ballance street. Birch had said Glasspole could say what he liked. He was not going to say he was up there. At the detective office, Glasspole had said to witness: “Birch had nothing to do with it. It was my idea. I thought the whole thing out.” Birch when interviewed, had said he had no revolver. A .45 revolver in a leather holster was later found behind the air compressor in Birch’s garage. Counsel Object

Both defence counsel objected to all reference to firearms. Because they had been found on accused’s premises did not mean that they were related to the incident in Wesley road. ■Detective Harper said that Birch later later said: “Seeing as you have got the revolver, you might as well have the rest of the ammunition.” Birch had taken 20 rounds from a cupboard and handed them to him. . Constable Henry John Austin Wright said he had inspected a green coupe car and the clutch was in need of repair and had not been removed for a few months. Mr Stacey submitted that the story of the child who said she struggled away from an adult who was trying to

put her in a car was improbable and uncorroborated. There was no evidence that the men knew who her parents were, and no proved intention that they intended to take the child from the parents’ control. There was seme imagination in the child’s story. Assuming the men tried to put her in the car, the Court did not know what for. It may have been annoyance. There was no evidence of any connection between Glasspole and the girl’s father which suggested that he was to be deprived of the child. It was, geographically, almost impossible to abduct anyone in this country. For Birch, Mr West-Walker said that never had a man been charged with so much on so little. There was no evidence that Birch was even in Wellington on the day of the incident.