GUILTY OF THEFT

Gisborne Herald, Volume LXXV, Issue 22571, 26 February 1948, Page 6

GUILTY OF THEFT

WRIGHT REMANDED MATAWHERO ROBBERY JURY OUT ONE HOUR Following - a trial lasting two days and after the retirement of the Jury for an hour, Douglas Wright, aged 37, labourer. Auckland, was found guilty in the Supreme Court at Gisborne yesterday of the theft of a safe,* £832 18s Id in money, and 12 packets of tobacco from the dwelling-house of Walter Wilson. .Matawhero, on December 28. the prisoner was remanded for sentence by Air. Justice Fair.

Wright was found not guilty on the other two charges preferred against him, these being one of breaking, entering and theft of the safe, money and tobacco from the shop of Walter Wilson, and of receiving the safe, money and tobacco, knowing them to have been stolen.

Following the jury’s inspection of the hotel yesterday, the witness. John Martin Williams was recalled at the request of the foreman and questioned regarding the three men he saw at the Royal Oak on the night of December 27. Theie were at least three other boarders at the hotel that night, said Williams, and at least two of these had since left the district. He was the only witness being called regarding the three men

Constable James Heaslip told of finding the window prised up and the front door half open at the Royal Oak on the morning of December 28. There were also tyre treads on the road, three tyres having a diamond tread and one being plain. Finding of a Car The finding of -a cat at Potaka on December 31 was told of by DetectiveSergeant R. H. Waterson. In the car was a screwdriver, which fitted the marks on the hotel window, also two driving licenses in the name of Douglas Wright and several letters addressed to him. After further inquiries Detective-Sergeant Waterson arrested Wright at Te Kaha on January 5. Wright denied any implication in the robbery On Wright was found £294 in notes, and some silver, this money being produced in court. Accused contended he had won the money on horse racing. Questioned by Mr. Woodward, witness admitted that at the time of his arrest Wright had several betting slips on him. With the exception of one for £ls on Flowerburn for a win, all the bets had lost. Flowerburn had paid about £2 12s for a win.

The finding of the safe blown open in the magazine of the old gun emplacement on Kaiti Hill on December 28 was described by Detective T. Sneddon.

Stewart Henry John Wilson,.senior chemist at the Dominion Laboratory, Wellington, described tests he had carried out, which showed that paint on a board from the hotel bar, the safe, and that on the car was the same.

Following the closing of the case for the Crown. Mr. K. A. Woodward (for the accused) intimated that he did not propose to call evidence. However, Wright wished to make a statement from the dock. Statement by Accused

“I did not steal the safe and do not know anything about the Matawhero robbery. I have never been inside the Royal Oak Hotel," said Wright in a statement from the dock. He said he had arrived at Gisborne on the afternoon of Saturday, December 27, and after two hours in the bar of an hotel had driven to the Waikanae Beach. About 8 p.m. he parked the catnear the beach tennis courts and after drinking a bottle of beer dozed off, awaking about mid night. As he had not booked into an hotel the accused said he decided to sleep in the car and next morning continued his journey to Auckland. One tire was punctured at the Oweka Stream and as he had no tools he could not change the tyre. That night he again slept in the car, said Wright, setting off for Opotiki next morning. On the way he had a swim in the sea, placing his watch on a rock. On arrival at Opotiki he stayed there for three days, returning on the Thursday to see if he could find the watch which he had left behind, said Wright. During the week-end. he remained at Te Kaha, and was arrested on the Monday, January 5. “The money found on me is my money and most of it has been in my possession since long before this robbery took place," said the prisoner. The tin found in the car was also his, as he had often used it in place of a cup. The silver in it might have come from a spoon. Tbs accused said he did not know how the paint came to be on the car, but he had bought it second-hand and the paint could have been on it them. “The paint is not off the safe, ■’s the safe has never been in the car,” continued Wright. He had used the name of Regan at Te Kaha in an argument with a drunken man, hoping to scare him with an Irish name. As others had heard him use the name he did not ’ ither to correct it. Following Wright’s statement the jury was addressed briefly by the Crown prosecutor. Mr. F. W. Nolan, after which Mr. Woodward made his address, submitting that some of the evidence heard could be disregarded as it was not supported. His Honour’s Summing-up

"You will feel no doubt at all that the hotel was broken into and the safe and money stolen What you must decide is whether the accused was one of those who helped to remove the safe," said Jlis Honour in summing up.

The jury must decide whether or not to accept Williams’ evidence, dealing with the visit of three men to the hotel on the night of December 27 and his alleged view of the accused in the yard early the next morning. People who stole things like safes and money, were often found in possession of the g00d.,. Williams had taken some time to corrte forward with his story, but he was pro bably waiting to see what happened and whether the thief was caught. However, even without Williams' evi dence there was still strong evidence that Wright's car was on the scene of the robbery that night. The tyres, paintwork and other marks all indi catcd that the car had been in the vicinity of the hotel on the morning of December 23. There was no question added His Honour, that the accused was the driver of the car :n Gisborne and on the East Coast. The accused might have given a wrong name as a joke, but it appeared strange that Wright did not attempt to correct it. The money found on Wright represented just over one-third of the money taken from the Rovnl Oak Hotel. He was found in possession of one £1 note which could be positively identified by two of the witnesses. There was also a 10s note in Wright's pocket, which was remembered quite well by one of the hotel employees. If there was no reasonable explanation as to how they came into Wright's possession othei than by him stealing them, the jury was entitled to taKe this point into consideration, in conduction with other points of evidence which they were prepared to believe. Regarding the money found o.i Wright, it might be thought that had he been guilty he would have hidden most of the £204. continued His Honour. However, Wright might also have thought that his explanation that he had backed a winner at the Auckland races would be enough for the police.