THEFTS FROM CAMP

King Country Chronicle, Volume XXXII, Issue 4639, 13 May 1938, Page 5

THEFTS FROM CAMP

OFFENCES NEAR PIO PIO. NATIVE BEFORE COURT. TWO YEARS' IMPRISONMENT. Three charges of theft, alleged to have been committed near Pio Pio on December 29, 1937, were preferred against a native, Tuhaka AropaPiripi (34), of Miranda, in the Supreme Court, Hamilton, on Tuesday, before the Chief Justice, Sir Michael Myers. Accused was also charged with receiving the property, having known it to be dishonestly obtained. Accused, who pleaded guilty, was represented by Mr. W. Noble (Auckland), and Mr. H. T. Gillies appeared for the Crown.

Mr. Gillies stated that the alleged offences had occurred at a public works camp at the Mahoenui Gorge, between Te Kuiti and New Plymouth. At Christmas time the workmen left for their holidays and did not return until January 9, when they found that the tents had been broken into and several articles stolen. Just before Christmas a man named Churton was driving his car to the Waikato, when he picked up a man who was later identified as the prisoner. Churton was asked to take him to Miranda and did so. He stayed with Piripi during the Christmas holidays. Churton later decided to go haymaking in Taranaki and offered to take Piripi with him. On one occasion near Pio Pio, Piripi left Churton and later returned with a large swag. Churton would not have anything to do with the swag. Dealer Approached. Later a second-hand dealer in Auckland was asked by the prisoner to buy certain articles. On that occasion the prisoner gave a false name. The police were keeping a watch for the articles stolen from the camp and eventually traced the prisoner through them to his home. Churton was already serving a term of probation, having been found guilty of being an accomplice in the charges. Several articles produced in Court were indentified by Ernest William Wyatt Hughes, who was in charge of the camp, and by Eric John Garlick, assistant engineer in the Public Works Department stationed at Te Kuiti. Evidence of having picked the prisoner up in his car near Manurewa, two or three days prior to Christmas, was given by Alexander James Churton, a labourer, of North Auckland. Piripi persuaded witness to go to his home" at Miranda, and he stayed there for several days. Just before New Year witness and the prisoner set out for Taranaki to look for harvesting work. When they stopped near Pio Pio witness slept in the car. There were some tents in the vicinity, and early in the morning the prisoner out a swag, of property on the carrier of the car.

Instead of going to Taranaki witness returned with Piripi to Miranda. Some of the articles produced in Court were in Piripi's house. The articles had later been taken in witness' car and sold to a second-hand dealer at Onehunga. In reply to Mr. Noble, witness said he did not go on to Taranaki as he was suspicious of Piripi. Witness did not know where the property came from.

Mr. Noble: Are you sure you did not take it yourself? Witness: Do you think I did?

Under further cross-examination witness denied having stolen the property.

William Leatham Donaldson, a second-hand dealer, of Onehunga, described the visit paid to his shop by Piripi, and identified several articles produced in Court. On that occasion the name and address given were "Arlen Lancelot Priestley, 16 Grey's Avenue."

Corroborative evidence of having arrested, Piripi was given by Constable D. N. McDonald and Constable R. D. L. Jones, both of Auckland. Accused stated that he and Churton had picked up a tramp on the Great South Road and given him a ride in Churton's car. The tramp had no money, but paid for his ride with a sack of property. That was the property which Piripi had sold. On making inquiries for 16 Grey's Avenue witness found that from No. 2 to No. 24 was occupied by the Auckland Town Hall.

This concluded the case for the Crown.

Addressing the jury, Mr. Noble stated that there was no doubt that the stolen property had been traced to accused's house, but he submitted that there were grounds to doubt who committed the theft. Apart from Churton's statements, there was no evidence to show that accused had ever been at Pio Pio. Piripi had given a complete explanation and had not endeavoured to hide anything when interviewed by the police. After a short retirement the jury returned a verdict of guilty on three counts of theft. "Your character is disclosed by your previous record," commented His Honour. "You have pratically qualified for habitual criminality, and if you came before the Court again you will be treated as such." Accused was sentenced to two years' imprisonment with hard labour,