SUPREME COURT.

Manawatu Standard, Volume XLIII, Issue 397, 11 August 1921, Page 7

SUPREME COURT.

ALLEGED ARSON. Tho hearing of a charge of arson against Percy Russell Roberts, in which ho was alleged, to have set fire to a motor car on July 4, 1921, well knowing: _lh.it the shed i;i which it was stored was likely to bo set on lire, was continued,, in tho Supremo Court yesterday afternoon before His Honour Mr Justice Hosking. Accused, who had entered a,'plea of not guilty, was defended by Mr Cooper. Detective-Sergeant Quirke deposed tin t he interviewed accused at the police station, Palmerston North, regarding the partial destruction of his motor ear and asked him to account for his movements on July 4. Accused made a statement, which he sigiioc. After the accused had made the statement witness said: “You were at Jones place that night. ’’ Accused replied: “1 was at Julies place and all that I have said is (rue, except lljal 1 omitted to mention it. In >a further statement accused said that he had examined tho car, and while thus engaged dropped a match on some waste, which caught alight, Ho thought that he had extinguished tho incipient blazo._ - To Mr Cooper: Accused had previously denied that he was at Jones’ place, but no threat was held over him to make the second statement. George Jones, recalled, stated that he had never seen any cotton waste in the shed, or cleaning rags of any kind. His young children had never played in the vicinity of the car. George N. J. Jones cotrobov.”ted this statement. No evidence wan brought forward by the defence, and the Grown Prosecutor, addressing the jury, stressed (ho fact that, accused had, voluntarily and without undue pressure, stated that, ho had sot the car alight, and his defence now was that, it was an accident. Either ho deliberately set lire to the car or it wad an accident. 'I ho accused did nol visit the house of Ml Jones when lie went to examine the ear—that was a significant fact. Admittedly accused had been the last on the premises, and he asked the' jury to draw their own conclusions from the combination of . the facts that he was there, that a bottle ot kerosene was found that was riot there previously, that ho did not visit the house and that there was a. fire. . Mr Cooper, addressing the jury, reminded them that tho proof of tho charge of deliberately setting lire to the shod lay with the Grown, and declared that apart from accused’s own statement (here was not any evidence to connect accused with tho fire, and that that statement had been made after he had been challenged us to the truth of the other one. No motive for such an aci had been inscribed to the accused, and counsel entered a strong plea to the jmy, in all the circumstances, to return a, verdict of not guilty. , His Ilonoui, summing up, said'that the point to bo cl ole nn i nod by Ibo jury, that the act of setting lire lo the car, was ft deliberate one. His Honour then reviewed the evidence in detail. One of the indications of guilt frequently exhibited in trials was whore a guilty person when charged, made a false statement on tne subject. Was the statement that of an honest man trying to cover up an accident, or of one who was trying to conceal a crime? The accused owned a motor ear for which he hud had no use for IB months, and it sometimes happened that derelict property was destroyed by bye, oven although the owner was not in financial straits at the time. After a retirement of about an hour and a half, the jury returned with a verdict ol not guilty. ALLEGED THE FI. A man named James Nash, of Mangawcka, was charged that on June 23, 1921, at Palmerston North, he stole an overcoat valued at £7 10s, the property of James Roberts, and further that lie received the coat, knowing it to have been dishonestly obtained. The following jury was empanelled: Messrs G. H. P. Smith (foreman), J. Baldwin. G. Hammond, V. E. Andrews, J. Linklater, L. Peirard, G. 11. Arrow. U. W, Mitchell, J. H. McGrath, V.. J. Inkpen, G. Simuson and 11. J. Snnmouds. Mr I .oughinui conducted the p execution. Accused was not represented by counsel. James Roberson, retired farmer, deposed that on the dale stated he hung las overcoat in the hull of the Victoria boardinghouse, Palmerston North, at 0.00 p m When he canto to claim it ten minutes later, the coat had disappeared. Tho coat produced was his property. i The evidence of Alfred Penketh, second* hand dealer, was that accused had sold him the coal on June 24. On the following day ho identified accused as the vendor. Sonior-Sergt. Fraser stated that on June 24 accused was arrested for drunkenness. When charged with the theft, accused replied, M did not steal tho coat, it was given to me by another man. 1 sold the coal and wo divided the proceeds. Ho did not know the other man’s name. Accused swore that he met this man in the Square, and had been asked lo sell the coat for him. This ho did. receiving: £1 from the second-hand dealer. they promptly proceeded on a dunking *pu with the proceeds, and ho know nothing more until ho woke up at the police station. , , To Mr Loughnan: The 6thor man s name was Cholo, who stole two overcoats from flic boardinghouse. Cholo told him that he had stolen the coal and had asked him to sell it. , , ,i After His Honour had summed up, the jury retired and returned in ton minutes with a verdict of not guilty of stealing, but guilty of receiving. Sentence wa» deferred.