Lucinsky Guilty of Theft

Manawatu Times, Volume 63, Issue 174, 26 July 1938, Page 8

Lucinsky Guilty of Theft

THIRD PARTY IN SAFE ROBBERY EPISODE The re-trial of Thomas John Lucinsky, labourer, aged 30, on a charge of breaking and entering the premises of J. L. Bennett, Ltd., by night and stealing therefrom a safe and its contents, valued at £446 4s Bd, took place in the Palmerston North Supreme Court yesterday and ended with a verdict of guilty of theft only. The following jurymen were chosen: Messrs. A. J. Fraser (foreman), K. L. Beals, F. W. Ayers, J. C. Reid, H. A. Hoskin, C. G. W\ Johansen, D. N. O’Brien, J. J. McPhee, S. Penketh, S. F. Lincoln, W. H. Richardson and G. Thomson. Mr. H. R. Cooper conducted the case for the Crown and Mr. T. F. Belling appeared for accused. The Hon. Mr. Justice Quilliam presided. The evidence followed the same lines as that presented during the first trial last Tuesday. Edward Charles Young, who has already been sentenced for his share in the burglary, was again called to the witness box, but as his evidence varied from that which he gave at the first trial last Tuesday, Mr. Cooper was granted permission to treat him as a hostile witness. Young said that after the robbery it was only Maurice Lucinsky, accused’s brother, who asked him to give a lift with the safe on to the carrier of the car. Tom Lucinsky, as far as he could recollect, was not there then though he had been on the scene before the robbery. Mr. Cooper: Do you remember what you said in evidence last Tuesday? Witness: I have forgotten. His Honour: Come! Cornel you had better bo quite frank. Counsel also asked witness not to forget there was a crime called perjury. Reading from last Tuesday’s evidence Mr. Cooper drew Young’s attention to what he had said, namely, that there were three of them present. Witness recollected that he had said that. His Honour: I asked you before who put tho safe on the carrier and you said it was you and Maurice. Last Tuesday you said it was the three of you who lifted it on to the carrier. Witness: I said at the time I had had a few drinks and was not clear. His Honour: You didn’t have a few drinks last Tuesday. Which statement is true? Young: I don’t know. Counsel: Last Tuesday you told the truth. Isn’t that it? Young: To the best of my knowledge. Mr. Cooper: And the three of you put the safe on the earner. Young: That is probably right. Witness also said that after the safe had been opened on Kellow’s line, he drove Maurice and Tom Lucinsky back to Palmerston North, receiving his share of the money as they drove along. Evidence was also given that Tom Lucinsky claimed as hi 3 property, a handkerchief with one hem missing. The hem was found tied around one of the money bags dug up from the earth floor of Young’s fowl house. The jury retired at 4.17 p.m. and two hours later returned to ask several questions of his Honour. The main one was whether in a charge of breaking, entering and theft they could return a verdict of theft only and his Honour’s reply was in the affirmative. They also asked if the receiving of stolen goods from the safe constituted theft and again the answer was yes. Retiring again the jury returned at 8.5 p.m. with a verdict of guilty of theft and Lucinsky was remanded for sentence.