SWEEP “WINNER” IN COURT

Northern Advocate, 19 August 1936, Page 4

SWEEP “WINNER” IN COURT

PROBATION FOR TWO YEARS

[Per Press Association. — Covyright.l DUNEDIN, This Day.

In the Police Court this morning, Ernest A. T. Johnstone was charged with obtaining taxi hire credit by fraud. An original charge of being idle and disorderly was withdrawn. Chief Detective Young stated that the charges arose from a statement to the effect that accused won £30,000 in an Irish sweepstake. It was alleged that accused caused a telephone message to be sent to the “Times” that a Dunedin plasterer named Johnstone had won this sum. The following morning a representative of the “Star” saw accused who, in; reply to a question, said the report in the “Times” was correct.

Asked when he learned the news Johnstone was alleged to state that he received a telegram the previous night from a Timaru friend. He naturally received considerable attention, and commenced to borrow, obtaining £lO from his employer, and later another £lO before going to Timaru, allegedly to collect the ticket, with a promise to return on the following Monday. He stayed in Timaru for a week being royally entertained. «

* “Not the Action of a Crook.”

When doubts arose, accused returned, and was later arrested on a vagrancy charge. The 1 present charges arose from the fact that, on the Sunday night, the accused hired two taxis to 'take a party to Waikouaiti. The chief detective stated that the accused appeared in the Children’s Court in Timaru in 1928, being committed to the Child Welfare Department and later spending some time at the Weraroa State Farm in 1932. He was charged with theft at Wanganui, and returned to Weraroa.

i For accused,' Mr White said there was nothing: to prove that he originated the idea of the win. If he had done so, he had the opportunity to get hundreds of pounds and skip away. But all he did was to borrow a small sum,, and avail himself of the glamour afforded by publicity. His return to see his employers was not the action of a crook. The fact that there was no suggestion of any other charges indicated that Johnstone was not responsible for the orignial hoax. His employer was willing to take him back. *

Mr J. R. Bartholomew, S.M., in admitting accused to probation for two years, said he was somewhat unbalanced. He doubted whether accused would do much good outside institutional control, but in view of his age, Only 22, he would give him a chance.