TWO YEARS' PROBATION.

New Zealand Herald, Volume LIX, Issue 18215, 7 October 1922, Page 7

TWO YEARS' PROBATION.

SHOPLIFTERS ADMIT GUILT.

A SERIES OF ROBBERIES.

Shoplifting from Queen Street retail establishments was admitted by tvro young women who appeared on remand at the Police Court yesterday, before Mr. J. W. Poynton, S.M. The fa\;ts disclosed were that accused visited four

establishments and, when in the last, one of the women -was. detected in the act of concealing a silk "jumper." They were detained by a shop assistant, and a basket in their possession was found to contain a quantity of stolen property, chiefly clothing.

Elsie Davis, aged 24, was charged with having stolen two skirts and a dress, valued at £10 8s .6d, the property of John Court, Ltd. ; a silk "jumper," valued at £6 6s, the property of Eva Barton Walker; a feather necklet and two skirt fronts, valued at £3 10s, the property of Milne and Choyce, Ltd.; and a hairbrush, valued at £1 15s, the property of J. R. McKenzie. Bertha Evis Vivian, aged 22, was charged with having, conjointly with Elsie Da-vis, stolen two skirts, valued at £5 19s, the property of John Court, Ltd. Statements by r the Accused. Detective M»iklejohri said that in consequence of a telephone message on Monday he went to Mrs. Walker's ishop, Strand Arcade, in which accused were being detained. A quantity of dress material was handed over to him. At the police station accused made statements which were produced. Elsie Davis said in the course of her statement that she was a single woman, residing at Morningside, and had known Bertha Vivian for years. , Sho had been in Auckland for about six weeks and had been out of work. The two women met. in town by appointment-on Monday and after lunch visited Milne and Choyce's premises, where Davis took a feather necklet and two other articles which were put in a basket. She said Vivian saw her doing so. and the day before had asked her to get a brown fur. They then went to J. R. MoKenzie's shop, where Vivian picked out. a hairbrush which Daviu put in the basket, and thoy left the ;;hop without paying for the brush. They next visited John Court's. At Vivian's request Davis took a frock which had been shown to Vivian by an assistant. She also stole two skirts, and they left without paying for the articles, When in Mrs. Walker's shop in the Strand Arcade, where they had gone to look at fancy "jumpers, Davis was in the act of concealing- one under her coat when she was detected. . In her statement, Bertha Vivian, a married woman, said she' did not see Davis take anything at Milne and Choyce's. When they were in. McKenxie's shop she saw Davis take down st\ brush, but did not, see her put it in the basket which Davis carried and did not see it there until they were at the shop in the Strand Arcade. She did not see Davis take, a frock at John Court's, bub saw her putting two dresses under her coat. These were placed in the basket which by this time :>ras nearly full, and Davis put a piece c? brown paper over them. Vivian carried the basket over' to Mrs. Walker's shop in the Strand Arcade. Act Difficult to Explain. Accused pleaded guilty. On their behalf Mr. Sullivan said that this was one of those peculiar studies in criminology so difficult to explain. The women' had a considerable sum of money in their possession and it was difficult t<> understand their reason for risking ruin by these thefts. They had never been in trouble before. One of them was engaged to be married and this lapse might have had serious consequences to her Mure. However, the mail to whom she was engaged declared that he would stand by her because he knew dishonesty was not one of her characteristics. Counsel said all the property'had been recovered, and • under the' circumstances, submitted | that it was a case for probation. Chief-Detective Mcllveney said that 1 Davis had Is in her possession when arrested. " She came to Auckland from Wellington about six -weeks ago. Vivian bad £9 in her possession. She was living apart from her husband. The magistrate said that as far as was known accused gave way to temptation on the day in question. There did not seem to have been any other cases and the women had not been before the Courtbefore. Accused were placed, on probation for two years-