CRIMINAL SESSIONS.

New Zealand Herald, Volume LX, Issue 18551, 8 November 1923, Page 7

CRIMINAL SESSIONS.

YOUNG MAN ACQUITTED.

CASH BOX IN HARBOUR.

EXPLANATION OF ACCUSED.

The criminal sessions of the Auckland Supremo Court were continued yesterday, before Mr. Justice Stringer and Mr. Justice Herdman.

A young man, Cecil Peters Magnus Brown (Mr. Northcroft), pleaded not guilty, before Mr. Justice Stringer, to a charge of stealing, on September 6, money, cheques, and postal notes to the value of £136 15s 2d, the property of his employers, the New Zealand Express Company, Ltd.

Mr. Meredith, for the Crown, stated that the cashier to the company would say that accused asked him not to lock the safe as he had a book to put into it. When the cashier went to the office the following morning the cash box was missing. The same day a Harbour Board employee salved a brown paper parcel floating near King's Wharf, which contained the missing cash box and various papers and cheques. Accused made two statements, in one of which he said he packed the cash box into a parcel and took it home for a joke. He did not interfere with the money. He intended to replace the money next day, but became afraid that lie might be seen and so decided to take out the money and throw the box into the harbour. He hid the money in a lavatory, and accused later showed the police where it was hidden. Detective Frank W. Johnsen produced the statement in which accused said: "I merely did it for a joke." His Honor: Has everything been recovered ? Mr. Northcroft: Nothing whatever was taken. Accused, in evidence, stated that he was not in financial trouble, but his nerves had not been nearly so good since he returned from the war. He assarted that the cash box had been left out when he shut the safe. He could not telephone to the manager, and he decided to take the box home with him. He took it back in the morning, and someone met him at the office door and said: " The cash box has been stolen and there is a row on." That disturbed him and he lost his head. Under cross-examination, accused said he had a safe at the office in which to put his cash, but he doubted if it were thief-proof. He could have put the notes into his cash box. ' Accused's wife stated that he brought home a parcel and told her he would be returning it in the morning. He took the parcel with him when he left next day. His Honor, in summing up, referred to the panic which had been known to affect innocent people when involved in some crime and which had led them to run away. In the present case it might be that the sudden presentation of the fact that there was a hue and cry about the cash box and the knowledge that he had it under his arm at the time, were more than his nervous system could stand and that he took an absurd and incriminating course. His Honor reminded the jury that a fraudulent intention w. v an essential ingredient in a charge of steal-

ing. - The jury returned a verdict of not guilty, and accused was discharged.

PISH DEALER NOT GUILTY. LADY'S MISSING BAG. A plea of not guilty was entered by Henry Jiggens (Mr. Sullivan), when charged before Mr. Justice Herdman with stealing a handbag, thermometer, a pair of scissors, and £10 in money; of a total value of £12 2s, the property of Mrs. Mary Ann Wigmore; and, alternatively, with receiving the property well knowing if to have been dishonestly obtained. It was alleged that-the bag had been left in a fish shop at Kingsland kept by accused and another dim. Mr. Paterson, in outlining the case for the Crown, said that Mrs. Wigmore was a nurse living at Kingsland and about 3.30 p.m. on Friday, September 14, she went into accused's shop as the other parftier was going out. . She was served by accused. She put the fish in her basket and apparently went «rat forgetting her brown leather handbag. No one else was in the shop at the time. On returning home she discovered her loss. When asked about it accused said he had not seen it. Hie partner also said he had not? seen it. Two girls aged 11 and 7 years respectively happened to go to the shop apparently , about the same time as Mrs. wigmore. The elder would say she saw a brown purse on the counter and handed it to accused who said the lady might come back. .Thi" was corroborated by the second girl. In a statement to Che police, continued Mr. Paterson, accused said he had not seen the bag, or had been handed one by the little girl. V Accused, in evidence, stated that be did not see a bag or a purse. He had many customers coming to the shop and on that particular day he took anything •between £15 and £18. He left the shop unattended after Mrs. Wigmore had been there, being away about four or five minutes. Customers were coming "■•' in and going out, including a number of children. . ■>.;'... .*■'.''":","■'.. ■'■ %v ■■••.'...

To Hie Honor, accused said he did not see Mrs. Wigmore bring a bag into the . shoponly a basket. Hie did- not suggest that? anyone came into the shop and took bag; he suggested she did not bring one into the shop. < j The jury returned a verdict of not guilty and accused was discharged.

THEFT OF watch AND GHAUT. RECOMMENDATION TO MERCY. The hearing of Hie charge against Robert Gitmour Ritchie (Mr. Northcroft), of stealing a gold watch and ohain from .Mrs. Emily Jane PriCchard was com,-fi"!"d before Mr. Justice Herdman eav iay. Accused . had pleaded not guilty on Tuesday. Accused, continuing hie evidence, said there was no suggestion that .he should recover the watch, or that he had done anything wrong. He . did not consider he was in any way indebted to Mrs. Pritchard. He had compassion for her and she had looked after ihim. He did what he ; could for her, faking her to church, and also out in the evenings. Cross-examined, accused said he gave his wrong name and address to the pawnbroker with whom he yawned the watch because he did not want his name on the ticket. Accused admitted that he had been convicted of vagrancy. He denied that ho was living on his wifs. The jury returned a verdict of guilty, with a recommendation to mercy. His Honor deferred sentence till to-day.