CONSORTING CHARGE

New Zealand Herald, Volume LXXII, Issue 22247, 23 October 1935, Page 16

CONSORTING CHARGE

TRIAL OF LABOURER POLICE OFFICERS' EVIDENCE COMMENTS BY HIS HONOR The trial of a labourer, John Thomas Scott, aged 39, on a charge deeming him to he an incorrigible rogue in that he habitually consorted with reputed thieves, was commenced before Mr. Justice Callan, in the Supreme Court yesterday. Mr. It. Meredith conducted the case for the Crown, Mr. Sullivan and Mr. Aekins appearing for the defence. Mr. Meredith said accused had been convicted as a rogue and vagabond in 1934, and the contention of the Crown was that ho had since committed another offence by habitually consorting with reputed thieves Evidence was given by a number of police officers, principally attached to the Freeman's Bay station, that accused had been observed in the company of men who were convicted or reputed thieves; It was stated that accused was charged with vagrancy in April, 1933, and ho was sentenced to a month's imprisonment on the charge in the following July. It was admitted that the sentence was imposed because accused was seen to be drunk, a condition previously imposed being that he should abstain from liquor. He had been imprisoned in May, 1934, on a charge of being a rogue and vagabond. Meaning of " Reputed Thief " One constable who detailed his observations of accused was questioned on what he regarded as the meaning of a reputed thief. He said he would not hold it against a convicted man five years after the first offence, if tho man had been leading a good life. His Honor: What is the point about five years? 1 suppose there are thieves who get such a fright upon their first conviction that they immediately decide to lead good lives. 1 suppose even the police must meet people like that. The constable said a person's general behaviour was considered in judciuc his or her repute. Another constable was asked about a man ho considered to .be a reputed thief, who was seen in accused's company. He said he considered this person a reputed thief on his general reputation, and because he had occasion to interview him regarding certain complaints made to the police. Those interviews had been some timq prior to his observation of the man with accused. "A reputed thief means a person who is reputed, at this time, to be addicted to thieving," said His Honor. "How are we to assume that a person, because ho was convicted some years ago even, goes about habitually thieving, and that the police are not clever enough to catch him. Ihe offence might have been trifling, and bitterly repented." The constable giving evidence said the police had received complaints about the person concerned. , Ruling By Judge His Honor: But there was no prosecution. How do you know those complaints were true? His Honor ruled against any reference to persons noticed by the police with accused as "undesirables," and emphasised that there was no such thing in law as a person considered undesirable. There was no such a thing as a reputed thief, and the grounds for such a belief were required to bo shewn. | Mr. Sullivan, for the defence, said I accused was a member of long stand- ! ing in the Waterside Workers' Union, ! and most of the associates described by the police were members of that organisation. Accused had to associate with his own class. There existed on the waterfront a "vigilance committee" to ensure that a worker was not a thief, or a reputed thief in the sense implied by the police, and accused, who was an excellent worker, and who had not been convicted of any crime involving dishonesty, had given full satisfaction. Counsel considered the question whether the police were not abusing the statute arose in the present case. After evidence was called for the defence, in which accused's capacity as a worker was praised, the case was adjourned until this morning.