COURT REPORTS.

New Zealand Times, Volume XXIX, Issue 6371, 20 November 1907, Page 5

COURT REPORTS.

TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 19. CRIMINAL SESSIONS. (Before His Honor Mr Justice Cooper.) A PRISONER SENTENCED. George Cowan, who bad been found guilty on the previous day of larceny, was presented for sentence. Prisoner asked for leniency, on the ground that ho had worked hard at his trade as a bricklayer for a considerable time. liis Honor said that this appeared to be true, and he would take it into consideration, and also the fact that the jury had found the prisoner guilty not of theft from tho person but of simple larceny, inasmuch that he had not taken the money from tho prosecuting witness, but had found it on tho floor. But the prisoner had an exceedingly bad record, as since 1890 he had spent twelve years of his life in prison. However, the sentence of the Court would bo comparatively a light one —eighteen months' imprisonment with hard labour. Hus Honor further ordered that the sum of <£9, round upon the prisoner, bo refunded to David Morgan, the man to whom it belonged. A RESTITUTION ORDER. On tho application of tho Crown Prosecutor (Mr M. Myers) hi# Honor raado an order that a sum of money—something over a sovereign—which had been found in the possession of Wm. James Webster, convicted on the previous day of breaking and entering and theft at Taihape, should be returned to the owner. A BROKEN WINDOW. A short, thick-set yfeing man named Patrick Brady, pleaded not guilty to a charge of having mischievously broken a plate-glass window, valued at <£s, in tho Clarendon Hotel, Palmerston North. Mr M. Myers appeared as Crown Prosecutor. Tho accused was not defended by counsel. From, tho evidence called on behalf of the prosecution it appeared that Brady had been drinking with another man in the hotel, and eventually quarrelled with him. He picked up an earthenware water-jug and hurled it at the other man. Fortunately, it missed cho man, but it wrecked the window. The accused's defence was that he had come aown from the "King Country,” and arrived in Palmerston North late at night. The hotels were all closed, and he could not get a bed anywhere. He walked about all night, and when tho hotels opened in tho morning he commenced drinking. He could not remember' anything of tho window-breaking incident. The jury brought in a verdict of guilty. His Honor said he would not deal very seriously with the accused. No doubt there had been a drunken row in the hotel, and during the course of the row prisoner had thrown the jug with the intention of hitting the other man, but he missed him and smashed the window. Probably there was no possibility of prisoner paying for the mischief he had made.

Prisoner: I can get good work up country, sir. His Honor: Tee, perhaps so, but it is not a case in which I can grant probation. However, I'll deal leniently with you; you ax© sentenced to one month's imprisonment with hard labour. Prisoner; Thank you, your Honor. A CHARGE OF THEFT.

A young man named Daniel Desmond O’Brien was charged with having, on October Bth, at Dannevirke, stolen the sum of a watch, a knife, and a key from the person of Jacob Sorenson. Mr Noave appeared for the accused, and when he was asked to plead said O’Brien wished to plead guilty. His Honor said ho could not accept a plea from counsel. The prisoner must plead for himself. 1 The prisoner then said he would plead not guilty to the charge of "stealing,” but he admitted that no had " taken " 3Cte of Sorenson’s money. His Honor said he would regard that statement as a plea of not (guilty. Tho case for the Crown was that Sorenson, who was a wood-splitter at Dannevirke, was more or leas under the influence or liquor on the Bth October, and he got into'the company of the accused at a Imardinghouse. They started drinking together, and, later on, Sorenson came buck to the boardinghouse, lay down on a sofa and fell asleep. He was aroused by finding prisoner’s hand in his pocket. When tho accused went away Sorenson found he had been robbed of his money, watch, and knife. Accused had stated that he had only taken 30s from Sorenson, but as he had changed two Jil notes the following day this statement seemed questionable. Tho defence was that the two men were drinking together, and Sorenson got very much intoxicated, while the accused was not altogether sober. O’Brien took Sorenson homo, and also took his money and watch from him to take care of. as Sorenson was in such a condition that ho could not take care of himself, to say nothing of his property. Hr Noave contended that there was no criminal intention in this act, bat he said the accused admitted that subsequently he spent 80s of the money. His Honor said that ae the accused had pleaded not guilty to the major charge of stealing from the person but had admitted his misuse of the money, it was a question for thq Crown Prosecutor whether he would accept the plea of not guilty on the major’ charge when, as Mr Neave had said the accused had never been in trouble before it might be possible, if the probation officers’ report was satisfactory, to admit O’Brien to the benefit of the First Offenders’ Probation Act. Mr Myers agreed to this course, and the accused was remanded until Saturday in order that Mr Armstrong (the probation officer) may make inquiries as to tho character of the accused. ANOTHER CHARGE OP THEPT. A young man named Thomas Hayes pleaded not guilty to a charge of having on October 14th, at Dannevirke. stolen from George Coleman a sovereign case and J 55 10s in cash from the dwellinghouse of Florence Packer. Mr T. M. Wilford appeared for the defence. The case for the Crown was that the two men had been drinking together and accused took Coleman home to his board-ing-house and put him to bed. Subsequently Coleman discovered that he had been robbed, and the sovereign case was found in the prisoner’s sock. Florence Packer, a single woman, who was manageress of the boarding-house or coffoe palace at the time, stated that she saw the accused bring Coleman homo, and she partially undressed him. She took his sovereign case out of his pocket, and as it sprang open she saw its contents— £3 10s in gold. Accused was present, and ho also must have seen the money. Coleman also had two notes for £t each.

George Coleman described himself as a ‘'pensioner,” and would draw 6s 2d per day for life, and also a commission agent. Ho was intoxicated on the day in question, and had ,C‘> 10s on him, which was afterwards missing. In cross-examination by Mr Wiiford the witness said ho had been in trouble for forging about fourteen years ago, but had since lived a reputable life. He admitted that he had stated that he had won .£6OOO in TattersalTs sweep, and the statement was untrue. The fact was that he received a telegram one day, and there were a number of people standing around who wonted to know the contents of the message, and he bantoringly replied. "I’ve won TattersalTs.” Walter Mends stated that the last witness before he went home with the accused had borrowed half a sovereign from him, and had said that he had no money at all. ' Mr Wiiford at the close of the case for the Crown called the accused, who stated that he was twenty-two years of age, and on the day in question he had

taken fourteen drinks. After lie hac; taken Coleman to his room he gave him the sovereign case to "hold for him.” iuu witness .-Hiiu lie was wearing for the first time a pair of trousers which had side pockets, and when, as _ he thought, putting the sovereign ca-se into his pocket he slipped it inside his trousers instead of into his pocket. This was in Miss Packer’s absence. He did not see the throe and a half sovereigns nor the two AT notes, and it wo# not true that this money was handled in his presence. In cross-examination the accused admitted that six years ago he had been convicted of the theft of 7s and released on probation.

Counsel having addressed the Court, his, Honor summed up the evidence. The jury, after debating for nearly an hour and a half, returned a verdict of "not guilty.”