THEFT CASE

New Zealand Times, Volume XLVI, Issue 10507, 7 February 1920, Page 7

THEFT CASE

A JURY’S FINDING. tt r £ RBSEE.VRS POINT FOB APPEAL COURT. PBB PRESS ASSOCIATION. AUCKLAND, February 6- ' At the sitting of the Supreme Court, Charles Joseph Stone, who pleaded not guilty to an indictment containing three counts: (I) 1 That he stole a gold watch from the Thames Hotel on February Hrth, ISltl; (2> that he stole a watch; and (3) that he did receive and have - a watch, well knowing at the timfe ' it J was stolen. '• The evidence for the prosecution was that the watch was missed from the hotel after a fire there, and eleven months later the police interviewed the accused, and- recovered the watch from, a b<3s"stared by Stone. 1 ; The accused said he purchased the Watch from a stranger at the fire. The jury found a verdict of not guilty' on the count of theft, and on the count of,-receiving found: “That Stone did not knoiy at the time he received the watch that it had been stolen,” but they were agreed that ho knew subsequently that it had been stolen. The jury agreed to His Honour adding words to the verdict to the effect that the accused knew, before he was interviewed by the police that the watch bad been titolen. His .Honour said the verdict would ■haVe to go to the Court of Appeal. He agreed -with the accused’s counsel that the fitiding, in law, amounted to not ■guilty. 'He thought that possibly the Court of Appeal would order that the count he altered to fit the finding of the 'jury. Judgment' was reserved for the Court of Appeal, and ■in the meantime The accused was released on bail.