HABITUAL CRIMINALS.

NZ Truth, Issue 218, 28 August 1909, Page 6

HABITUAL CRIMINALS.

A Dangerous Pair Gaoled.

'Hardened criminal Frederick Dennett put up a big fight .m Christchurch Supreme Court on behalf of himself and <3«orge Nottingham m an. attempt to escape that nightmare of all gaol birds, rtlic indeterminate sentence. Dennett did induce a jury to let them off on one charge, but as they had pleaded guilty m another case this was sufficient to bring, them under the classification of habitual criminals. On the night of July 27, Dennett and Nottingham were discovered by ■fthe police m the office of a local nursing home, and as aToung woman "named Julia Harvey had been maltreated and; searched by two men earlier m the even-* • dng at the corner ; of -Tuam and Barba-does-streets, the burglars were suspected. Miss Harvey could identify neither of her assailants, Mrs Florence Stephensoh saw Nottingham and another man m the vicinity just before the assault, and Thomas Cashien, bookie's runner, recognised Dennett as one of two men he had spoken to . a quarter of a mile from the outrage ; so that the police case wasn't a strong one. Neither of the accused elected to . go into the witness-box, but Dennett made an appeal from the dock. "In the first place, he asked the jury to dismiss from their minds all newspaper reports and go carefully into the evidence. "Newspaper reports," he said, "convict a person BEFORE HE IB COMMITTED AND ' TRIED." lie told the jury frankly a fact that was .well-known and mentioned m evidence — ,tbat they were under arrest on another 'charge. Dennett said the case against •them was one of circumstantial evidence .as to identity. Miss Harvey had identified himself and Nottingham, not as the men who had actually committed the aseauit, but by their appearance and build.* .The prisoner spoke disapprovingly of the -method adopted by the police m identifying accused persons, it, was true they ■Tere placed with a number oi other persons, but these were respectable-looking individuals. Some were clean shaven and 3iad straw hats, and others had whiskers-; but Dennett and Nottingham had ■•been m confinement for a couple of days; ■their clothes were dirty ; their collars and ties had been taken from them. : "Even my braces were taken from me," said Dennett, "and I must have looked disreputable." Miss Harvey didn't see rtheir faces, and though she identified fthem by their disreputable appearance, she couldn't swear that they were the men who assaulted- her. It was true they tooth wore hard\ black hats, but half ol iChristchurch did the same thing. Cashden, who was m the locality that night, mas wearing a hard black hat. There {was inconsistency in' the evidence. Mrs Stephenson swore that" -Nottingham was (wearing a light overcoat, Peeler Torrance said he was wearing a dark overcoat, whilst Cashien said that it was Dennett (Who was wearing the overcoat. Miss Harvey was the most unreliable witness iin the Court that day. In the S.M. Court she said that Nottingham was wearing a light overcoat ; m the Supreme Court she said it was a dark overcoat. The jury returned a verdict of liot guilty. Dennett and Nottingham came up for Sentence for the burglary later. Dennett said his age was 35, and Nottingham 21. Dennett remarked that he had just recently come out of gaol m Auckland, yrherfj he served a heavy sentence of seven years. Through good conduct and industry m prison, however, he was. granted a remission of twelve months, after petitioning the Minister of Justice. Dennett said that after completing his sentence he found his constitution to be iweak. He tried to get employment m 'Auckland, but was KNOWN AS A DESPERATE CRIMINAL &nd failed. He came to Christchurch, meb a number of old friends, and started drinking. He had no intention to commit crime. He was worse than drunk, he was stupid, and didn't know what he was doing. When he was m Christchurch previously, the nursing home used lo be a boarding house, and when he entered he didn't discover his error till too late. Nothing was stolen. If he had intended to commit a crime a man of bis

experience would have had house-break-ing tools with him. He had respectable*, parents, and Was not descended from the criminal class. His father had been Mayor of Hastings for some years. It was Dennett's intention to have emigrated out of the country, if. he had succeeded m getting work. Mr Justice Denniston said that Dennett must have a very poor opinion of the intelligence of the person Jto whom he had addressed his remarks, if he expected him to believe the story of a man with a criminal record like that, of the accused. His Honor read out Dennett's [ little list, the Crown Prosecutor remarking that his record brought him | UNDER THE HABITUAL CRIMINAL ! CLAUSE. . • Nottingham, when asked if ho had anything to say, observed • that he was only a young man, and didn't want to spend his life m gaol. ,; ! The Crown Prosecutor said that Nottingham was sentenced to three years' imprisonment on each of three charges of breaking and entering, sentences to run concurrently. Later he got twelve months for the same offence. Sergt. Johnston, Probation Officer, said he had known Nottingham since the latter's childhood, and the young man was always inclined to thieving. He was before the Court several times as a youth, and was sent to Burnham. He was a native of Rangiora. It seemed to his Honor that they were both of tne class of men that the Legislature had m mind when they introduced this law— men who had made up their minds to be habitual criminals. Botu men were sentenced to three years' imprisonment and declared habitual criminals.