"AN ABSURD DEFENCE”

NZ Truth, Issue 1044, 28 November 1925, Page 7

"AN ABSURD DEFENCE”

STRONG VIEW OF JUDGE, BUT THE JURY ACQUITS ABOUT A SUIT ENDS IN

' (From "Truth's" Special Christchurch Repi-.esentative.) Although Mr. Justice Adams said the case was a simple one and characterised the defence as almost absurd, a Christchurch jury brought m a verdict of not guilty m a case m which Harry Hill, aged 52, was charged with theft.

The article alleged to be stolen was i suit of clothes valued at £4 lbs. It appears that Brian Fitzpatrick, a canvasser, rented a back room m Hill's place and kept some of his stock there. When he returned from a trip he found one of his suits missing. lj-ii -a v i,,j 4...L-0,, +Uo «.,,;* H.ll said he had taken the suit because he was starving. Fitzpatrick took the room oh a monthly tenancy, paying 28/- a week, but he had not paid for some time, as the Hills bought from him and made up rent that way.

Hill was found m a second-hand shop by Detective N. Laugeson, to whom he later made a statement admitting having taken the suit. The defence was that Fitzpatrick owed several months' rent and. that, if the accused had not the ex- ' authority to hawk the goods £ oJd by the * enant> they had at least implied authority, . Despite an adverse .summing up by the Judge the jury, after half an hour, returned.a verdict of not guilty.