BICYCLE THIEF CONVICTED.

Otago Daily Times, Issue 19904, 25 September 1926, Page 24

BICYCLE THIEF CONVICTED.

ONE OF THE LIGHT FINGERED, A SERIES OF THEFTS. REMANDED FOR SENTENCE* “This man has been sneak thieving all over the country. He doesn’t desrve any consideration,” said Mr H. W. Bundle, S.M., in the City Police Court yesterday morning, in remanding Robert Leonard Martin for sentence on charges of theft. The accused was charged with the theft of groceries to the value of 15s sd, the property of John Colquhoun; three bags of wool, valued at £6, the property of Jamas Blair, and a bicycle, valued at £9, the property of Robert Brownlee Johnston. He was also charged with procuring liquor during the currency of a prohibition order. Accused pleaded guilty to all the charges except the one concerning the bicycle, to which ho pleaded not guilty. Chief Detective Lewis said that there was a difficulty in regard to the bicycle. There were two witnesses in court, but ho had sent to Auckland to verify some of the facts, and so far there had been no reply. The accused had said that he had bought the bicycle from a man he knew in Dunedin. He had bought it in Auckland some time ago, and the man had since gone to Australia, according to accused’s story. Robert Brownlee Johnston said that on December 3, 1925, he reported to the police that his bicycle had been stolen. He had never seen it again until last Saturday. Ho had purchased the machine from C. H. Paul, bicycle maker, of Dunedin, and he identified the machine produced as his. He remembered the number which was identical with that on the machine. The bicycle was stolen from the front ot the Chief Post Office, about 11.50 a.m. He was away not more than two minutes. Charles Henry Paul, cycle dealer, gave particulars of a bicycle he had sold to the complainant, which tallied with that one in court. He was able to say that that was the bicycle he had sold to- Johnston. Cross-examined bv the accused, witness said that it was possible for two bicycles to have the same number, but they could not have come from the same factory. Detective Sneddon read a statement by the accused, who said that ho had purchased the bicycle from a man called Fred Milliner, in Auckland. He had worked with Milliner in Dunedin, he said, as an employee of the Drainage Board. Milliner had talked of going to Sydney by the Uliniaroa. Witness added that the accused was in Dalclutha at the time of his arrest. Witness did not know Milliner, although he had made inquiries and found that there was a man of that name who liad worked for tiie City Corporation. He had been told that Milliner had lived in Auckland. The defendant had produced some Union Steam Ship Company’s forms to show that two bicycles had been sent down from Auckland. There was nothing to show whether the bicycle concerned was one of these two machines, however. One of them was a lady’s bicycle, t The Chief Detective said that that was as far as he could take the case. The police had sent to Auckland regarding Milliner, but the information had not come to hand. Accused said that he would prefer the case to go on, otherwise he might bo remanded for weeks pending _ inquiries. In answer to a question he said that he was a married man with six children. It was stated that he was separated from his wife. Accused said that he _ had bought the lady’s bicycle for his girl. It had cost 255. His Worship: Why should you buy this bicycle for your family if you had no money at the time? —I did have about £2O, and besides I got it cheap. The Magistrate: There’s always this mysterious man in these cases of stolen goods. You buy the bicycle in Auckland and you think it is worth while paying the freignt to Dunedin. Yes. It cost £5, and I paid 21s for the two —10s each. His Worship said that he did not believe the accused’s story. ‘‘What about the other charges?” The Chief Detective said he understood that there was a maintenance order against the accused. Hia family was living in tents at Balclutha. He had stolen the wool from Blair’s barn at Shands, and had sold it for £5. He had stolen the groceries about the same time, and he was found to have a bottle of liquor in his possession. Accused was remanded for a week for sentence, the probation officer being asked to make a report in the meantime. “This man has been sneak thieving over the country,” his Worship added. “Ho doesn’t deserve any consideration. • _______________