ATTEMPTED ROBBERY

Otago Daily Times, Issue 21360, 13 June 1931, Page 8

ATTEMPTED ROBBERY

JEWELLER AND WIFE ASSAULTED TWO MEN BEFORE LOWER COURT HEARING OF EVIDENCE CONCLUDED ACCUSED REMANDED TILL r MONDAY The sequel to a desperate attempt by two men on the night of May 11 to rob the premises of Mr W. G. Rossiter in , George street, combined with a violent attack on Mr Rossiter and his wife, was heard in the City Police Court yesterday, when Thomas William Wilson and Rupert Saunders appeared, charged with having assaulted Walter Gabriel Rossiter with intent to rob him, and with having intentionally done actual bodily harm to Jane Rossiter, Mr White represented. Saunders and Mr H. Baron appeared for Wilson. Mr H. Wi Bundle was the presiding magistrate. DETAILS OF ASSAULT.

Walter Gabriel Rossiter, who gave his age as 73 years and that of- his wife at 65 years, identified a plan produced by the police as that of his premises in George street. There was a large and a small window in the front of his shop, and there was a show case just inside the door, jk small door at the back of the counter, led from the shop into a recess, from which two doors opened—one into • the living room and one on to the stairway. The top half of the front door of the shop was glass, the bottom half being of wood. Witness lived on the premises with his wife and daughter. About 11.20 p.m. on May 11 he was working in his shop when his attention was attracted by the blind on the outside of the front window being disturbed. He opened the door and looked out, but he could see no one; on turning to go inside again, however, he saw the accused, Wilson, in a crouching position. Wilson said, “I am very bad," and witness told him he had better go home. The accused Saunders then approached front the North-End, and drew up' alongside witness. Witness suspected danger* and attempted to close the door, but one, of the men put his foot inside and prevented his doing so. Witness was not strong 'enough to keep 'the men out, and they pushed their way inside and closed the door behind them; Toey immediately attacked him, and it seeihed to him that'both of them were holding his mouth'. He managed to cry for help, but the two men pushed him towards the counter, and whilst the taller man (Saunders) held him down on the floor the other went behind the counter. Witness, "still being held by Saunders, was calling for help, and the shorter man (Wilson) in the. meantime had made for the recess at the rear of the shop. The taller man was neither brutal nor cruel—he confined his attention to holding witness down. The pmaller man then returned to the shop, And, leaning • over witness, stuck his fingers down his (witness’s) throat. and worked them around like a corkscrew. Witness could not call any more; he was completely done. 1 and he heird' Wilson say, “ I’ve fixed them, they’ll hot bother us,” TIMELY, ASSISTANCE. - Wilson then made for the window, but he ; had only been there about a minute when witness heard a crash at the front door, and someone enter the shop. At f this interruption Saunders stood up, and witness arose and went through the doorway at the rear of the- shop to find his wife lying insensible in a pool of blood .near the foot of the stairway. Witness knew that’the shorter man had not gone out through the front door, and he immediately rushed upstairs to make a search. He could find nothing, but he 1 noticed that the window of the bathroom had been „ broken open. On returning downstairs he saw the tall man standing with Mr Yennail and a constable. The man said to him: “You have never seen me. before, Mr Rossiter," to which witness replied, “I shall never forget you, and I never want to see you again,” Before the accused entered his shop, witness considered that he would be carrying a stock valued at £3OOO or £4OOO. There were eight trays of, assorted rings in the window, one of them being valued at, 250gns. The jewellery removed, but later restored, was valued at £9OO. Three fl notes and a 10s note had vanished from a. till in the counter, hut these had not been discovered. From the bathroom window to the ground was a distance of about 20 feet. In reply to a query by Mr White, witness stated that he was certain that ' Saunders had taken no part in the assault on Mrs Rossiter. Moreover, he had had every opportunity of handling witness roughly, hut he refrained from doing so. « To .Mr Baron: He did not recognise the smaller man, although he considered v he could identify him by his voice, A SUMMONS FOR HELP."

Rosie Mary Rossiter, daughter of the previous witness, stated that on the night of May 11, her mother had retired about 9.30 o’clock, .whilst she went to bed about an hour (later. About 11.20 o’clock 1 she heard her father’s voice calling for help, and imagining that he had taken ill, she called to her mother, who went downstairs, calling to Mr Rossiter as she did so. Witness was about to follow her mother when she heard someone running and a scuffle at the foot of j the stairs, and realising that something was wrong, she ran out on to the shop veranda and called for help. She saw ' > two men come from the other side of the road, and heard the glass of the front door break. She was assisted downstairs by one of the men, and on reaching the . foot of the stairs, she found her mother lying on the floor in an unconscious state. At a later date a number of rings that

Lad been recovered from various parts f of the house, were handed to witness. So far as she knew, all the jewellery that had been taken Lad been recovered. Her mother’s mind' was still a perfect. blank with regard to the occurrence, and she had no recollection whatever of what had happened. Witness identified a hat prbduced by the police as one which she had found on the premises. y' PAINFUL INJURIES.

Dr N. C. Speight stated that at 11.45 pint on May 11, he was called to the premises of Mr Rossiter in George street. On examining Mr Rossiter he found him to be suffering from a wound in the tongue.and abrasions of the tissues of the mouth and throat. His wife was suffering from shock caused by injuries. The left side of her face was badly swollen, being almosj three tiraes its normal size; her left eye was completely closed, and. there was, on the left side of her forehead, a deep cut which was bleeding freely. Witness considered that the swelling had been caused by a direct blow. Cross-examined by Mr Baron: Witness *aid that it was possible, but not probable, that Mrs Rossiter’s injuries were caused by a fall. Dr F. Hodgkin, a house surgeon at the Dunedin Hospital, stated .that when Mr Rossiter was admitted to the Hospital he was suffering from shock and a septic mouth, the result of bruising, and laceration of the mouth. The injuries were consistent with their having been caused as Mr Rossiter had stated. A SEVERE SHOCK.

Dr P. C- Anderson, house surgeon at the Dunedjn Hospital, stated that Mrs Eossiter was admitted to the Hospital in a fiemi-conoscious and shocked condition, and was unable to say how she received her injuries. _ There was a lacterated wound on the right side of the forehead and extensive bruises and swelling on the left side of the face. In witness’s opinion the injuries were caused by Mrs Eossiter receiving a heavy blow and being knocked down. It was improbable that the injuries could have been caused by Mrs Eossiter falling against the banisters. After she was discharged from Hospital Mrs Eossiter continued to receive treatment, and she was still in such a physical and mental condition that she could not attend the court proceedings.—To Mr White: Witness stated

that the injuries could have been caused by one blow. The wound on the forehead was close to the hair, and appeared to have been made by a blunt instrument. The gash might have been caused by Mrs Rossiter striking the banisters. A STARTLING DISCOVERY.

Albert Victor Smart stated that on May 11 he obtained a room at the Criterion Hotel. Shortly after 11 p.m. he was walking along Princes street with one, Kenneth Harle, and when he reached Moray place north he turned to go back, walking back on the west side of George street. When he was opposite Mr Rossiter’s shop he saw Miss Rossiter climbing out of a window. She beckoned him to come over, and told him that there was something wrong in the shop. He looked into the shop and saw one man lying on the floor, another standing at his feet, and a,third man behind the show case. Witness then asked his friend to get the police. The man on the floor had blood on his forehead, and seemed to be lying quite still. Mr Vennall then came across the road and broke open the door of the shop, witness immediately going to get a policeman. When witness returned Mr Venn ail had one man, Saunders, in n corner. He then went to the back of the shop and saw Mrs Rossiter lying in the passage moaning, and he went back into the shop and told the others to get a doctor. The third man witness had seen had disappeared by the time the constable arrived. Witness then went outside, the shop and climbed on to the veranda and helped Miss Rossiter to get back into her room. When witness re-entered the shop the man who was handcuffed said, “Hello! How are you?” That man was Saunders. . He could not describe the other man who had been in the shop.—To Mr White, witness said he could not be certain whether Saunders was behind the counter or not when he first, looked into the shop, as he was partly hidden by a show case. Kenneth Harle gave evidence in support of the previous witness’s statements. A SUCCESSFUL “ BLUFF "

Charles Vennall, a watchmaker with premises opposite those o%Mr Rossiter, said that in company with another man he was coming downstairs from his workshop about 11.20 p.m. on May 11 when he saw two men in the middle of the road who said that there was murder being committed in Mr Rossiter’s shop. As he went across the road he could see Miss Rossiter standing on the veranda, calling for help, and on looking into the shop he could see Mr Rossiter on the floor with a man, whom he afterwards identified as Saunders, attacking him, and holding his hand across his mouth. Witness smashed the glass of the door with a screwdriver which he carried in his pocket, and, undoing the Yale lock, opened the door. He challenged Saunders, and, pointing the screwdriver at him, ; told him to put up his hands, which he did. Saunders appeared to make a move towards his righthand coat pocket, but stood still again when witness threatened to blow his brains out. Saunders appeared to be very sorry for himself, and he remarked that he supposed he would get something for what he had done. While he had Saunders bailed up, he heard two panes of glass smashed upstairs. After Saunders was handcuffed witness rushed upstairs and, picked up about 50 diamond rings off the bathroom floor; he later picked up two handfuls of rings off the shop floor, v ARRIVAL OF POLICE. . Constable M'Grail stated that whilst on duty in George street on the night of May 11 he received some information which sent him to Mr Rossiter’s shop. On arrival- he saw the witness Vennall holding Saunders up With a screwdriver, and was told by him that Saunders was the man who had attacked’ Mr Rogsiter. Saunders denied that he was concerned in the assault, and explained his presence in the shop by stating that he had been pushed into the shop with the crowd, Saunders was handcuffed, and witness went upstairs. He heard glass break on two occasions, and on looking through the bathroom win- 1 dow he saw a man getting through the window of a dental surgery * opposite. Saunders was asked who hie mate was, but he denied that he had a mate, and asserted that he knew nothing about the occurrence. A search , was made of the dental parlours, but no trace of anyone could be found. 1 •' ;

To Mr White: Saunders gave notrouble at all when he was arrested. He appeared to have been drinking, AN UNCERTAIN WITNESS.

Albert Henry Ramsay, a taxi' driver, said that he kept'his car on the Moray place east rank. , On May 11, in consequence of something he heard, he followed a sergeant df\police down to the Octagon. When he got 'to Sprosen’s corner he saw a man on the verandas in the Octagon, moving towards the Oban Hotel. Just about that time he saw a constable with a man handcuffed to him. Witness then identified Saunders as the man he had seen on the verandas. —Cross-examined by Mr Baron witness said that the man on the veranda was wearing a blue suit and had no hat.—At the . conclusion of witness’s evidence the magistrate said that unmaking an identification the' witness should always be perfectly sure in his mind that he could make such an identification, for it was obvious that in the present instance he had made a mistake, Saunders, whom he had identified, as the man' on the veranda, having at that time been handcuffed to the constable in Mr Rossiter’s shop. MEDICAL ASSISTANCE.

Robert Marshall, licensee of the European'Hotel, stated that in consequence of information he received he _ went to Mr Rossiter’s shop and on going into the living room he saw a number of rings lying on the floor. Mrs Rossiter was lying at the foot of the stairs covered in blood,, and after she was attended to by _ Dr Speight, witness took her to the Hospital. When witness saw Mr Rossiter he was bleeding at the mouth. POLICE EVIDENCE.

Constable Gjerson stated that on the evening of May 11 he was on plain clothes duty in the vicinity of, Dowling street. \ At 10.40 p.m. he was standing at the parapet on the top of the steps when he saw the two accused walk above him and stand looking down towards Stewart Dawsons jewellery shop. He asked them what they were doing and-told them he was a constable. They moved away shortly afterwards. —To Mr White, witness said that he thought the men were drunk and told them to go home. —Inspector Cummings stated that the two accused admitted having'spoken to the constable. Detective Gibson said that at 1.10 a.m. on May 12 he was standing in front oj. Mr Rossiter’s shop with Sergeant Wade. There were a number of people standing nearby, - one of them being the accused Wilson, who was wearing a dark suit and had no hat. Later in the day witness again saw Wilson standing in Hanover street reading a newspaper. . Witness asked him who he was, and he stated his name was Wilson, and on being questioned further, said he would go to the Police Station with witness. Wilson then asked if they wanted to see him in connection with the occurrence of the previous evening. Wilson was told that it was alleged that he had beeiv - in Saunder’s company the previous night; and had assaulted Mr and Mrs Rossiter. He denied having had anything to do with the assault. At the time .of his arrest Wilson was wearing a light coloured suit and a light felt hat. Detective Turgis corroborated ail the evidence given by the previous witness. The accused Wilson stated that he had come from Invercargill about 10 days previously. During the time he was in Dunedin the accused, by his statement, said he had slept in railway carnages and in the Gardens. When arrested he had over £lO in his possession. Detective Power gave evidence of having found a pearl and sapphire ring lying at the back of Mr Roseiter’s shop, about an hour after Saunders was arrested. Detective Sergeant Nuttall stated that in company with Detective Jenvey, he had visited Wilson’s lodgings on the evening of May 12, and had found a blue suit (produced), with several small tears in the trousers, and a pair of shoes, cut about the toes and showing a graze in which ground glass could distinctly be seen. Witness later arrested the accused, who, after receiving the Customary warning, made a statement. A statement was also received from Saunders. Witness had examined the window through which Wilson said he made his ! escape. This window was 18 feet from the ground and at right angles to it, seven feet away, was another window in Myers’s buildings. Both windows were broken. WILSON’S VERSION. In his statement to the police, Wilson said that after drinking with Saunders on the afternoon of May 11, the two of them met again in the evening, and after wandering about town they stopped in the vicinity of Mr Rossiter’s shop. Saunders remarked, “That is Rossiter’s: what about giving it a go? ” They both waited

to the door of the shop, and seeing the door open, the accused pushed his way in. followed by Saunders. Mr Rossiter was in the'shop, and the accused grabbed him, by the throat, but he could not see what Saunders was doing. _ While he was wrestling with Mr Rossiter, he heard screams behind him, and just then the door of the shop was opened. He released Mr Rossiter, and Saunders rushed in from the back of the shop, saying that he had knocked a woman out, adding “ Grab what you can and get out.” Saunders then rushed to the window, and grabbing a tray of rings, said “ Go. for your life.” The accused took the rings from Saunders and rushed to the stairs, at the foot of which he saw a woman on the floor apparently unconscious. He rushed upstairs, and, kicking the bathroom window out, he got'through and jumped aero® to another building. 1 He lost all the rings either when going upstairs or at the top of the stairs* When he got on to the other building, he had to kick in another window to gain entrance, and, passing through the building, he got out on to the roof of the veranda that faces the Octagon, climbed down a pole into the Octagon, and walked round into George street, where he joined the crowd of people there. He went to the door ofthe shop, but was pushed back by a constable; but later he was inside the shop when it Was suggested that the building should be surrounded. After getting home that night he found that the blue suit he had been wearing was dirty and that the trousers were badly torn. He repaired the tear with sticking plaster. To get away he considered he must have jumped about 12 feet from Rossiter’s building. When kicking in the window of the bathroom Tie scratched the toe of one of his black shoes, and during the scuffle with Mr Rossiter he was bitten on the ring finger. The suit and black shoes shown him at the Police Station were his property, and were worn by him the night he and Saunders attempted to rob Mr Rossiter’s shop. Witness added that he did not strike Mrs Rossiter. It was Saunders who had done this, and he had heard her scream when she was struck. STATEMENT BY SAUNDERS.

Saunders stated to the police that after drinking during the afternoon with a man whom he had previously met at Forbury Park, he met him again in the evening when, after walking about for some time, the two of them repaired to Mr Rossiter a shop. The man he was with walked to the window and unhooked the blind over it. Just then a man in the shop opened the door about a foot, and immediately the other man pushed his way inside. Saunders, according to his statement, followed, and although the man in the shop tried td keep him out he got inside, but in doing so he came to grips with the man and he thought it was then that he fell on the floor. The accused realised that the man he was with was up to no good, and, becoming frightened, he would have \ liked to get out and run away. He did not remember if Mr Rossiter called out whilst the two of them were on the floor, but the other man was away in another toom. r He returned to the shop, however, and after making some remark about having fixed the woman,' he jumped on Mr Rossiter. At this time, Saunders heard a woman screaming, and the other man jumped up and ran out of the shop. Just then the front door of the shop ,waa forced in, and a man put something to his head, threatening to blow his brains out if he moved. The accused was certain that he did not strike or injure Mr Rossiter in any way, and he did not put his fingers into his-mouth. If a woman was struck, nobody but the other man could have done it, as he (Saunders) never left the shop. He did not go round the counter or touch any jewellery, and he did know if the other man had done so, as he lost sight of him from the time they went into the shop until he returned and said that he Had fixed the woman up. When he was held up by the man who entered the shop, the accused realised that something was wrong and that he had no right to be there. Detailing hip movements prior to May 11, Saunders stated that after signing off the steamer Waihemo at Auckland on April 21 he came to Dunedin a week later. While in Dunedin be had done a fair' amount of drinking with seafaring men, arid on the day of the occurrence he had been drinking all day. The man with whom he went into Mr Rossiter’s shop was only a casual acquaintance, and the accused did not even know his name or where he lived. At the time he -went into Rossiter’s shop he was in a muddled state with liquor, and had he been sober he ■would never have been mixed up in the affair. He did not go into the shop with the idea of stealing anything or doing anyone any harm, and if anyone said that he had injured Mr Rossiter or Mrs Rossiter (that was not the truth. ACCUSED REMANDED.

At the request of counsel, who stated that they wished to consult their clients, 'the accused were remanded until Monday.