CITY POLICE COURT

Otago Daily Times, Issue 22630, 23 July 1935, Page 2

CITY POLICE COURT

Monday, July 22. (Before Mr H. W. Bundle, S.M.) DRUNKENNESS. A first offender for drunkenness was fined 10s, in default 24 hours’ impnsonnß'nt' THEFT OF OIL. David Albert Smart pleaded guilty to the theft of two bottles of lubricating oil, valued at 6s. the property of Maddox and Watson. He also pleaded guilty to a charge of being an unlicensed motor driver.—Senior Sergeant Packer said the accused drove a motor lorry along Crawford street and stopped at Maddox and Watson’s service station, where he purchased some petrol. During the temporary absence of the manager the accused took two bottles of lubricating oil and placed them in his vehicle. He was seen by a passer-by, however, and when he was interviewed two hours later the two empty bottles were found in his vehicle. —The accused, who said he was in the wood and coal business, stated that he had committed the offence on the spur of the moment. He admitted that it was an act of stupidity qn bis part.—The magistrate said that it was not merely a stupid act, for a wood and coal merchant who would stoop to petty thieving was not to be trusted around people's properties. In view of the fact that he had not previously been before the court in a case involving dishonesty, he would be convicted and ordered to come up for sentence within 12 months if called upon. On the charge of being an unlicensed driver, he would be fined ss. ADMITTED TO PROBATION. Robert Leslie Bowles pleaded guilty to a charge of stealing 11 gramophone records, valued at £1 13s, the property of the Otago Education Board. He appeared for sentence on charges of stealing blinds and curtains from unoccupied bouses—Chief Detective Young said that the additional charge against the accused was similar to the others. The accused stole the records from the Kaikorai School. In all, 47 records were stolen from the building, but the accused admitted the theft of only 11. —Mr B. A. Quelch said the accused's circumstances made the question of restitution somewhat difficult, but if an order were made the accused would do his best to fulfil it. —Chief Detective Young said that the blinds had been recovered in good order, but the curtains were now of little value. The records which the accused admitted having stolen were recovered in good condition^ —The magistrate said that he had considerable hesitation in placing the accused on probation as the charges involved a despicable type of theft. Taking the probation officer’s report into consideration, however, he would admit the accused to probation for two years on the first charge, a condition being that restitution to the extent of £2 10s was made and the accused paid 12s, the costs of the prosecution, the whole to be paid at the rate of 3e per week. On the other charges he would be convicted and discharged. MAINTENANCE. Alexander M'Culloch was charged with the disobedience of a maintenance order in respect of bis children, the arrears to date amounting to £sl 6s. —Senior Sergeant Packer said that the defendant had not tried to keep up payments on the order, and the magistrate, remarking that the defendant did not appear to show any interest in his children, sentenced him to on e month’s imprisonment. William Tate was charged with the disobedience of a maintenance order in respect of his two children. The defendant also sought a variation of the current order of 30s a week. —After hearing evidence the magistrate said that it was obvious that the defendant had no means and dismissed the information regarding the disobedience of the order. The arrears over £lO were remitted, and the order was reduced to £1 Is per week. Francis Paranthoine, who was charged with the disobedience of a maintenance order in respect of bis wife, was sentenced to one month’s imprisonment, to be released on the payment of £lO. John Riely was charged with the disobedience of a maintenance order, and was sentenced to 14 days’ imprisonment, to be released on the payment of £4 10a.