THEFT CHARGES

Otago Daily Times, Issue 23106, 4 February 1937, Page 2

THEFT CHARGES

"A SHABBY OFFENCE" EX-SCHOOL TEACHER CONVICTED Two charges of theft from Edwin Forsythe Lloyd, one of £2 on December 9 and the other of £1 on December 15, were preferred against Catherine Nancy Russell, an exschool teacher, in the City Police Court before Mr J. R. Bartholomew, S.M., yesterday. The accused, who pleaded not guilty, was represented by Mr I. B. Stevenson. Chief Detective Young said that Mrs Lloyd was a dressmaker, living at 44 Crosby street, Mornington, the accused being one of her customers. On December 4 the accused called on Mrs Lloyd concerning a dress she was making, and paid £1 for a previous dress. Mrs Lloyd put the £1 in an open dish, and left the room for a short period. Later, after the accused had left, Mrs Lloyd looked for the money but could not find it. On December 9 the accused again called on Mrs Lloyd. On that date the sum of £4 in notes had been left in a desk in the room. After the accused had left, it was discovered that a £ 1 note was missing from the desk, and also £1 from a cashbox. A third call was made on December 15 by the accused, who was now under suspicion, and before she arrived several marked notes were left in the desk. When the accused called Mrs Lloyd purposely left the room, and when the accused had gone one of the £1 notes had disappeared, as well as some silver from a cashbox. The matter was reported to the police, and the following day Acting Detective Brown called on the accused, who at first denied any knowledge of the missing money, but later admitted that she had taken £ 1 and some silver the previous day. She produced some notes which she said she had taken, but they were not the stolen notes. The accused subsequently went to the Lloyds and said that she had been advised by the police to pay back the money to save further trouble. This, however, was quite incorrect, for the police had made no such statement. The accused admitted having taken £3, and pointed out to the complainant the pigeonhole in the desk from which she had taken the money.

Evidence in support of the chief detective's statement was given by Mabel Catherine Lloyd and Edwin Forsythe Lloyd. Acting Detective Brown said that, in company with Detective Wells, he called on the accused and told her that on the previous day a trap had been set for her by the complainant. The accused admitted having taken a £1 note and some silver, butdenied having taken anything else. She also produced two £ 1 notes and some silver and said that that was all the money she had. She pleaded with witness to leave as she was very anxious that her parents should not know of the trouble?. She went to the detective office later in the day and then denied having taken any money at all. She said to Detective Taylor that if she had not admitted one of the offences they wculd have had nothing on her, as no marked notes were found in her possession. Witness reminded her that she had already admitted the theft of £ 1 and some silver. Subsequently the accused admitted having taken £1 and £2. Mr Stevenson said that the defence was a complete denial that the money had been stolen. The accused was an educated woman of a highly respectable family, and the allegations made against her had caused her considerable shock. She had been on friendly terms with the Lloyds for a number of years, and hsd no reason to question their good faith when they stated that the money had disappeared, but knowing Lloyd's method of handling money, she suggested that the money had not been properly counted, and that it was not lost at all. There was no evidence in support of the charges counsel submitted, apart from the alleged admission of guilt, for although the trap consisted of marked notes, none of them had been found in the accused's possession. She lived with her parents and was most anxious to keep the matter from them, and for that reason had agreed to go to the police station in an endeavour to clear the matter up.

Evidence was given by the accused, who denied having at any time admitted taking any of the money. The magistrate said that the case against the accused was complete on both charges, for she had made distinct admissions of the thefts on three distinct occasions.

Mr Stevenson said that the woman came of a respectable family and was well educated, having at one time been a teacher at a kindergarten, which had closed down during the depression. She bore an excellent character, and her lapse must have been the result of sudden temptation. In view of her position, counsel asked that the accused's name be suppressed. The magistrate, describing the offences as a shabby type of theft, convicted and fined the accused £2 on the first charge, and convicted her and ordered her to come up lor sentence within 12 months, if called upon, on the second, on condition that she made restitution. The application for the suppression of her name was out of the question.