THEFT OF GOODS

Otago Daily Times, Issue 23370, 9 December 1937, Page 2

THEFT OF GOODS

“A PROFESSIONAL SHOPLIFTER ” ABNORMALITY PLEA FAILS TWO YEARS’ DETENTION ORDERED "A professional shoplifter ” was the description applied to Leonie Evelyn MacMahon, aged 34, of Christchurch, by Chief Detective Young when she appeared before Mr J. R. Bartholomew, S.M., in the City Police Court yesterday on 12 charges of stealing goods of a total value of £lO5 3s 3d from 11 city stores. The accused had a record of 73 convictions for this type of offence, he said. The magistrate said that, in view of this record, appeals for leniency on the grounds that the accused was abnormal in this respect could not be considered, and he sentenced her to a term of two years’ reformative detention. MacMahon was represented by Mr J. B. Thomson. “ This woman is a professional shoplifter,” said Chief Detective Young. Some years ago she held a good position in Dunedin, but she lost it, he understood, in consequence of some irregularity concerning cash. Since then she had apparently done little else than shoplift ing. Since 1926 she had appeared to answer no fewer than 73 charges of this nature. Her first appearance was in Auckland, where she was sentenced to three years’ detention in the Borstal on 22 charges. In December, 1932, she appeared on 42 charges in Christchurch, and was sentenced to three years’ reformative detention. Apparently she served the full three years. She was released in December, 1935, but on July 9, 1936, she appeared before the Christchurch court again • on eight charges. She was then ordered to come up for sentence if called upon within five years. The Method Adopted

The accused occupied a flat in Christchurch, the chief detective continued. She came to Dunedin on November 25 with a number of large suitcases, apparently for no other purpose than to commit a series of raids on Dunedin shops. Suspicion soon fell upon her, and she was seen to take a coat from one large store. Her system was to take two bags and a quantity of paper and string. She would take an article into the cloakroom and wrap it up in paper, and then repeat the procedure. She was watched in this particular store and handed over to the police. A search of her lodgings resulted in the discovery of a large quantity of new goods, which were identified as stolen.

The extent of the accused’s operations, Mr Young said, was indicated by the fact that in about one week in Dunedin she had stolen goods to the value of £lO5. Everything had been recovered in good order, and the chief detective stated that the accused had given the police every assistance. But for that assistance it would not have been possible to identify a number of the articles found. Mr Thomson said that the chief detective’s description of the accused as a professional shoplifter was scarcely justified. She had not stolen from shops as a means of livelihood or for personal gain, and he was instructed that she did not go into shops with the idea of filling receptacles with -'tolen goods. She had come to Dunedin with three suitcases and a hatbox, and her idea had been to buy goods which could be obtained much more cheaply in Dunedin than was possible in Christchurch. She had arrived in Dunedin on November 18, not on November 25, for a holiday following a severe illness. Plea of Abnormality “ It is customary in these cases to plead abnormality,” Mr Thomson continued, “ and this is an instance in which such a plea is thoroughly justified.” The accused’s story was that when she wag in shops she experienced an irresistible impulse to take things. She was a well-edu-cated woman, having been to a university, and she was well connected. She had never attempted to sell any of the goods that she had stolen, although many of the articles were quite useless to her. It was a definite case of a woman labouring under some species of abnormality at times, a fact which was supported by her record. She had been before the court three times and had served two long terms of detention. To a woman of her upbringing that was a tei’rible experience, but it had not been sufficient to prevent another lapse.

Mr Thomson suggested that the accused did not act with deliberate criminal intent. “ Few shoplifters have been dealt with as severely as this woman has been,” he said, “ and the only explanation of her behaviour is abnormality.” The accused’s family lifs had been a rather tragic one, he added, and she was now convalescing from a series of three' serious operations which she had undergone in Christchurch in April. This was a case in which punishment of the extreme type had been tried and had proved useless, and he asked the court to consider imposing a term of probation with strict provisions, one of which should be that she should stay in Christchurch. She was known in that city and there was little likelihood of her being able to continue this practice there. Mr Thomson drew the court’s notice to the fact that this was the accused’s first lapse since she was released by the court in Christchurch 18 months ago. Chief Detective Young said that the conditions under which the accused was living in Christchurch were not satisfactory. She was living in a flat and the only friend she appeared to have was a married man. Mr Thomson: That is going too far. The man has been separated from his wife for some time, and there is nothing known against him. The accused has friends and relatives in Christchurch. "A Tragic Case” “ This is a tragic and extraordinary case,” the , magistrate said. “It is tragic that an educated and intelligent young woman should persist in this type of crime. Her record, it is stated by counsel, suggests abnormality, but in view of her record there is only one course for the court to take.” Imposing a sentence on the major charge of two years’ reformative detention, the magistrate said that this was not so much a punishment as a deterrent. The interests of the public had to be safeguarded, and this sentence would make it possible to study indications of her abnormality. She was convicted on each of the other charges.