CITY POLICE COURT

Otago Daily Times, Issue 26113, 28 March 1946, Page 5

CITY POLICE COURT

Wednesday, March 27 (Before Mr H. W. Bundle, S.M.)

Alleged Carnal Knowledge Robert Marriott Simpson, aged 28, of Arrowwhenua, Temuka, was charged with carnal knowledge at Lauder of a girl under 16 years of age. Mr C. H. Stevens appeared for the accused.—Chief Detective Hall said that the offence was admitted. but he desired to bring the girl’s mother from Temuka to give evidence In answer to the magistrate, Detective Hall said that the girl was 15 years and 5 months of age.—The accused was remanded till Friday week. Bail was fixed at £SO in the accused’s recognisance and he was required to report daily to the police. Intoxicated Motorist > George Gilmour Bell, a taxi driver, residing at Ranfurly, pleaded .guilty to a charge of being intoxicated while in charge of a motor car.—Senior Sergeant Vaughan said that about 1.25 that morning the accused had been seen by a policeman driving along Princes street. He had no lights on as he turned up Stafford street. The policeman flashed his light for the motorist to stop, but he evidently did not see the light. The motorist tunrned back at Hope street and pulled up at the Provincial Hotel, where he was staying. The constable interviewed him, and then brought him to the police station, where Dr Harty certified him as being intoxicated.—Mr J. G. Warrington, who appeared for the accused, said that he had come to Dunedin to attend his sister’s wedding. The wedding breakfast was at 9 p.m., and a certain amount of liquor had been consumed by •the accused. The accused had served for two years overseas. He was a married man 42 years of age, and his livelihood depended on his taxi business. —The magistrate imposed a fine of £2O, plus £1 Is medical expenses, in default 14 days imprisonment. If application were made to the Minister after three months for the lifting of suspension of the licence the court, he said, might be disposed to recommend the cancellation of the balance of the period. Fourteen days were allowed in which to pay the fine. Alleged Theft of Coal

The action was continued against John Henry Dysaski, who was charged with stealing 12 bags of Birchwood coal, valued at £2 10s, the property of the Westport Coal Company. The accused was defended by Mr J. P. Ward. —Detective C. G. Evans said that at 3 p.m. on February 21 he had gone to the company’s coal depot in Birch street, and had interviewed the accused regarding 12 bags of coal which were missing. The accused said that he did not know anything about the coal, and he denied that he had made an arrangement with Francis Maurice Hancock for the latter to collect the coal. The accused had at first refused to sign a statement, but later he agreed to do so. Witness said that he had told the accused that Hancock had admitted receiving the 12 bags, and that Hancock had said that he had got them from him (the accused). Dysaski also denied that he had rung up Mrs Hancock, despite her evidence that he had.—The accused said that he was 43 years of age. He had been employed by the Westport Company for about six years. He claimed complete innocence of the whole matter. He had not at any time spoken to Mrs Hancock by telephone or otherwise. When Mr Gregory, the depot manager, came to the office he asked witness about 12 bags in a truck which had gone missing, and witness had said that he could not give any explanation. Mr Gregory then said he would send for a detective, and witness told him to do so. He was unable to give any information as to where the 12 bags had gone. He had never had any dealings with Hancock about coal.—Cross-examined by Chief Detective Hall, witness said that when Mr Gregory came to the depot he told him “ he was finished.” Mr Gregory told him to stay in the yard till 5 o’clock, but he had gone before that time. Mr Gregory had told him (witness) before Detective Evans arrived that he knew where the 12 bags of coal had gone.—Laurence James McDermott, a clerk in the Westport Coal Company’s office at the coal depot, gave evidence regarding the checking of deliveries.—The magistrate said that the actions of the accused when ordered back to the coal depot were hardly those of an innocent man. The obligation on the Crown was to prove a person’s guilt beyond reasonable doubt. There was a grave suspicion, but not enough to justify a conviction. In view of the fact that Hancock was an acomplice his evidence must be very strongly corroborated, and he could not accept Mrs Hancock’s evidence as sufficient corroboration. It might well be—and the probabilities wer»—that it was the accused who had rung up Mrs Hancock, but it was just possible that it was someone els'e. After listening to all the facts he had some slight doubt about the guilt of the accused, and the accused must receive the benefit of that doubt

Guilty of Receiving

Francis Maurice Hancock, who nad pleaded guilty on Monday to receiving 12 bags of Birchwood coal on February 21, knowing that the coal had been dishonestly obtained, came up for sentence, which had been deferred pending the hearing of the case against Dysaski.—The accused was fined £lO, in default 14 days' imprisonment, and was ordered to make restitution of £2 10s, the value of the coal.