Supreme Court.-Criminal Sessions.

Otago Witness, Issue 1795, 17 April 1886, Page 19

Supreme Court.- Criminal Sessions.

, Monday, April 12. ...(Before, his Honor Mr Justice Williams.) - .His Honor Mr Justice Williams took his seat on the Bench. »t 10 a.m. IMiBGAIXY PAWNING. Alfred Hotley (aged 46) pleaded Guilty to five indictments charging him with illegally pawning watches and jewellery the property of David Dawson, for whom he was acting as , The Crown Prosecutor : The value of the 'property : dealt with by the prisoner altogether jeasdtetween £60 and £70, but the amount so 'ilfarnfl'these oharges is concerned is between £10 •aadf £12. They are only a few of a number of ■ohwgeS that might have been brought against • the' -'prisoner. Detective Bain, who was in charge of the case, got tired ef proceeding with the oharges, thero were so many of them. ■ t His,» Honor • You.seem to have been convicted, prisoner, a good many times previously, but for offences of an altogether different nature from the offences to which you have just now pleaded " 'gailty. JL shall give the fact of your having been previously convicted some weight in the sentence • lam about to passj but I shall certainly not give it such weight as I should if your previous •offences had been of the same, nature as your preaent.one. The Bentencet>f the Conrt is that you b^e kept in penal servitude in the Colony of New Zealand for the term of three years. , , INDECBKT ASSAULT. .r . Peter Silyersten was indicted for having, on March '19, .indecently assaulted his daughter, Maria Silversten, aged 12 years. - /; The Prisoner (who was undefended) said : Before God I am guilty, but not before man. . .The following .witnesses gave evidence on behalf of the Crown :— Maria Silversten, Margaret Silversten, Lawrence Newman, and Alexandor Henderson. Newman, in the course of his evidence, said : lam a Dane, and come from Copenhagen. The prisoner is a countryman of mine. There are a good many people do not think, .the man is in his right mind, and I think that myself, because he will do anything for the , love of God. He does not mind any pay — only just enough to live on. He will work from morning till night, and has very strange ways. He haa always-been a very good man. I took him to be a good, honest man, and would trust him with any amount of money : there would be no fear of his running away. i The Prisoner called no witnesses, and iv ad- , dressing the jury said he hoped that God would give them wisdom enough to look into the case and judge aright. His Honor: Prisoner, the offence of which you have been convicted — that of indecent assault qpon your own daughter — is a hideous and diabolical one. I shall pass the heaviest sentence which the law permits me to pass for the crime of indeoent. assaults upon females. The sentence of the Court is that, you be kept to penal servitude in the Colony of New Zealand for the term of seven years. LARCENr. John Wilson pleaded Guilty to a charge of stealing £10, the property of Henry M'Gawn. (Sentenced to three months' hard labour. STEALING FHOM THE PERSON. George. Berry was indicted for stealing at Outram, on March 6, the sum of £7 from the person of John Burton. The prisoner pleaded Not guilty, and was defended by Mr Farnie. The case for the Crown was that prosecutor, on the date mentioned, was in the Outram Hotel at Outram ; that the prisoiier and a man named Montgomery began pulling him about, and then left the room. Immediately afterwards Burton found that his pocket-book was missing, and gave information to Constable M'Kenzie. The latter heard the prisoner making a noise in an outhouse, and on seaching the place he found a £5 note there concealed. The prisoner was thereupon arrested, and when before the justices he made a statement that the money was given to him. Evidence was given by the Prosecutor, John M'Gregor, and Constable M'Kenzie. 'No witnesses were called for the defence. The jury having been absent a short time, The Foreman said: We find the, prisoner f* Guilty" as an, accomplice, your Honor. I might state that the jury are unanimously of the opinion that more than one was engaged in the robbery. Hiß Honor : Yes, I think that was very likely. His ' Honor passed a sentence of 12 months' . imprisonment, with hard labour. I „..,/- UNLAWFULLY WOUNDING. Benjamin Rudd pleaded Guilty to an indictment', charging him with having on the sth January fired a gun at John Waldie with intent , t» fnnict grievous bodily harm. Mr J. Macgregor defended the prisoner. .. The Crown Prosecutor, in opening the case, {^id, that Waldie, ,the prosecutor, was a farmer ' living at the Half-way Bush, and was also a The prisoner lived somewhere in ' the : >eighboarho6d of Flagstaff. On the day mentioned in the indictment the prosecutor and one Alfred Jopes were riding together along 'the road towards Flagstaff. They saw the prisoner at work at a stonewall alongside the road, and as they passed .him the prosecutor said to him ," Go it, Uncle Ben ; you are working hard." Immediately he said this the prisoner took up a Btone and threw it at Waldie, who turned back and asked him for an ' explanation. Prisoner then rushed towards his gun, picked it up, •and aimed it at Waldie. Portion of the Bhot struck him— some in the hand, some went through his clothes into his pocket, but the principal portion struck the horse on its hindquarters. Waldie and Jones then turned back and spoke to the prisoner, but as they saw he was in the act of again loading his gun they rode off and gave information to the feohce, . Prisoner, on being interrogated by Btable Mfljaughlin, denied all knowledge of the Matter— denied having shot at Wa)die or having fired off a gun. Subsequently, however, he admitted having fired the shot, but said it did not" strike Waldie, as he was a long distance off at the time, and gave as his reason for discharging. th.p weapon that Waldie had insulted him. Wftldie would give ovjdenoe that he only knew be prisoner by the name of " Uncle Ben," and hat his observation was intended to be of a riendly nature. After evidence for the proseufclcra had be«n given in the Polioe Court, the

prisoner said: "Ml- Waldio has insulted me times and times. I have been knocked down by his bullocks." That was the only excuse he had to offer for his conduct.

John Waldie and Constable M'Laughlin gave evidence for the prosecution.

Robert Chisholtn, called by the accused's counsel, said he had found the prisoner an honest, mduhtriou.<«, and inoft'enbive man.

William J. Crofts (manager for Butler Bros.), Robert Miller, John Hornby, and Robert Ritchio also gave evidence respecting the character of the accused, who, in their opinion, was a very quiet ami respectable man. Mr Mivcgregor,in addressing tho jury,remarked that the gist of tho charge was the intention to do bodily harm, and it would be for the jury to say whether they were forced to the conclusion that Rudd had any intention to injure the pro s ecutor. The defence was that Rudd picked up the gun in order to frighten away the boys who were teasing him, and that when t!vy were so far away that he believed them wan no chance of hitting them he fired in their direction. All tho circumstances of the case must lead the jury (o infer that the shot was not fired with intent to do bodily harm.

The. Jury retired for a few minutes, and then returned a verdict of "Not guilty." The accused was then discharged.

Tuesday, April 13. unlawfully woundinu,

James Cherry (aged 52) was indicted for having, on the 3rd of February, at Dunedin, unlawfully and maliciously wounded his wife, Susan Cherry. A second count of the indictment charged the prisoner with inflicting grievous bodily harm. The jury having returned a verdict of guilty His Honor sentenced the prisoner to 12 months' imprisonment, with hard labour.

BIIEEP-STKALING.

John Heonan was charged with having, on the sfch of February, stolen one sheep, the property of Robert Robinson. The Crown prosecutor conducted the case for the Crown, and the prisoner was defended by Messrs Macdonald and D. M. Stuart.

The Crown Prosecutor, in opening tho case, said that Mr R. Robinson, the owner of the sheep alleged to have been stolon, had sheep running on his place, and ako on the Maungatua and Traquair ITumlmk He had, amongst other sheep, a number of merino wethers that were both branded and earmarked. Mr Robinson's brand was a letter "R," and it was put on the loins of the sbee.p — .1 very conspicuous position. This brand was perfectly distinct and plain, so that there was no possibility of mistaking it for anything else. The sheep were car-marked on both ours th'> Marks being a fork in tho noar ear and two buck bits on the off ear. On the 29th of January la^r. aMr Andrew Beattie was riding over Maungatua Hundred and he saw some sheep belonging to his father,some belonging totheprosecutor(who was a connection of Mr Beattie's by marmge), and one which he recognised as the property of ftlr Reid. Mr Beattie took possession of these sheep and put them in a paddock on the -Ith of February. In this paddock there were 19 sheep in all. The paddock was securely fenced, the fence being sheep-proof, and the entrance to it was secured. At 9 o'clock in the evening the sheep were safe, but between 5 and 6 o'clock the next morning four of tho sheep were missing. It haa been raining during the night, and ths footprints of a man and a lioiso and the tracks of the sheep were discovered, and Mr Beattie and his sons (who wero with him) followed the tracks, and they led directly to where the prisoner lived. Information was then given to the police, and a search-warrant; obtained. When Constable M'Kenzie executed the warrant the prisoner was not at home, but on searching the premises the carcasses of two sheep, apparently recently killed, were found under a table in the back room. In tho Mine place the heads and fleeces of four sheen were found. The other two carcasses were not found, but the head and skin of what was distinctly identified as one of Mr Robinson's sheep had been found. It would appear that tho sheep was not in the state it would have been if it had been taken away by mistake, or if it had been taken away with any other intention than to steal. The enr-marks had been tampered with, and tho brands had also been interfered with, evidently for the purpose of preventing identification. There were, however, peculiarities about ihe head of the sheep, which led to its identification. The learned Crown Prosecutor thought there could not be a stronger case. The sheep had been traced to the possession of the accused immediately after their disappearance, and on the question of identification distinct evidence would be given.

For the prosecution, evidence was given by Robert Rolinson, Andrew Beattie, William W Reid, John Beattie, and J. C. M'Kenzie.

Mr Macdonald, in opening the case for the defence, said that the dt'fennts was that Heenan took the sheep believing them to be his own. Evidence would be given by men who accompanied the accused when he took them which would show that when they were ttvken out of the paddock they had Heenan's ear-mark and brand on them. Beattie had done what he had no right to do : he had taken sheep bearing Heenan's brands, instead of bringing a civil action to recover them. The sheep which Heenan claimed as his had been removed by Beattie by force, and the accused had gone into the paddock, searched for sheep bearing his brands, and removed four of them. Several actions bad arisen out of this matter of disputed ownership. An information had been laid at Outram and dismissed ; another information laid at Dunedin had also been dismissed ; and a civil action, commenced at Outram, had been discontinued. If it had been a case of sheep-stealing it would not have been done in such a clumsy fashion, and certainly Heenan would not have threatened to take them if they were not given up. Daniel Heeuan was called, and his examination was proceeding when the Court rose. Wednesday, April 14. charge of sheep-stealing. John Heenan was charged with having, on the sth of February last, stolen one sheep, the property of Robert Robinson. Mr Haggitt conducted the case for the Crown, and Messrs Macdonald and D. M. Stuart appeared for the accused. The hearing of this case was resumed at 10 a.m. The following witnesses gave evidence for the defence : — Daniel Heenan, Alexander Bathgate, W A. Sim, John Vezey, Thomas Caradus, Henry M'Donald, James Heenan, Gilbert M'Dermid, Joseph Baxter, and the Rev. Dr Stuart. The two last-named witnesses were called to give evidence regarding the character of the accused, and both spoke favourably regarding him. The Rev. Dr Stuart said he had known John Heenan for 26 years, and regarded him as a very impulsive man, but one who was of a kindly disposition and honest. Mr Macdonald addressed the jury on behalf of the prisoner, and Mr Haggitt for the Grown.

His Honor in summing up directed the jury that *t was first of all necessary they should be satisfied that the sheep had beon clearly identified as belonging to Mr Robinsou ; and if they were satisfied upon that point, then they had to consider whether it was taken with Mni.iou.s intent. That it was taken by the accused was admitted ; but if the jury came to the conclusion that he took it hona fi-le believing ho had a right to take it, then ho was not guilty of stealing it. If the conduct of an accused person weroreasonably capable of two foustructions — an innocent one and a guilty one — and the jury wanted to find out his intention from his conduct., then evidence of the previous good character of the accused was worthy of consideration.

The Jury retired at 1.55 p.m., and an hour afterwards returned with a verdict of "Not guilty."

Tbo Crown Prosecutor : There is a second indictment against the prisoner, your Honor, but I think that practically the prisoner has been tried on that indictment.

His Honor : Quite so. The caso under this indictment is stronger than the case under the other.

The Crown Prosecutor : The other ca.se if. Reid's sheep. I don't think that I ought to prosecute on that indictment.

His Honor ; No, I think not,

The Crown Prosecutor : Then, if your Honor pleases, I will offer no evidence on that indictment.

His Honor (to the jury) : The Crown on this indictment offer no evidence, gentlemen, so you will find a formal verdict of " Not guilty." It is just a formal matter to get rid of the thing. The Jury returned a verdict of " Not guilty," and prisoner was discharged. This concluded the criminal sittings.