Thank you for correcting the text in this article. Your corrections improve Papers Past searches for everyone. See the latest corrections.

This article contains searchable text which was automatically generated and may contain errors. Join the community and correct any errors you spot to help us improve Papers Past.

Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image

THEFT OF BEDSPREAD.

EXPLANATION NOT SATISFACTORY. FINE OF £lO IMPOSED. w . AUCKLAND, July 20. , Bearing a valuable fur coat and a smart blue hat, Alice Chapman, a woman of 43, who said she was engaged in domestic duties, stood in the dock at the Police Court this morning charged with stealing a bedspread valued at £6 6s. The accused, for whom Mr Jordan appeared, pleaded not guilty. A salesman employed by a Karangahape road furnishing firm said that on June 30 last the accused purchased a remnant from him. When he went to serve, her he had a bedspread in his hands. This ho placed on a parcel of blankets while he served her. The remnant was wrapped up and the accused placed her purchase in an attache case. Five minutes later he discovered that the bedspread was missing. The next witness was Detective Sergeant Issel, who executed a search warrant at the accused’s house. Mrs Chapman produced the bedspread which she got from a suitcase under a bed. She explained that she had taken it from the shop by mistake and intended returning it. Counsel stated that Mrs Chapman purchased two articles. On going to tho counter to get her purchases she put two parcels in her case. As she had just removed into a new house, she had no occasion to open the case until July 11. She was surprised to find the bedspread there when she opened the case. The accused gave evidence on oath in support of what her counsel had said. Why did not you return the bedspread? asked Chief Detective Cummings.—l was too busy, but was going to take it back. Mr W. R. M‘Kean, S.M., said that the explanation given was one that he could not regard as satisfactory. 3he accused would bo convicted and fined £lO, in default 14 days’ imprisonment. Counsel’s application for the suppression of the accused’s name was refused. The magistrate remarked that such cases were always difficult to detect. An application for payment of the fine at the rate of 10s a week was also refused. Fourteen days wore allowed in which to pay.

Permanent link to this item

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/OW19270726.2.279

Bibliographic details

Otago Witness, Issue 3828, 26 July 1927, Page 76

Word Count
356

THEFT OF BEDSPREAD. Otago Witness, Issue 3828, 26 July 1927, Page 76

THEFT OF BEDSPREAD. Otago Witness, Issue 3828, 26 July 1927, Page 76

Help

Log in or create a Papers Past website account

Use your Papers Past website account to correct newspaper text.

By creating and using this account you agree to our terms of use.

Log in with RealMe®

If you’ve used a RealMe login somewhere else, you can use it here too. If you don’t already have a username and password, just click Log in and you can choose to create one.


Log in again to continue your work

Your session has expired.

Log in again with RealMe®


Alert