THEFT OF A BICYCLE

Southland Times, Issue 19389, 1 November 1924, Page 3

THEFT OF A BICYCLE

A BELATED CONFESSION. “THE MYSTERIOUS MAGGIE.” ANOTHER NAME SUPPRESSED. At the Magistrate's Court yesterday before Mr G. Cruickshank, S.M., a married woman residing at Bluff, whose name was suppressed by the Bench, was charged with the theft of a lady’s bicycle, valued at £B, the property of Elsie Robertson, from the curb in front of Messrs William Todd and Co.’s premises in Don street on October 4. Mr Eric Russell appeared on behalf of accused. Elsie Robertson said that on October 4 she left her bicycle outside Todd’s auction rooms, and on her return an hour later found that the machine was not there. On October 11 while passing the Public Library she saw a bicycle standing aaginst the curb. It was considerably battered, but witness recognised it as her own. After getting Mr MacKenzie, a cycle merchant, to identify the machine, witness waited till a boy came out of the Library and claimed it. He said it belonged to his sister who had bought it at Campbell’s in Esk street. On being asked about the sale Mr Campbell said that a Mr Kissell had left the bicycle to be sold. Witness met Kissell in Todd’s Auction Rooms and he informed her that he had given the bicycle to Campbell to sell, on hehalf of accused. They met accused in the street and upon witness asking her when she got the bicycle, she turned to Kissell and said, “I only rode it home, anyway.” She then said to witness: “Didn’t you get my telegram?” Witness replied in the negative, whereupon accused said, “111 see you in a week,” and got into a car and drove off. Later, accused visited witness at her house and asked her to come to Campbell’s and get the matter “hushed up,” but witness told her it was too late. John Kissell, labourer, said that on October 4, accused arrived at his house at about midday and stayed for dinner. She rode the bicycle up to witness’s place and told him she had brought it up from Bluff and wished him to sell it for her, as she wished to buy a man’s bicycle for her husband, out of the proceeds. Witness, therefore, took the machine into town and gave it to Campbell to sell. When accused gave him the machine she asked him to remove the lamp and mud flap, stating that they would do for the machine she was going to buy.

John Campbell, cycle merchant, said that on October 4 he received the bicycle from Kissell, and later that day accused came into the shop and asked him to post the cheque to Mrs Lee, care of the Post Office, Bluff. He did not know what her name was. When he had sold the machine he posted the cheque to the address given. On Saturday, October 11, after Mrs Robertson had informed him that the bicycle had been stolen from her, accused again came into the shop saying that she wished to see some tricycles. Witness told her that he knew the bicycle had been stolen, and she said that she would have to see Kissell at once as she had not told him that the machine was not originally hers. She said "that a woman named “Maggie” had given it to her, but she could not say what “Maggie’s” surname was and did not know where she lived.

A statement made by accused was produced by the police in whiph she said that on October 4 she met a woman named “Maggie” in front of H. and J. Smith’s at about midday. “Maggie’ss description was as follows: —A few inches taller than accused; stout; brown hair and brown eyes; sallow complexion; aged about 27 or 28, and wearing a grey costume and navy blue straw hat. “Maggie” had given her the bicycle and asked her to sell it on commission, which she agreed to do. She did not kqow “Maggie’s” other name and had only seen her once or twice before, some years ago, when “Maggie” was at the Victoria Home. After acfcused had discovered that the bicycle had been stolen, she wired Mrs Robertson and asked her to be in front of the Post Office between 1 and 2 p.m. on October 11, but as she was late in coming up from Bluff that day, had failed to keep the appointment. Detective Sergeant Carroll said he had made inquiries about the mysterious “Maggie” at the Victoria Home and found that the only Magge who had been there about that time was a woman, now 80 years of age, who was deaf and dumb. This closed the case for the prosecution and the Court adjourned for a few minutes to allow accused to consult with her solicitor. When the hearing was resumed, Mr Russell said that in the face of such a strong case for the prosecution his client had decided to enter a plea of guilty. He would submit that although the theft was of a mean nature, accused’s record had been previously above reproach and she had evidently given way to a sudden temptation. The Court was adjourned until the afternoon in order to allow the probation officer t 6 report. Upon Mf Pollok’s report proving favourable, his Worship said that accused ’would bk convicted and released on one year’s probation.