THEFT AND FORGERY

Southland Times, Issue 22473, 8 November 1934, Page 9

THEFT AND FORGERY

SUPREME COURT CASE REFORMATIVE DETENTION. Terms of reformative detention were imposed by his Honour Mr Justice Kennedv upon Charles Martin Todd, a manned man, aged 30 (Mr Gordon Reed), and Cecil Lawrence Gilbertson, single, aged 32 (Mr Eustace Russell), when each appeared for sentence yesterday on charges of the theft of money belonging to the Southland County Council and of forging pay-sheets. In pleading for leniency for Todd, Mr Reed stressed that the prisoner, a comparatively young man, was married with three young children. The case was a most distressing one, pursued counsel, for he came from a particularly well-known family, and had now brought disgrace upon them. He had had a curiously bad run of luck with regard to employment, haying been in and opt of a number of jobs, in some cases through the liquidation of the firms employing him. Ultimately, after a period in hospital, he had gone on the unemployed and had then obtained his position with the Southland County Council. Had he used .his brains he could have nursed that job, but, unfortunately, he had not done so and found himself in his present predicament. Although Todd had nominally been earning £4 a week in the latter stages of his employment, it was necessary to explain that that amount had been circumscribed to a certain extent. As a result of a robbery at the County Council office some time previously when £4O had been stolen from a cash box, he had had to repay this money. There was no suggestion that the prisoner had stolen the money, but it had been in his charge and he had been held responsible. The method of repayment was that he had not been handling the bus drivers’ commission. He was therefore receiving only £3 a week less 3/- tax. The young man who was admittedly handling between £30,000 and £35,000 per annum, counsel emphasized, had received only £2 17/- a week as wages. That was not very much. Mr Reed urged that the Court extend the greatest leniency possible in the circumstances.

The Crown Prosecutor (Mr H. J. Macalister), referring to the bus money for which the prisoner had been held responsible, said that the facts regarding that incident had hardly been as stated by Mr Reed. Todd had a drawer in the safe in which he was supposed to keep the money. He had, however, left it in a flimsy drawer. The place had not been broken into, but someone had got into the building and the money had simply disappeared. Prisoner had therefore been held responsible by the council. “Prisoner at the bar, you appear for sentence upon two charges of theft as a servant and upon thirteen charges of forgery," said his Honour, addressing Todd. “The crimes are interlocked. You commenced to steal and to forge before Gilbertson came into the employ of the County Council and some of the charges relate to a period prior to his employment. There is no question but that you were the originator of the frauds and primarily responsible for them. It was stated in the course of the proceedings that there was a very considerable shortage. You will be detained for reformative purposes for 18 months on each charge; all the terms will be concurrent.”

“Gilbertson was directly under the last prisoner,” began Mr Russell in seeking leniency. “He it was who found things in such a mess and it was as the result of the card system he introduced that he discovered what had been going on for long before. Rather than expose Todd he had to come into the trouble. In fact, he simply took the line of least resistance and, instead of reporting it, gradually drifted in.” Counsel stressed that Gilbertson, who realized the seriousness of his offences, had frankly confessed his guilt. It was the first time he had been before the court and Mr Russell urged that he had really been a victim of circumstances. Counsel sought every leniency possible. The Crown Prosecutor: There is this to say in Gilbertson’s favour—he made a clean breast of it.

His Honour, addressing Gilbertson, said that he had found a fraudulent scheme already in existence, and, instead of reporting it, was weak enough to join in with the other thief. “Your responsibility was not so great and you frankly reported everything to the police. I think, therefore, that I should treat you in an entirely different way to the other prisoner. You will be sentenced to reformative detention for six months,” added his Honour.