JURY DISAGREES FOR THIRD TIME

Sun (Auckland), Volume 1, Issue 42, 12 May 1927, Page 7

JURY DISAGREES FOR THIRD TIME

SALE OF STOLEN IRON LAMB TRIAL ADJOURNED The third trial in the Supreme Court of Robert Lamb, charged with having received six tons of galvanised iron valued at £286, knowing it to have been dishonestly obtained, concluded yesterday afternoon, when the jury again failed to come to an agreement. His Honour Mr. Justice Herdman presided. Outlining the case tor the prosecution, Mr. V. Meredith said that a man named Reston went to the accused and told him that he could sell him some corrugated iron. Lamb was aware that Reston was a foreman for a carrying firm and would have no iron of his own for sale, yet he purchased two and a-half tons for £4O, half the cost of new corrugated iron.

Accused sold the iron to a metal worker named Hargreaves, who later saw shipping marks on the cases, which led him to suspect that the iron had been shipped to John Burns and Co. He saw Mr. Burns and the whole mater was disclosed.

Evidence of the sale of the iron was given by Benjamin A. Reston, formerly a foreman in the employ of Herring and Co. He said that accused asked him if it was all right and he told him it was heavy. By that he meant it was “crook.”

To Mr. Leary: He did not know if accused understood his meaning or not.

Detective J. K. Robinson said that accused admitted knowing Reston by sight, but not by name. He said that Mr. Burns knew all about it and the matter had been fixed up. Witness agreed to make an explanation, but when Questioned regarding his transactions with Reston he refused to Proceed further. Accused had previously been convicted of theft. His Honour said the case although not very serious, required careful consideration. He asked the jury to judge whether the accused, in buying new iron so cheaply, did not suspect its origin. Accused’s action in selling the second lot of iron he found in his yard, without ascertining whence it came, was, he stated, at least suspicious.

After a few hours’ retirement the foreman said there was no possibility °f the jury reaching an agreement.

His Honor: I am sorry that is so; hut the responsibility is yours, not mine.

Accused was allowed bail in his own recognaisance, and directed to appear again on Monday morning.