CRIME SERIES IN MARCH

Taranaki Daily News, 7 May 1930, Page 4

CRIME SERIES IN MARCH

HALF-CASTE STANDS TRIAL

EVIDENCE GIVEN BY DETECTIVE.

PLEAS OF NOT GUILTY ENTERED.

COMMITTED TO SUPREME COURT.

The preliminary trial of a half-caste Maori, Robert Harvey Campbell, was continued before Mr. R. W. Tate, S.M., in the New Plymouth Police Court yesterday. Campbell was charged with a series of crimes in March, including breaking and entering the offices of the New Plymouth Harbour Board, the theft of a letter of credit for £2OO ano. other valuables from a guest at . the Criterion Hotel, New Plymouth, .'the theft of £lOO from Masters’, Ltxl., Stratford, the obtaining of a car valued at £l6O by means, of false pretence, and the forgery at New Plymouth of a cheque drawn on' the Bank of New Zealand, Palmerston North. After the evidence had been heard Campbell pleaded not guilty to all the charges and was committed to the May session of the Supreme Court in New Plymouth for trial.

Campbell conducted his own defence, cross-examining the witnesses. The case for the prosecution was conducted by Detective Meiklejohn. The chief evidence yesterday was given by Detective A- B. Meiklejohn, who told how he had found articles alleged to have been left by the accused at the scenes of the crimes, articles of clothing alleged to have been stolen by the accused and found in his possession, and footprints of bare or stockinged feet in the soft sand by the Harbour Board offices which, the detective stated, corresponded approximately witli the rather small feet of Campbell. When confronted "by the detective with this and other information at the police station, after having been warned that anything he said would be used against him, the accused repeatedly replied: “I will leave that till we go to court.”

The main witnesses for the Crown yesterday were Hercules Moon, who stated that he had met the accused, apparently in bathing clothes, on the esplanade" the morning of the robbery at the Harbour Board; Llewellyn Price, who stated that the accused had told him of his excursion into the Criterion Hotel and given him some of the booty; Edward Cawthray, who alleged that the accused had given him false information when buying a car under a hire purchase agreement. He had met a man wearing a coat, singlet and pair of light shorts (which witness thought were bathing pants) walking along the esplanade on March 13 a little before 6 o’clock, said Hercules Moon. The clothing produced was similar to that worn by the man. Moon had said, “Good morning; you’re out early this morning.” The man replied, “Good morning.” For the moment witness thought he was Pete Sarron. Moon said, “Well, you must have' been ; up pretty early,” and he said, “Yes, I was.” The general conversation drifted to the—fight till they came to the Grosvenor Hotel. Then the man left him, going in the side door of the hotel. SAND HANGING TO LEGS. "What struck him more than anything else, said Moon, was the amount of sand hanging to the man’s legs. He was carrying a towel and a bundle under his arm, but he could not swear there was anything in it. Witness thought the man was a quarter or half-caste Maori. Campbell: The bundle I had was a towel ?—Yes.

Campbell: You firmly believed that I had been swimming?—Yes.

Llewellyn Price, prisoner on remand at the New Plymouth gaol, said he had pleaded guilty to a charge of receiving a wallet containing a cheque book, railway ticket, letter of credit and other articles, of a total value of £l3O, from Robert Harvey Campbell, well knowing at the time they were dishonestly obtained.

Under the name of McLeod he had crone to' the Grosvenor Hotel- on March 6 and stayed two days. The day after he-. had booked at the hotel he met Campbell. He had received the goods frbm Campbell, who said he had’ secured them from the Criterion Hotel. Campbel, he had been caught at the Criterion and got away; He had no hat and told price he had lost it that; night at the Criterion. He had known the accused previously. The letter of credit was given to him on the understanding that he was to go to the banks to operate upon it. Afterwards the letter ..was to be returned to Campbell. He had posted the letter of credit at Douglas to R. Rea, care New Plymouth post office. Rea was the name under which the accused was going at the Grosvenor Hotel. He had visited Campbell in hie room at the hotel and seen him copy the name “McMillan” from the letter of credit. He wrote the name several times.'

The cheque produced was one which Price had handed over at a shop at Stratford. The cheque had been taken out of the cheque book produced. He had written the body of the cheque and Campbell had written the signature. Price had filled in the body of the cheque afterwards. Campbell had. told him: “Get as much as you can on it.’’ He had left the Grosvenor Hotel on March 7, and Campbell had remained there. Campbell: What date was it that you say you met me at the Grosvenor Hotel?—On March 0. And you say you posted me the letter of credit from Stratford soon afterwards? —Yen. Then if I had not collected it it /should still be there? —Yes. ALLEGED USE OF ALIASES. Harry Holmes, licensee of the Grosvenor Hotel, said he had booked Campbell at his hotel under the name of “Rae” or “Rea.”- About a week after the accused came a man’booked in as “McLeod.” Accused spent most of hie time in the sitting room upstairs at the hotel. He had spent every night at the hotel as far as witness knew, except the night of March 18. The accused was missing from breakfast the next day, but rang up to say he would be calling for his luggage. Campbell: You say I' seldom wore a liat. Wae I wearing a hat when I left the hotel? —I could not Bay. To the accused: Witness had never been accused in the company of “McLeod” and had never cause to think the accused was financially embarrassed. Campbell had never mentioned “Mc-

Leod” to him, said Percy Darwell, a porter at the Grosvenor Hotel. Om?e in the sitting room accused had asked him what hours he worked, what'time he got up, and so on. One morning about 0 o’clock he had seen “Rea” come in at the side door without shoes, speks or hat. Rea was half running, half walking, when he eame in, and he carried something. • Although witness had been up at 4.30 he had not seen or heard accused go out that morning. He might have gone out by the fire escape and not been seen, but the front doors would have to be unlocked. Witness had . cleaned Campbell’s shoes once or twice; they were black patent leather shoes very similar to the shoes produced by the police. To Campbell: The shoes would have been put out two or three times in three weeks, Campbell: You are of the opinion that I wore a blue serge coat and blue serge ba.thing drawers when I came in that morning early?—They, might have been blue, but they were. dark in colour. , ... In regard to the back, lire,escape, isn’t that used as a late,.entrance fpr private boarders also?—Oh yes; when, the front doors are locked. u : Did not the conversation about the hours you worked arise . from your remarking that you felt tired?—J, cannot remember. •To Detective... Meiklejohn:. He had never seen. Campbell with a hat all the time he was there. Darwell remembered that one evening Campbell knocked on the door of his room and asked for McLeod, who was in the room next dooi.- His wife had answered. Campbell: Did your wife tell you that ? Darwell told the rnagistiate that he had heard it from his bed. Recalled, Price said that when Campbell had told him he had left his hat at the Criterion Hotel Campbell had asked him to buy him a cap or hatPrice had not bought the cap. He had given Campbell some money to buy a bottle of beer. Witness gathered that accused then had very little money. To Campbell: Previous to March 6 he had ’ not been in the company of accused in New Plymouth. It would be 12 months before that when he had been in the company of Campbell. PURCHASING OF THE CAR. The story of the purchase of the ear was told by Edward Cawthray, car agent of New Plymouth. He said he remembered doing business with Campbell. On March 17 Campbell called and said he was looking for a three-seater car. Witness had shown him one which accused said was what he wanted. The price was £l6O, or £l5O cash. Campbell said he could not fix up for the car that day as the banks were closed., but he would be along next morning at 10.30. He did not. appear next day, but on the morning of March 19 he eame in at 8.30 saying, “Here I am now; yon wanted cash; here’s the cash.” " Accused had a roR of notes in his hand and counted out £5O. Witness asked: “Are you not paying all cash?” and accused replied, "No, I prefer to take it on terms.” Terms were arranged and witness • asked him what was his bank. Accused replied: “The Bank, of New Zealand.” He. told witness he had a farm at Dannevirke. When they were making out the papers witness had asked where the car would be garaged. Campbell had stated High Street, Dannevirke. Accused had signed a hire purchase agreement and made out 12 promissory notes drawn against his account at the Dannevirke bank for the balance. The first of the promissory notes, dated April 22, had been sent to the bank and returned endorsed “No account at the Bank of New Zealand Dannevirke.” After the accused had counted out the £5O in notes he still had a few left. The car was maroon in colour and the number 64-381. Campbell had given the name of Te Puke. Accused: The payment of the £5O and the handing over of the receipt would complete the main part of the transaction?—No, the main part was the hire purchase agreement.

Did the statement that I was a farmer- in Dannevirke influence you in selling the car to me? —In some respects. Did you not tell me that as long as the money was in the bank to meet the notes it would be all right?- —Yes, probably. The first of the promissory notes was due on April 22. Are you aware that I was taken ip custody on April 17? That still gave me five days to open an account at the bank in Dannevirke-had I not been arrested.

You admit, then, that the statement that I was a farmer iii Dannevirke did not wholly cause the. transaction to be -completed?—No,, not wholly. Detective. Meiklejohn: If you had known the accused gave you a false name, false address and a false banking statement, would you have allowed him to drive the car away from the garage? —No. Edmund Attick, bootmaker employed by Hannah and Co., New Plymouth, said that the two pairs of shoes produced had, in his opinion, been worn by the same person. Catherine Fabish, an employee at the Grosvenor Hotel, remembered Campbell and McLeod staying at the hotel in March. She had noticed a spare pair of shoes in accused's room, similar to the shoes produced. The hat produced looked like the hat she had seen him wearing s one day. The only time accused'had indicated any friendship with McLeod w«s when one morning he asked if McLeod was still iii his room.

Detective Meiklejohn stated that on March fi he was called to the Criterion Hotel. The hat produced was one handed to the police by the night porter. He was called to the Harbour Board offices on March 13 at 5 a.in. and found the safe had been blown open with explosives. He found a red fime lying below the door of the safe. A pinch-bar was lying near the safe. A pair of shoes and a long bolt were handed to him by the nightwatchman. FOOTPRINTS IN THE SAND. On the south-eastern aide of the offices he saw the marks of bare or stockinged feet through soft sand. It was a rather small footprint. He made a rough sketch of the length and size of the footmarks. He took the measurements of Campbell’s feet on April 30 at the detective office. They were about the size of the footprints in the nand. He had gone to Masters’ promisee in Stratford on March 19 and found that the etrongroom had been blown open with explosives and many cashboxes rifled, continued the detective. A piece of red fuse lay near the strongroom. At Masters’ office he climbed on a partition arid found a man could swing down from the* skylight on to the top of the partition arid from there by shelves to the floor. He had seen Campbell on April 23 at

the police station and warned him regarding anything he might say. He showed him. Lealand’s coat and asked him where he had got it. Accused said: “I will leave that till later.” The detective showed him the raincoat produced and he said that and the other coat were his property. The detective told him that the raincoat was from Masters’, Ltd., in Stratford, where the cafe wae blown and £lOO taken on March 18. He asked where accused had <rot them, and he said, “I will leave that till I get to court.” The detective told him the first coat wan alleged to have been taken from the Harbour Board office, whe-e the cafe wan blown open on March 13 and that a man named Moon had met him coming from the breakwater at 5.40 a.nf. on that day and accompanied him to the Grosvenor. Accused said, “What has that got to do with the coat?” The detective told him that shoes considered to be his were found by the back door of the Harbour Board office. After seeing the shoes Campbell said.they were not his. He asked accused whether he had stayed at the Grosvenor from February 29 to March 18, and accused said, “To March 19.” The detective said, “Where did you stay on March 19; not at the Grosvenor?” He answered. “I stayed in New Plymouth.” The detective said, “Where?” and he replied he would leave that till later.

The detective then asked him if he had paid £5O to Cawthray and a £0 16s hotel bill to Holmes, on March 19. and lie said “Yes.” When asked where he had got the money he said he would leave, tnat till later. The detective suggested that the acr eused had had a lot of .experience with explosives, but he denied it. He told Campbell that Price said he had gone to the Criterion on March fl, was caught in a. room, and had escaped from a guest and a porter. The accused had said: “Can, they identify me?” The detective asked him what size hat he took. Accused said 6 7-8. The

detective fitted the hat. produced on accused’s head. The detective produced the cheque and Campbell denied signing the cheque or giving Price the wallet and contents. Campbell had given the detective samples of his hand-writ-ing on request. He admitted meeting Price at the hotel and said he had known him previously. The detective had asked accused if he saw .in the paper that a half-caste had been caught in the Criterion Hotel and Campbell had replied, “believed half-caste.”: The detective showed him a cap in ( his; possession when arrested and asked him about a felt hat. Campbell said he left it in a shop in Wellington where he had bought the cap, but would not say the name of the shop. Lealand came ih and the detective told Lealand to. put on the coat and pointed out that it: was evidently a suit. Accused said it seemed to be the same material.

Accused said he had stayed a few days in Palmerston North, but' refused to say where. The detective told him that when buying the car he had given a false name, false address, false occupation and made a false statement about his banking account. Accused said, “It is no crime to use another name.” He admitted giving the wrong address but denied that he had said he had a farm at Tahoraite.

The next day the detective had gone to Stratford, taking a coat and a number of handkerchiefs, one of which Campbell had identified. The same afternoon he showed accused the handkerchief found in his portmanteau and asked him what was on it. He said, “Paint off the car.” He then showed accused the initials L.C., and accused said, “Oh, you’d better not say that.”

He also showed accused two . receipts, one for £1 and one for £1 5s given in Wanganui. He asked ; him where he had got that money and also the money, he had spent on his trip to Wellington until his arrest. He said: “I will leave that till we go to court.” The detective showed him a letter addressed to Sam Rigga and asked if

it was for accused, and he said, “Now, now, Mr. Meiklejohn!” “I asked him if two men who had left New Plymouth some months ago had told him where to get gelignite to blow the safes,” continued the. detective. “He denied knowing them or knowing that gelignite was obtainable-from a “magazine in New Plymouth. ‘ bell had admitted that on 1° JJ was stopped while in the car by tne Otaki police, when he gave the name oi Frank Te Puke and w&» allowed to proceed. Campbell had no MOne y ’j >?* possession when, arrested, concluded detective. - , “Have you anything to say? ;: asked the clerk of . the court. Campbell said he had one .request, HO would like • the handkerchiefs, in his portmanteau counted. There (were found to be four, not counting the;fine produced. . • ■ ■ / J;;