HAT STOLEN FROM HOTEL

Taranaki Daily News, 2 August 1930, Page 4

HAT STOLEN FROM HOTEL

WAITARA MAORI PUNISHED. DOCTOR PUKI’S EVIDENCE. t The case in which Jacob Kaingaru , was charged with the theft of a hat, . the property of Charles Handley, drover I of Urenui, adjourned from last court > day to enable the police to produce a > witness, was heard in the Waitara > Court yesterday before Mr. R. W. Tate, S.M. i Evidence taken at the last sitting 1 of the court was to the effect that Kaingaru had- been seen in McLean Street wearing a hat which tallied with ■ Hie description of the one Handley had ' lost. Handley had followed defendant - to a barber’s shop and idenitfied the hat us ’his. Kaingaru said at the time that he had bought the hat from the Waitara branch of W. T. Hookham. When informed that he had made no such purchase for two years he had stated that ho had bought the hat at the Inglewood branch. - Later he had asserted that he pioeured it from Puki, a Maori doctor. Puki ; Terirc,- described as a Maori doctor, who wds in Otorbhanga at the initial 1 curing of the case, recounted io tie ecuit how he had stopped at the Bridge hitel during April and, in company with defendant and Mrs. Kaingaru, entered and partook of drinks in the commercial, room. lie saw a man apparently asleep upon one of the sofas with .a felt hat lying on the floor beside hint; - Jacob picked up the hat as they left the hotel and witness left for the’-Hawera .district shortly afterwards. Witness declared that he neither touched tlie hat, told Jacob he could have it nor'said anything to lead defendant I to ..'believe- that the hat belonged to j witness; - - i . .' VISIT TO HOTEL. i Cross examined by Air. A. A. Bennett, who .appeared for Kaingaru, Puki stated that, the three of them, left in Jacob’s I car for'The" hotel at about 7 p.m. to I sco Mrs. McPherson about a cure he had administered. They entered the-> commercial or sitting room and had a glass of beer each. ? Counsel: A glass of beer at seven in the evening! Witness explained rather impolitely that they certainly had but had drunk it in the sitting-room. Conns I: Who brought the liquor? Witness: I “shouted,”.. ! Counsel: Who brought - it, not bought it? Witness: I got it from the bar. Counsel; Artd you paid? Witness:' Do you think' I got it for nothing? Witness 'then described the position c-f tho men on the couch. - Mr.. Bennett asked witness where lie' ■sat in the car during the ride in and Puki showed marked impatience, replying, "Why you ask about the car; I come here to talk about the hat.” Counsel: Never you mind. All you have to do is answer my questions. Witness stated that Jacob gave the hat to his “missus” when they reached the car ready to start for home. In reply to counsel, who asked him if he knew Jacob had no right to the haty . witness said he knew but said ,nothing. “Would the hat fit you?” aflkcd Mr,'. Bennett. Witness answered that it was too small. Mr."' Bennett: How did you know? * Witness; Not my hat. Counsel: But how did you know it was too small? ’ Witness: Oh .... I could see it was too small. . • Puki stated he met Jacob in Waitara some weeks later and when he asked where the hat was had been told the tale of the trouble the hat had landed Jacob and his wife in. Jacob told him ihe police had the hat and counsel learned by further questioning that witness had told defendant not to worry because the police could prove nothing."PUKI AN ACCOMPLICE?’ To Constable Lapouple, who conducted the ease for the police, witness' said tliat when he saw Jacob in the street on the' occasion mentioned defendant, after telling him of the trouble, asked him to help them and say he bought j; Hie hat. from the shop, but he refused.■(' 'XCounsel, placing Kaingaru in the 'wit- . ■ue’ss box, said the case was really one of “much ado about nothing” and, from : a criminal point of view, seemed remarkably weak. Puki on his own evidence was an accomplice. To the Maori mind an offer to pay for the use of the . hat'.as made by Kaingaru was not an adraishon of guilt. Kaipgaru ..explained through an interpreter- that Puki alone had entered ■the hotel/defendant and his wife waiting in'the .car'for him. Puki gave him the hat tlie house of a friend later ' in tlie evening and that was the first time he halt'.".-seen it. He understood it to be a tofcdn of appreciation for the services he' "jiad done Puki when the latter in ,the district. He died to shield Puki;.’ who was a person of im- - pen-tanee.- among the Maoris, but later told the truth when it became, unfair to himself .to keep silent. /Mrs. Kaingaru gave corroborative evidence, emphasising that she had wait- ' cd wijth Jfier husband in the car. (• The..-magistrate in summing up ; the ease said that Puki was undo.ubtejdly an accomplice; He had to choose between the story of Puki and |hat Of' ( Jacob and his wife. It seemed To him that Jacob stole the hat and should be dealt' wltliXaecordingly. ! Deferidgn'fi, was fined £1 with costs £3 j 4s 4d. ' v ;