SHOPLIFTERS AT WORK.

Taranaki Herald, Volume LXVII, Issue 16503, 2 August 1919, Page 3

SHOPLIFTERS AT WORK.

YOUNG WOMAN ARRESTED

THEFT DURING A SALE,

Shoplifting in some of the principal cities of tho United States is carried on on a very extensive and scientific scale (says the Dominion), and the methods employed by the gangs form a formidable barrier against immediate detection. While there js no suggestion that there is any organised gang or gangs of shoplifters operating in New Zealand, there is evidence that tho practice is being carried out by individuals of the light-fingered fraternity, whoso efforts nave not been without success. Wellington shopkeepers have beei somewhat concerned of late over the operations of tho shoplifters, who appear to bo getting a little more daring. During tho course of Messrs. Kirkcaldio and Stains’ half-year sale, on Wednesday, a well-dressed young woman named Amy Stewart was caught in tho act of appropriating two blouses. The police were communicated with and the woman was promptly arrested. On Thursday she appeared before Mr. J',. Page, S.M., at the Magistrate’s Court, and pleaded guilty to the theft of the property, which was valued at £5 Bs. Chief Detective Boddam, who prosecuted, said that he had been informed by Mr. Sidney Kirkcaldio, head of the firm of Kirkcaldio and Stains, that the loss suffered by his firm through shoplifting was very considerable. In tho past heavy penalties had not been asked for in such cases, but, for tho information of those women who go about shoplifting iii a systematic manner, and there arc a good many of them in Wellington, the Chief Detoc'iivo said that heavy penalties would be asked for in tho future. Nothing was previously known about the accused, who resided at Upper Hutt. Evidence was given by Detective Torthe accused had attended a sale,*and at an opportune moment picked up tho two blouses and hid them in her muff. Two assistants witnessed tho theft, and witness found the stolen property in tho possession of tho accused. His Worship commented on tho fact that tho offence was one which could not bo looked on lightly. The accused would ho fined £5, in default fourteen days’ imprisonment. An order was made for the return of the stolen property to the owners.