Crimes and Offences..

Timaru Herald, Volume XCVIII, Issue 170572, 3 August 1921, Page 5

Crimes and Offences..

INTERPRETATION OF VERDICT. Per Press Association. i WELLINGTON, August 2. At the Supreme Court to-day Roscoe and Holland were charged with the theft of about £75 in goods from the! Empire Trading Company. The jury returned a verdict of guilty, with a strong recommendation to mercy, on the ground that the business was not conducted in a. strict way. Mr Justice Reed said he would refer the question of what the decision meant to the Appeal Court. Bail could not bo arranged. POSSESSION OF AMMUNITION.

NELSON, August 2. Andrew Strand was charged with being in unlawful possession of ammunition for an automatic pistol. Counsel said defendant was very well known to the R.S.A. as a man of very excellent character. Defendant was a foreigner, and spoke English with some difficulty. There 1 must have been a mutual misunderstanding between him and the sergeant. Defendant was a seaman, and went to register a pistol, hut was unaware that the ammunition had to be handed in. When approached by a constable the ammunition was immediately handed in. A policeman said objection was taken by the Police Department to defendant retaining a pistol, as the report /was not favourable. Cross-examined, h© said ho knew the defendant, who was horn in Denmark, and was a naturalised British subject. Constable Mackenzie said there was no evasion by the defendant, whom he knew as a man of good character, with a good war service." The Magistrate said it was quite clear the offence had been committed. Ho took into account the fact that defendant was a man of good character, and nothing was known against him. He ordered tho ammunition to he forfeited to the Crown, and a fine of 10s, with 7s costs, was imposed.

ALLEGED CHILD MURDER. CHRISTCHURCH, August 2. In the Burgess child murder case, Mr Cunningham said he wished to submit that the evidenco adduced i>y the Grown was wholly insufficient. xto asked his Honour to direct the jury to return a verdict of not guilty without going further. ~ , His Honour replied that ho qould not take such a course. There was evidenco that tli© child had. been born alive, though Dr. Pearson stated under oiossexamination that there was a possibility that it might have died in the course or birth. The only other question was whether the child had been killed by accused, and upon this there was the evidence of the wounds. It might not be strong enough to warrant a. verdict of guilty, but it could not be disregardCounsel in his address submitted that the evidence iwas insufficient to establish that the child had been born alive, and that if accused took the child s life she was insane; that she did not know the nature and the quality of her act; and that the evidence was wholly insufficient to connect accused with killing the child, which might have been done by some other person. The Crown Prosecutor did not address the Court. After a retirement of 35 minutes the jury returned with a verdict of not guilty, and the prisoner was discharged.