THEFT OF COAT

Timaru Herald, Volume CXXXVII, Issue 19803, 19 May 1934, Page 6

THEFT OF COAT

YOUNG MAN’S LAPSE PROBATION GRANTED Enforced idleness was discrebed by his father as the cause of the downfall of Stanley Charles Smith (24) of St. Andrews, when he was charged in the Magistrate’s Court yesterday with the theft of an overcoat, valued at £4, the property of some person dv persons unknown. Smith pleaded not guilty. Senior-Sergeant Mathieson handled the case for the police. Constable J. H. Hogg said that on May 5 he saw accused in Stafford Street wearing a blue gaberdine overcoat which by no means fitted him. Again on May 14, he saw accused in Stafford Street wearing a blue tweed overcoat which did lit him. Questioned by witness, accused said that he had got the coat from a secondhand shop, having exchanged it, with 2/- for the other blue one. At the police station, he said he had purchased the gaberdine coat from Mr Foster, a draper in Waimate, in February for 29/6 and that Mr Foster would corroborate that statement. Mr Foster was communicated with and stated that he had never stocked such a coat and further that if he had, it would have been sold for £4 as the coat cost about £3 to buy. Smith then said he had got the coat from Herbert Ashton, whom he had met while in the Borstal. He did not wish to give Ashton’s name as he feared the coat might have been stolen. Inquiries made by the Waimate police failed to find trace of Ashton in Waimate in February or since then. Smith, in evidence, confirmed a statement he had made to the police, in which he said Ashton had given him the coat to look after while he was away rabbitting.

The Magistrate (Mr C. R. Orr Walker, S.M.): Even if Ashton did give you the coat to look after and you sold it without his authority, you were guilty of theft. I am afraid you have convicted yourself. Senior-Sergeant Mathieson said that there was no trace of Herbert Ashton having been at the Borstal. Statement Not Believed. The Magistrate: It is perfectly obvious that if your statement is true, and you got the coat from Ashton, which is doubtful, you stole the coat when you sold it. I don’t accept that statement. You gave too many different statements for me to believe that that is correct. You served two years Borstal in 1930 and were granted two years probation in 1933. Senior-Sergeant Mathieson: That was for the theft of an overcoat, too. The Probation Officer (Mr G. McKessar) said that accused was still on probation. In 1933 he had stolen a coat at a dance at Pleasant Point, but had left it at the premises of a friend of the owner. The Magistrate: There must be something wrong with hi*n mentally. It is very hard to deal with a man like this. There were only two alternatives, said the Magistrate—a term of reformative treatment, or a term of probation. Smith intimated that if granted probation he would go to the back country and get work. Smith’s father stated that his son’s lapse was due to his enforced idleness, and if he were given work he might reform. He was not very strong mentally. The Magistrate said that a term of probation might save Smith from becoming a permanent criminal. He was prepared to stretch a point and grant accused a further term ci’ two years’ probation after the expiry of the present term. “This is your last chance,” he warned accused. “If vou break the law again you can only expect a term of two years reformative treatment, which I was nearly going to give you this time. I am only taking into consideration your weak mentality. The Magistrate inquired whether steps had been taken by the secondhand dealer to trace the source of the coat. It was obvious that the coat did not fit accused, and inquiries should, therefore, have been made. Senior-Sergeant Mathieson remarked that there appeared to have been a certain amount of slackness in that respect. “It is with some reluctance, then, that I make an order fov tlje return of the coat to the dealer, subject to the payment of 2/-, which is to be returned to accused. That is all I can say,” stated the Magistrate.