Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image

CHARGE OF THEFT.

NOTES IN A CASH BOX.

MAN AND WOMAN ACCUSED.

A roll of notes alleged to be from the cash box of the Trocadero Hotel was the principal exhibit in a case in the Magistrates Court to-day when Daniel Murray, alias Jackson, and Marie Hill were charged that on October 12 they stole £3tflos, the property of Wilhelmina David. Mr V. G. Day. S.M., was on the Bench. Detective-Sergeant Connolly said that complainant was the proprietress of the Trocadero Hotel, Manchester Street. On the afternoon of October 13 she went out of the office and left the cash

box in the desk. When she returnee i the money was gone. The matter was reported to the police and Detectives Bickerdiko and Robinson arrested the ; two accused at Lyttelton. When • charged both admitted the offence and i made a statement to that effect. Over : £29 of the missing money had been recovered.

When the police were proceeding to call evidence, the Magistrate pointed out that where there were signed stulements admitting guilt it was not neces--1 eary to put a. witness in the box. I The accused Murray: But wo both I plead not guilty. | His Worship : Oh! That makes a difference.

Katherine Gibson said that her principal duties at the Trocadero Hotel were hooking up and looking after the cash. The two accused booked up on

Saturday morning as “Mr and Airs Murray.” On Sunday afternoon she handed the key to Mrs David and went out. The cash box then contained from £4O to £SO. At 7 p.m. she found that all the £1 notes had been taken from the till.

tVilhelraina David said that the fe-

male accused stood by the desk on Sunday afternoon when witness counted out some money from the cash hox. Subsequently witness went out, leaving the desk open and the cash box unlocked. She noticed when she came back that the box had been shifted.' The female accused: I did not see what was in the cash box.

To the male accused, Mrs David said

that on going out a second time she locked the desk, hut she did not look in the box. She was positive that the money had been taken during her first absence. Plain-Clothes Constable Bickerdike said that, in company with PlainClothes Constable-Robinson, he met the two accused on the Governor’s Bay Road. Lyttelton. After some questioning, the female accused said to Murray: “Hand them the notes, Dan, you stole from the Trocadero Hotel. They know all aoout it.” Murray replied: “You have given the game away.” In a signed statement. Marie Hill said that she was a widow residing in Wellington and that Murray was a wharf labourer. She admitted that they had stayed at the Trocadero as “Mr and Mrs Murray,” and that Murray had gone downstairs after saying he was going to get some money out of the till. ’ Plain-Clothes Constable Robinson said that on the wav to the station, Murray said; “I did take the money from the cash box in the desk.” The accused Murray: Did you not trick me into signin- a statement by saying, “ Marie Hill has made a statement. Sign this and we will let her go?” . Witness: No, I did not. Murray: You did. His 'Worship: You will have an opportunity later to go into the witnessbox ana make a statement in the proper way. Murray: I am ignorant of the point of law. His Worship: This is a point of propriety. Constable Bipkerdike was recalled to undergo a heated cross-examination by the female accused, who asked, “Didn’t you tell me that if the money was forthcoming I would be able to go to Wellington? Didn’t you say that Mrs David would not prosecute if she got the money back?” "Witness: No. The accused: That’s all I wish to say if these men won’t tell the truth about the matter. Both accused pleaded not guilty and were committed to the Supreme Court for trial. His Worship said that he would allow bail at £2OO apiece, but ho would not recommend that accused be allowed the services of a Crown lawyer as the evidence did not warrant it.

This article text was automatically generated and may include errors. View the full page to see article in its original form.
Permanent link to this item

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/TS19191021.2.59

Bibliographic details

Star (Christchurch), Issue 12776, 21 October 1919, Page 7

Word Count
698

CHARGE OF THEFT. Star (Christchurch), Issue 12776, 21 October 1919, Page 7

CHARGE OF THEFT. Star (Christchurch), Issue 12776, 21 October 1919, Page 7