MISSING TOOLS

Waipa Post, Volume XXIV, Issue 1607, 14 February 1925, Page 4

MISSING TOOLS

PCKEATUA SETTLER IN TROUBLE.

FURTHER DEVELOPMENTS.

The alleged theft of a pipe wrench and spanner (valued at 15s) at .Pukeatua on September 2nd, 1924. the ..property of Alex. Ferguson, resulted in a prosecution at the local Court on ( Thursday morning, before MiyF, W. Platts, S.M. Constable Doylec;prosecuted. "John Mclntosh, the defendant, pleaded not guilty, alleging: that he picked up both implements the road. ( .■ > Evidence for the prosecution was that the tools had been left in a box on the road grader belonging to Alex Ferguson, a contractor. The grader was about two chains from the main Te Awamutu-Arapuni road, along which Mclntosh regularly drove a motor car. Mclntosh had taken the tools to enable him to remove the bolts of his car. One of the police witnesses was Harry Marshall, a Maori youth of 19 years, who had recently been convicted of the theft of a postal packet while employed by Mclntosh. He said he was with Mclntosh when the latter drove down the side road with a passenger and when returning he took the tools from the grader..,, When questioned in January by the police, Mclntosh said a boy travelling with him at the time picked up the spanners on the road. Mclntosh strenuously denied taking them, from the grader, and said he had intended to advertise the articles as found, but this had escaped his memory. He took no other steps to locate the owner. • Constable Hooker admitted that Marshall was the first to give him in-y formation as to the whereabouts of the missing tools. Counsel for the defence (Mr McCarter) asked that the case be dismissed "with a comment from the Magistrate that defendant left the Court without a stain on his character. He quoted earlier decisions; The Magistrate said he was quite satisfied there was a case to answer. _ Mclntosh, in evidence repeated his statement given to the constable when the search warrant was executed in January. He had no idea where the, road grader was. Marshall said, “There are two spanners.” Defendant stopped 'the car, Marshall jumped out and picked them up, and they proceeded on the trip to Arapuni. Had no idea who the tools belonged to. Asked members of his family if they knew of anyone losing the tools. Took no other steps (to find an . owner. Ferguson’s homestead was the nearest to where the spanners were picked up. Constable Doyle commented that Mclntosh’s evidence in Court differed materially from that given in his statement several weeks ago. Evidence as to Mclntosh’s good character in the community was given. His Worship said defendant could be convicted, as he kept articles without taking usual and proper steps to find an owner. However, he was quite satisfied on the evidence that deliberate theft had been perpetrated. This practice must be put a stop to. At * conviction would be recorded, with a penalty of £6, .with costs. This penalty was to enable an appeal to be lodged. An order (by consent) for return of the tools to Ferguson was made. ' jS

The, case as reported above, was completed before the luncheon adjournment, but soon after resuming at 2 p.m. Mr McCarter asked his Worship if he proposed to grant a re-liear-ing in consideration of the fact that one of the principal witnesses for the prosecution had made an important admission.

The Magistrate stated that he did not propose to reopen the case at that stage of the day’s sitting. The proper course was for counsel to formally apply for a re-hearing and it would come up at next month’s sitting.

Mr McCarter replied that in view of the newspaper publicity and the crowded courtroom the Magistrates comments when convicting Mclntosh of theft were damaging, more especiv ally as he was a settler of good repute in the district; However, the/Magistrate did not see his way to re-opening the case at once. Later in the afternoon, the case was again referred to, when Constable Doyle stated that’ during the luncheon adjournment a witness had made a statement in the presence of the police and defendant’s counsel that his sworn evidence was incorrect and he gave a fresh version. In his (Constable Doyle’s) opinion, the witness had been “got at ” and therefore it was but fair to delay the re-heanng so that .the position could be closely investigated and the Magistrate, Jiby delaying the re-hearing could more fairly arrive at the truth of the evidence. ' •