THEFT CASE ECHO.

Waikato Times, Volume 112, Issue 18803, 26 November 1932, Page 6

THEFT CASE ECHO.

AN APPEAL ALLOWED. HAMILTON CONVICTIONS. An appeal against two convictions for theft entered against him by Mr. F. W. Platts, S.M., at Hamilton on August 12, was made by Frederick Courtney, aged 52 years (Mr. Hall Skelton) in the Supreme Court, Hamilton, yesterday. Mr. 11. T. Gillies, represented tha Crown.

Doreen Robson, employed at the Henderson Shoe Store, gave evidence that the accused entered the shop on March 24 with another man. She could not find the brand -of shoes to suit the men and asked them to come back -later. She left the men to serve a woman at the other side of the shop. When she returned one pair of shoes on a fixture in the shelf had disappeared. Edward Henry Victor Dick, proprietor of Fort’s tailoring business, testified that the accused and another man visited his shop on March 24 last. Witness sewed a button on a coat for the accused. On the following -Monday he noticed two suit lengths valued at £5 10s were missing from the shop.

Ernest F. Liddell, manager of Hallenslein Brothers. Hamilton, remembered the accused visiting his shop on March 24. He had a friend with him. Accused asked to be shown soma suits.

Cross-examined, witness agreed that nothing was missed from his shop. Corroborative evidence was given by John Adamson Brown. Eric John Morgan, attendant at the Whiliora Bowser Station, stated that on July 13 last a car containing four men bought four gallons of petrol at his garage for 10s. He remembered one of the men observing him while lie went to the till. While the car was there the occupants seemed intent on drawing his attention. While there the men consumed some beer. After Hie men had departed witness found that three bottles of oil were gone. Accused Interviewed. Detective A. Moore, of Auckland* said lie interviewed the accused on July 21 and arrested him for vagrancy. The accused admitted he had gone into a bool shop in Hamilton, hut denied lie had stolen the slices. AN hen asked about Hie theft of oil from the Whiliora bowser station the accused admitted calling there with some other men. but denied stealing any oil. He agreed that a few bottles of liquor had been consumed at the bowser station. In allowing the appeals in respect of both convictions, 11is Honour, referring to the alleged theft of oil pointed out that no one saw the oil stolen. The only evidence before him was dial before Hie four men arrived the oil was there and after they had gone ilie oil had disappeared. While (lie circumstances might he highly suspicions he had to try Hie case as if fie were a jury. He saw no evidence to justify a conviction.

The oilier charge was similar, added Ills Honour. He could see- no complete linking-up between the disappearance of Ihi' slices and iho presence of (lie accused. Iho evidence was too unsatisfactory to show Dial a criminal offence had been proved.