THE COURTS.

Press, Volume LIV, Issue 16142, 21 February 1918, Page 4

THE COURTS.

SUPREME COURT. CRIMINAL SESSIONS. (Before his Honour Mr Justice Chapman.) Tiie criminal sessions were resumed yesterday. Mr S. G. Raymond. K.C., prosecuted on behalf of the Crown. BREAKING AND ENTERING . Robert Dickson Warden, alias Robert Lawrence, who was not represented by counsel, was indicted on iwo counts ot' breaking and entering and theft. The first count was in respect of the theft of 2s 6d from the residence of N. H. E. Asquith on October 19th, 1917; the second in respect of the theft of a gold watch and chain, valued at £12, from the residence of Elizabeth Aun Wood, ou November Ist, 1917. Accused pleaded not guilty. Mr Raymond, in outlining the cases, said that in both .the evidence tendered would be similar. Identification would be attempted to be proved hv means of finger prints. Mrs Wood's house, at 71 Bligh's road, was entered by the breaking of the pantry window, and on part of the glass that remained the person who entered left a welldefined liuger mark. This had been carefullv examined by the linger mark expert,* who identified the marks as those of accused whose linger marks had been taken previously. In the other case, the finger mark was found on a Post Office Home Savings Bank which had been broken open. Evidence was given respecting the circumstances surrounding the breaking and entering and theft in both cases. Edmund W. Dinnie, in charge of the Criminal Registration Branch of the Police Department, produced photographs of the finger prints taken from the piece of window glass and from the money-box, and stated that in respect of the first there were 17 points rf similarity between it and the photograph of the accused's finger prints taken in 1914; in the sccond there were 1-5 points of similarity; five or six points of similarity would be sufficient to establish identity. Accused, in statement, said that at the time of the offences he was laid up with two poisoned hands in the Wellington Hospital; he also had a burnt leg and could hardly walk. He handed up two letters—one he stated was from the hospital authorities, and the other from his father. After a retirement of a little over a quarter of an hour, the jury returned with a verdict of guilty on each count. His Honour remarked that of accused's 28 previous convictions fully a dozen involved dishonesty. On each of the two present charges, accused was sentenced to 12 months' imprisonment, sentences to be cumulative; on three similar charges, to which pleaded guilty in the lower Court, he was sentenced to 12 months' imprisonment, to run concurrent with the previous sentence; in all, an addition of two years' imprisonment to prisoner's term of two years he was serving: he was further declared to be an habitual criminal. CASE COLLAPSES. Stanleigh Leigh, for whom Mr Cassidy appeared, pleaded not gniltv to an indictment of four counts, charging him t with having indecently assaulted Annie Soman, and having stolen .from her a handbag and a number of articles of jewellery. Mr Raymond said that he relied chiefly on the evidence of Annie Soman, an "unmarried woman, who was called and gave evidence respecting the alleged offences. In cross-examination by Mr Cassidv witness stated that before signing a document (produced), in which she stated that she was sorry she told a certain man of her condition for which he was responsible, she had not read it. His Honour (referring., to the document: This was written by a responsible solicitor of this Court. (To witness) : Do you 6av that he concocted that?— Yes. After further cross-examination, witness stated to Mr Raymond that sbe had had a child three years ago, but it was stillborn. His Honour (to Mr Raymond): If you treat this as a genuine document, I don't Sfee that' you can rely on this witness. Mr Raymond: I confess I have'that feeling myself, sir. His Honour: "What course do you propose to pursue? Mr Raymond: I offer no further evidence. iii'HP on - J .u' s H° n °ur's direction the it> without leaving the box, brought m a verdict of not guilty. INDECENT ASSAULT. Ed bv 1 «jiin«nf y ' , was unrepresentof W ea<^ec ' not guilty to a 1918" at Snmn mg ' -°? January 6th. a girl about nine ye^rs' 6 assaulted Evidence on lines sL" , given in the lower to - lll,at The jury. a fto? a br! r g,ven " returned with a verdict nf rp . t ' rement J His Honour said th at + f U,lt - r -, place for a man of prisoner' l y prisoner s character

was gaol. He was sentenced to seven years' imprisonment, and .declared to be an habitual criminal. ALLEGED INCEST. Harvey Roland Birch Miles (Mr Cassidv) was indicted on a charge of incest. After a retirement of about twenty minutes the jury returned with a verdict of not guilty, and the prisoner was discharged. T'ue criminal sessions than closed. MAGISTERIAL. (Before Mr T. A. B. Bailey, S.M.) DISMISSED. A - woman (Mr McDougall) pleaded not guilty' to t a charge of receiving vanous goods lo the total value' of £7 2s. knowing them to have been stolen. The case was the sequel to one which was heard in the Court the previous day, when the accused s two little girls were charged -with stealing the goods mentioned and taking them home. Accused's explanation -was that the children had told her that they had been given, the articles by two other little girls, at the request of their mother, as she and her family were going to the North Island. Accused had no idea that the articles had been stolen, though she had put them on one side to make further enquiries as to whether the other little girls' mother really authorised the gift. The Magistrate described the case as one of the most extraordinary he had ever heard. However, he would accept the "woman's story and.dismiss the information. EVADING THE CONDUCTOR. Thomas Frost pleaded not guilty to having failed to_ pay his tram fare on a journey from New Brighton to Rolleston street, .and with having made a false statement in connexion with thematter. Mr Dougall appeared for the Tramway Board. A fine of 10s and costs ■■was inflicted on each charge. THREATENING BEHAVIOUR. Norman and Gloud Aitken (Mr Hunt) were charged with having used threatening behaviour on tho tennis courts at the Selwyn huts, whereby a breach of .the peace was occasioned, and also with having used obscene language. Both ■were convicted and discharged on the threatening behaviour charge. *"Tbe information alleging obsceue language against Norman Aitken was withdrawn* ■while on the similar charge his brother was fined -10s and costs.