Supreme Court Found Guilty On One Charge; Five Others Fail

Press, Volume CV, Issue 30976, 4 February 1966, Page 10

Supreme Court Found Guilty On One Charge; Five Others Fail

A burglar who entered five baches at Taylor’s Mistake on the night of September 27 apparently had no light with him, and so lit piles of screwi ed-up newspaper on the floors, ; scorching floor coverings, and in one case melting linoleum. “The places could quite easily have been burned down,” said a witness in the Supreme Court yesterday, when Mitchell George Joseph Laddie Heath, aged 20, a carpenter, stood trial before Mr Justice Wilson and a jury on five charges of burglary of the baches, and a sixth charge of attempted burglary of a bach. Defended by Mr R. L. Kerr, Heath pleaded not guilty. After a retirement of almost three hours, the jury found him guilty on one count, but not guilty on the other five. Heath had not been seen to enter the baches, but articles stolen from them were found in his possession, said Mr N. W. Williamson, for the Crown. Heath was charged with the burglary of baches owned by Viola Eva Roberts, Herbert Henry Eastwick, George Nelson Hacksell, Barbara Sarah Carter, and Norman James Forward, and attempted burglary of a bach owned by William John Shanks. He was found guilty of burgling the bach of Barbara Carter, and was remanded for sentence. Crown Evidence All six bach-owners gave evidence, saying that windows had been broken to gain entry to their properties, and the baches left in great disorder, with burnt paper and magazines scattered over the floors. Barbara Carter said there had been stolen from her bach a transistor radio valued at £22, a binocular valued at £lO, two cameras valued at £2B 10s, two bottles of Vat 69 whisky, and bottles of champagne, liqueur, and red wine.

In further evidence for the Crown, lan Victor Young, a factory employee, said that he previously lived in a roominghouse in Buchan street, Sydenham, where Heath and another man were also living. The three went to Taylor’s Mistake in his white van on the morning of September 27, after a week-end party, to gather pauas, but returned to Christchurch because the sea was too rough.

That evening, said Young, he lent the van to Heath and his friend tn pick up two girls for another party, but he did not see the van again until September 28, when Heath drove up to Buchan street about 8 a.m. Asked where they had been, they said they had fallen asleep. That evening, said Young, Heath gave him a radio (identified as stolen from the bach of Mrs Roberts) which he (Young) subsequently sold. He later saw a transistor radio, and two cameras (identified as stolen from Miss Carter's bach) during drinks in Heath’s room, when they had Vat 69 whisky. “There was also a champagne bottle there,” Young said. Cross-examined Cross-examined by Mr Kerr, he agreed that he had been convicted of receiving the radio, knowing it to be stolen and had also 18 previous convictions involving dishonesty.

Desmond Lewis Brown, a factory worker, and formerly resident at the Buchan street premises, said he saw a camera (identified as stolen from Miss Carter’s bach) in Heath’s room after September 27. When Heath vacated the premises, the camera was left in the pantry, and so he (Brown) put it in his room. A detective took it away. Constable M. W. E. Smith gave evidence of being at

Taylor's Mistake on the morning of September 27 with members of the Police Underwater Club, and seeing Young arrive in a white van with Heath and another man The latter two got out and wa'ked within 100 yards of the baches.

Interview Accused

Detective-Constable W. J Porter gave evidence of in terviewing Heath after tracing in second-hand shops art icles stolen from the baches Heath admitted going m a

white van to Taylor’s Mistake on the morning of September 27, and then to Stewart’s Gully, but said he drank heavily that day and about 6 p.m. “flaked out" in the van. He did not know where the van was driven after that, but when he woke up he was still in the van. parked in Buchan street. He denied giving a radio to Young.

His Honour, summing up, said that the case on four counts was very weak. “It is somewhat stronger on the first count, and strongest on the fourth count.”