Theft And Receiving
Sir, —In a recent case in the Supreme Court at Christchurch, a man was sentenced for the theft of a vehicle. Parts of thi vehicle were used to rebuild anoth r car. The accused received a heavy penalty while those who used the parts went “scot free.” Why was no charge of receiving brought against them? It was my understanding that this usually followed such a conviction.—Yours, etc., MALHEUREUX. February 27, 1966. [The chief superintendent of police, Christchurch (Mr G W. Altyj replies: “Your correspondent is correct in his understanding that charges of receiving stolen property are preferred in certain instances. It follows that if and when evidence is available charges are considered. We cannot, of course, discuss any investigations under inquiry or awaiting trial.”]
Permanent link to this item
Hononga pūmau ki tēnei tūemi
https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/CHP19660315.2.148.5
Bibliographic details
Ngā taipitopito pukapuka
Press, Volume CV, Issue 31009, 15 March 1966, Page 16
Word count
Tapeke kupu
128Theft And Receiving Press, Volume CV, Issue 31009, 15 March 1966, Page 16
Using this item
Te whakamahi i tēnei tūemi
Stuff Ltd is the copyright owner for the Press. You can reproduce in-copyright material from this newspaper for non-commercial use under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International licence (CC BY-NC-SA 4.0). This newspaper is not available for commercial use without the consent of Stuff Ltd. For advice on reproduction of out-of-copyright material from this newspaper, please refer to the Copyright guide.
Acknowledgements
Ngā mihi
This newspaper was digitised in partnership with Christchurch City Libraries.
Log in