THEFT CHARGE FAILS

Chronicle (Levin), 11 October 1947, Page 4

THEFT CHARGE FAILS

KUKU FARMER' S LOSS OF SEVEN DUCKS A charge of theft preferred against Herbert Douglas Wright, farmhand, of Manakau, was dismissed by Messrs. D, J. Gardiner and G. Sweetman, J.P's., at a special sitting of the Magistrate's Court, Levin, yesterday. Defendant was charged with the> theft from Nepia Winiata, farmer, of Kuku, of seven ducks to the total value of 28s on or about September 5. Wright; who pleaded not guilty, was represented by Mr. J. Todd. Sergeant W. Grainger told the court that complainant, who was a breeder of ducks,- had discovered that nine of his flock were missing. A search had been made and seven of the ducks had been located shut up on property occupied by defendant. The ducks had been identified by complainant as his, and the ducks had subsequently been recovered. In evidence, Nepia Winiata said that his ducks were of the Khaki Campbell breed. Among them was a real grey duck, the offspring of which were crossed with pure breed. He would know them anywhere. In answer to a question from Sergeant Grainger, Winiata said that there were other ducks of the same type, but they were two or three miles away. and had come originally from his stock. It was not a common breed. The flock, amounting to 18 ducks, was allowed to roam at will most of the time, but had been kept in near the end of July when they had been rounded up and .their wings clipped in preparation for laying. Though normally they were allowed free, they always came back at meal times.

Following the disappearance of nine of the flock, continued Winiata, his son had reported that he had seen ^hem on defendant's property. Seven of. these were later brought back by the police, and when he had seen them he was convinced that they were his. They had had the appearance of being locked up for some time. In answer to a further question from Sergeant Graingei;, he stated that he considered the distance between the ' two properties was from 200 to 300 yards. Cross-examined by . Mr. Todd, Winiata said that although Mr. Wright's ducks and his might have become ' mixed, it was unlikely as strange ducks did not. normally mix but usually stood aside. It was common for ducks to wander in search of food. He admitted that water races were popular for this purpose, but it depended on how close the ducks were from the races. In the case of defendant's, the water race was some distance away from where his ducks were' kent.

Nepia. Taratoa Winiata, complainan£'s son, stated that it was his task to look after the ducks. He had cut their wings a month before they went missing. He had looked at the ducks with Constable Kelk, and was sure they were his father's. On rejoining the rest of the flock, they had settled down without any trouble. Tn the case of strange ducks, the others would pick at them and it would be some time before they settled down. When eeling in the vicinity of the water race passing through Wright's property, he had often seen three ducks running loose in the vicinity of the barn. On another night he had heard the noise of ducks and on investigation had seen a lot more, among which he recognised those missing from his father's property. Cross-examining this witness, Mr. Todd asked him if he had remembered an occasion when Mr. Wright had come over to his father's property to enquire about some ducks which he (Wright) had lost. Witness: Yes. Mr. Todd: You told him then to go and have a look at your father's flock. That meant you realised the possibility of the duck's mixing, or you wouldn't have asked him to go and look at your ducks. Do you remember that on that occasion you were asked how many ducks your father had, and you replied you didn't know? Witness: I didn't say that. Sergeant Grainger to witness : Mr. Wright came to you and asked you about a missing drake and you said, "go and have a look for yourself." That's what any honest person would say. That's what you have been brought up to be. Called by Sergeant Grainger, B'obert Grahame Temple Bennett said that he lived almost opposite the Wright property, and had been sent over there by his father one night to destroy a dog for Mr. Wright. While talking to Mr. Wright, he had noticed a wire netting pen with some ducks in it. He was not sure of the exact num_ber, but he had commented to Mr. Wright that he "had got some new ducks" Mr. Wright had replied that someone had given him some. Constable A. T. Kelk said he had visited the property and interviewed Mrs. Wright about some missing ducks, and had asked her how many she possessed. She had replied "about ten." They were brownish in colour, sh.e. said, and there were two white drakes. They had had the ducks for nearly a year. When asked if any of her ducks had clipped wings, she had replied in the negative. Later when Wright had arrived home he had asked him the same questions. He had replied that the ducks had been bred from two given them two years ago. None of his ducks .had had their wings clipped, and he had added that if wany of the

ducks on his property .Jaad their wings cut, they wbuld not be his property. If Mr. Winiata ideht-ified them as his , then he considered that they must have become mixed with his by mistake. Some of his own ducks had been missing at one time", and he naturally. thought they had returned. Continuing, Constable Kelk said that the ducks were kept in a pen which had obviously been recently constructed. The grass in the pen was not worn as would be the case had they been there any length of time. Seven of the ducks had the feathers of their right wings cut. -On the other two the wings were complete. He had then asked defendant if the seven ducks were his property, and defendant had replied that they were not. In regard to the other two, Mr. Winiata had been unable to positively identify them, though he had stated that they looked very similar to his. Wright" had - then said they were his (Wright's) and in the absence of positive proof he had taken no action 'in regard to these two. Addressing the bench, Mr. Todd said that -there was no doubt from 'the prosecutionis chain of factp -that certain ducks found on defendant's property were not his, nor "could they have been because of the clipped wings. There was nothing in the evidence, however, that suggested a guilty knowledge or indication that Wright had stolen them. Both flocks were at large and both had access to the same drgins and streams, and the properties were only 300 yards apart. Complainant had admitted that his flock was only under control for a short period.

Called by Mr. Todd, Mrs. Tei Hei Wright, wife of defendant, stated tha't she looked after the ducks on their property. The ducks had previously been kept in the cow shed, but were brought down nearer the house because the shed was in use and in order to be near water. The ducks were shut up every night. She owned- nine ducks and two drakes, the ducks being bred from two given her by her parents. They were let out at 11. 30 and shut up again at 3. 30 on. accoun't of laying. They never wandered far. Last summer, because of a very dry period, they had been taken down to the water race by her husband. They had never since been back to tilG TEICG On the date of the alleged theft, September 5, her .husband was in bed, continued witness. He was suffering from boils under his leg and arms, and had been in bed since August 16. On September 4 he had visited the doctor, and she produced a certificate to this effect, and on September 5 she had left the farm at 5 p.m. to go to a chemist in Levin for cotton wool and bandages, the receipt for which she also produced. She had returned to the farm at 6.30 p.m. Sergeant Grainger: You are trying to create an impression that your husband was in bed all the time. He must have been able to walk some of the time. I saw him in town myself. Called by Mr. Todd, Mr. P. Timu, father of witness, gave evidence that he had given his daughter two ducks three years ago. In evidence, defendant said that his wife had received two ducks from which were bred his ducks. He had had them since last Christmas. He could not say if they were shut up on the day of the alleged theft. He had been in bed on orders from his doctor. Sergeant Grainger: If these ducks were descended from those given to you by your wife's father, how old would they be now? Witness: They were born last Christmas. Sergeant Grainger: The seven ducks now in a-motor-car outside this court are* "three years old., I can bring evidence to that effect. Could you dispute that? Witness: t don't know much about ducks. i couldn't tell their ages. Sergeant Grainger : Complainant's son. has said that he fre-' quently saw three ducks near your cow shed. Was he correct in saying three. Was it not the two ducks and a drake which he saw? Witness: The other's were probably inside. Continuing, he contended that he had never noticed any strange ducks and if the seven were not his, they must have come down the water race or by other means and joined his at feeding time. After - an adjournment of five minutes, the bench, without comment, dismissed the information against defendant.