CRIMINAL SESSIONS

Dominion, Volume 9, Issue 2845, 9 August 1916, Page 9

CRIMINAL SESSIONS

At the Supreme Court yesterday the Chief Justice (Sir Robert Stout) presided.

The Grand Jury returned true bills aga-inst James Connor,- receiving stolen goods (patent medicines): James Angus M'Quilkan, alleged theft from a vessel; James Joseph Eccles, alleged falsification of a trade mark; John Thomas Morris, alleged receiving of stolen goods; JSdward Hellawell, alleged receiving of stolen goods. The Grand Jury found true bills on twentythree indictments.

CHARGE OF RECEIVING STOLEN GOODS. 1

James Connor was cliargcd wi Lb receiving stolen goods (patent medicines) of the" value of £61 lis. 6d., the property of Messrs. Sharland Rnd Co., knowing the same to have been dishonestly obtained. There were in all lour charges, and accused pleaded not guilty to knowing that the goods had been dishonestly obtained. The hearing of the ease was adjourned to Wednesday, August 16. 'Mr. P. J. O'Began apeared for accused, who was released 011 bail as before.

ALLEGED ROBBERY WITH VIOLENCE.

Albert Edward Robinson and Henry Campbell pleaded not guilty to tho charge of having on May 24, in the Albion Hotel, robbed Rami Bagvatt, a Hindoo, of £5, using violence. Mr. H. I l '. o'Len.ry appeared for Campbell, but Robinson was not represented by counsel. Mr. V. R. Meredith, of tho Crown Law Office, prosecuted. . Mr. J. T. Tukes was foreman of the-jury.

The facts submitted were that on May 24, in the Albion Hotel, Rana , Bag van, .a Hindoo, went into the. hotel for a pint of beer. The accused were in tli© bar before the Hindoo came in, and about live or six minutes afterwards there was a scuffle, and Campbell had. the Hindoo by the throat, while Robinson went through his pockets and robbed him of JL'5. .

The complainant, Rana liagvan, who was provided with the services of an interpreter, gave evidence similar to that, tendered in the Lover Court, and detailed the circumstances of the assault. Yi'illiam James Gillham, barman at the .hotel, gave corroborative, evidence. ' Sergeant Willcox and Constable Hurley gave particulars of the arrest of the accused.

Clmpbell, one of the accused, went into tho witness-box and gave evidence. Ho said he was in Wellington just "about n week, before the occurrence. He had been discharged from the Fcatherstbn Camp for varicose veins. He'went into the Albion Hotel by himself, and met Robinson there, and they had a drink together. The Hindoo came in afterwards, and had a drink. Tho Hindoo bumpe'd up against him, and spilled his beer over witness. Witness then pushed the Hindoo back against the wall, and Robinson came in and tried ,to separate them, because he, thought' witness was about to strike the Hindoo. Tho Hindoo left the hotel before witness left. : He heard the next day when lie Went to the hotel that? the police . were after them, and, jater, lie and Robinson were arrested in tho'City Hotel. Ho know Robinsqu in, Southland some five or six years ago. In. cross-examination, Campbell admitted that he was convicted in Christchurch for striking a policeman. _Tho jury acquitted Robinson, whom the Judge described as-a lucky man, and brought in a verdict of guilty of assault, against Campbell.. Sentence was' deferred until Saturday. - INDECENT ASSAULT. --Isadora'-Mount appeared in tho dock to answer a charge of indecent assault on « male. Mr. V. R. Meredith appeared for the Crown, and Mr. H. O'Lear.v represented accused. Mr. A. J. G. Smith was foreman of the jury. Tho Court was elcarod during the hearing of tho case. Tho jury returned; a. verdict-of guilty, and prisoner was remanded to Saturday for sentence. ' ' FORGERY. ... Charles Hector Dudley was charged that 011 Juno 5, at Wellington, ho did forgo a chuquo on tho Bank of New Zealand ior £21 Is., purporting to be signed by G. Williams. 'Mr.'V. R. Meredith appeared for the Crown, and accused was not represented by counsel. Mr. R. AV. Martin was foreman of tho jury. The case for the prosecution was that accused on Juno 5 called upon Mr. W. W. Pjlkington, -and negotiated" for-the purchase of a motor-car. He finally ilecided on a car, and asked Mr. Pilkington for a blank cheque on the Bank of New Zealand, because he (accused) had not his cheque book with him. He was given a blank cheque on the Te Aro branch of the Bank of New Zealand. Mr. Pilkington struck out the words Te Aro, and inserted Nelsoni where the accused said he had his account. The negotiations for tho motor-car fell through, and : accused Kent away, taking with him the blank cheque. Later, accused visited the shop of Mr. Tucker, jeweller, of Cuba Street, and' intimated that ho wanted to purchase a watch. and chain for presentation. He was shown goods, and made a final selection. He tendered a cheque, like tho one produced, and as it was not in order Mr. Tucker refused to accept the cheque, and accused went away. , Later, accused called at_tho branch establishment of Mr. H., v,. 'Lloyd, jeweller, in Cuba Street. He stated lie wished to purchase a ivatch and chain, which he selected and tondsred a cheque for £21. The assistant who transacted the business with accused said that as a matter of business she would have to refer the chcque to Mr. Lloyd. Mr. Lloyd, in response to a message,-callod in at his Cuba Street shop, secured tho chcque and made inquiries. When the accused returned to obtain the goods, Mr. Lloyd taxed accused with the cliequo being bogus. Accuscd then snatched at the cheque, which was thus torn. The police were immediately sent for, and the accused given in charge, When arrested, accused stated that he had made a mistake, and asked to bo I given a ofiance. Corroborative cvidenco was given by the Crown witnesses.

Accused called no witnesses, but made a statement. He said' he had been in a bank for seven years, and knew how to fill in a cheque. Tho cheque he tendered was irregular in two places. Further, ho changed his mind after he had agreed to buy tho goods*at Lloyd's, and asked for the chcque back, and therefore ho thought lie was innocent.

His Honour pointed out that accused was not charged with obtaining goods, but with tendering a forged chcque, and the fact that he asked for tho return- of the cheque did not alter the fact that he tendered tho document.

Tho jury, after a short retirement, brought in a verdict of guilty. His Honour, addressing the prisoner, 'said ho did not know what to do. He had been sentenced in 191.5 011 nine charges of forgery. Becauso of his youth the Prisons' Board had treated him with somo consideration, and had given him a chance. Three days after being liberated prisoner had resumed his criminal practices. It was heart-breaking, and caused 0110 to loso faith. Prisoner was remanded to Saturday for sentence.