SUPREME COURT

Dominion, Volume 10, Issue 2997, 7 February 1917, Page 9

SUPREME COURT

CRIMINAL SLSSONS ALLEGED CO NSPIRAC Y' TO DEFRAUD THE ACCUSED ACQUITTED Before Mr. Justice Chapman, in the Supremo Court yesterday, the case was resumed in which Tim Troy, Maurice Costello, and Joseph Wm. Scott were charged with conspiring to' defraud Alfred Crossley of by cheating at poker. There was a further chargo against the accused of cheating at poller with intent to defraud Crossley of his money. Mr. V. R. Meredith conducted the prosecution, llr. H. Cooper appeared for Costello, and. Mr. J. J. M'Grath for Scott. Troy was not represented by counsel. Purthor evidence for tho Crown was given by Arthur Hoskings, licensee of the Rutland Hotel, Pahiatua. Eva Hoskings, Vife of. the last witness, was also called. Sergeant Scott explained to the Court the game of poker. Ho said that ho was not an expert, but that ho knew something about the game. Detective-Sergeant llawlo stated that he was on duty at tho Pahiatua races on September 14. He retailed statements made by Troy and Scott when interviewed regarding the pokor gamo of the previous night. , The case for tho defence was opened. Troy elected not to give ovidonco, and Mr. Cooper stated that he did not intend to call any witnesses. Mr., M'Grath,. in his opening on behalf of Scott, said that the latter was a man of good character who, but for his, generosity in inviting Crosslev to sleep with him, would never have been in his present position. Crossloy, seeing four queens in his hand, had caught 1 glimpses of a fortune, and might have risked hundreds of pounds but for Scott's advice, which throughout had been of the best. - Scott had been frank with tho police, and frank in every way, and counsel submitted that it was almost a wasto of timo proving to the jury his innocence in tto wholo matter. Thero was no evidence of conspiracy between tho three men, nnd the Croivn, apparently realising the weakness of the first chargo, had put in an additional ono of cheating at cards. - . . Seott, who staled: that his occupation was that of builder and horse-trainer, said that his accommodation at the Rutland Hotel had .been found. for him by tho secretary of tho racing club.. at Pahiatua. He had quite expected to be located olsewhere. Witness knew Crossley intimately. The lattor had often been, to' witness's house, .both on business and as a friend... WitneßS at the game of poker had withdrawn from piny early? He had not seqn Crossley s hand, but Crossley had, from the other side of the table, caused witness to understand that ho had a good ono. Witness at no stage of the game knew "roy s or Crossloy's hand. Ho told Crossley correctly what money lie was rstf.uired to put on, but tried, to stop tho latter before ho went too far. Witness, when he first saw Crossley on September 13, had no idea that thero would be any gamo of poker. Ho had received not a penny of the proceeds. When tho party went to the bar for drinks, Troy put down a cheque for .C 5, bearing Crossley's name. The licensee said the cheque was not in ordor, and witness, remarking that it would bo all right, took tho chequo and gave •£» for it. Ho thought. Troy took the mc.ney, Crossley had later offered to "square up" after the case. To Mr. Meredith: Witness had known Troy for a considerable time, and amorally addressed liim as "Tim." Mr. Meredith: Then why did you call him "Mr. Troy" all through tho I game?— Witness: I deny that 1 ever called him mister. | Witney?, in answer to furthor ques- [ tions by Mr. Meredith, said that lie had not thought there was anything wrong in introducing his friend Crossley to Troy and letting him join the latter in a game of cards. After going out of tho game, Costello took 1 somo money off tho table. AVitnoss did not know whether Costello pocketed the amount. His reason for removing it was that there was an. alarm, of "police." The monoy was put back on tho table when Crossley objected to Costello's handling it. Crossley. was | getting excited in the courso of the game, and "talking , hundreds," when witness advised him to stop. Witness saw no trick in the game, but next morning, hearing 'what Crossley had to say, ho began to think thoro might be eomotliing wrong. The witness Crossloy was recalled. His Honour (to Crossley): While the game was going on, was Scott on .. the opposite, side of tho table?—"Ho , was." Dow did lie know what your hand was?— "Ho ncvor did." Troy addressed tho jury in graphic terms. "Half of Crossloy's ovidenee," ho said, "is confounded lies. Tliat man knows as much about the game as I do." "He's only about five feet four," Troy said later, again referring to Crossley, "but when ho got four queens he was six feet," Troy wont on to allege that tho evidence for the' Crown was false, and concluded: "As for conspiracy, gentlemen, I leave that to you'." Mr. Meredith reviewed the'case for tho prosecution. On behalf of Costello, Mr. Cooper said that he.had heard no evidence throughout the case to suggest that thoro' had been any cheating, such as was alleged in tho second count of tho indictment. He asked the jury to be particularly ■ careful to consider in his client's oase only such evidence as was strictly relevant. .Costello might have been officious and indiscreet in his behaviour on the night of the game an d after, but though a man might be stupid he was by no jneans necessarily a criminal. Crossley, after the game, had had drinks with the alleged 'Swindlers," and hau slept with ono of them. He had not been sufficiently sporting to "play up, pay up, and shut up." Tho threo accused had come together by accidont, and had lind no opportunity to put their heads together-beiore the game. His Honour, in summing up, explained to tho-jury 1 that with regard to _the charge of conspiracy, ono man aTono could not be found guilty. On tho charge of cheating, one, two, or three of the accused could bo convicted if tho evidence was sufficiently strong. Tho first question to be decided was whether tho game of cards had been an honest one or a swindle. Each pieco of evidence would have to be distinguished aa ! relating to one, two, or all threo of the accused.Tho jury retired at 3.30 p.m;, and returned in half an hour with ft verdict of not guilty on both counts of tlie indiotmcnt. Tho' prisoners were discharged fprthvritli. INDECENT ASSAULT. William Francis O'Brien pleaded not guilty to a chargo of 'having on January 30, at Wellington, indecently assaulted a girl, 8i years of age. Mr. V. R. Meredith conducted the caso for the Crown. The accused was unroprosonted. Mr. A. It. Amey was elected' foreman of the jury called upon to try the case. Several witnesses were called fi« tho prosecution, and the accused made a statement to. tho jury alleging that ho was very drunk on tlie date in question. After a short retirement, tlio jury returned a verdict of guilty. Mr. Meredith stated that the prisoner had a record of previous convictions for acts of an indecent nature. His Honour said that he looked upon the prisoner as a dangerous character, and inflicted a sentenco of four years' imprisonment with hard labour. NEW PLYMOUTH SESSION. ,l)y Telegraph—Press Association. New Plymouth, February S. At the Supremo Court to-day Pranlc Kattenbury, a settler in tho Waitara district, pleaded not guilty to breaking and entering Hatrick and Co.'s warehouse at Waitara, and stealing 23 eases of whisky. Tho jurv, after three 'hours' deliberation, returned a verdict of "not guilty." Mr. Justice Edwards remarked that tho verdict of tho jury was not his, addiug that tho prisonor was a very lucky jnan. Diedrik Wohlert, a seaman, .who had

pleaded guilty to tho same charge, was brought up for sentence. Jlr. Justice towards said it was ail outrage of justico to pnnisli Wohlert when the main culprit escaped. Wohlert was admitted to probation for two years. Benjamin Graham Diver, labourer, for indecent assault on a young female, -was sentenced to three years' hard labour and three years' reformative treatment.