20 THEFT CHARGES

Gisborne Herald, Volume LXVI, Issue 20101, 22 November 1939, Page 11

20 THEFT CHARGES

GOODS VALUED AT £262 VARIED COLLECTION WOMAN BEFORE COURT (I'ur Press Association.) AUCKLAND, this day. Approximately 3400 articles, ranging from a bootmaker's last to clothing and small pieces of jewellery, were displayed in the Police Station gymnasium, which had been specially constituted as the Police Court, when Annie Adalia Albertha Le Compt O’Hanlon, a domestic, aged 57, was charged with thefts from city stores of articles valued at £262. On behalf of the accused, Mr. Aekins entered a plea of guilty to a charge of the theft of a carton of honey valued at 10d., but pleaded not guilty to the other charges. In order that the goods mentioned in the charges might be suitably displayed, application had been made two wee ks ago for the holding of the court in the police gymnasium. Two long benches and the table tennis table were laden with articles, which included 216 pieces of crystal and glassware, 139 pieces of hardware and kitchenware, 447 articles of clothing. 263 toilet requisites, 203 articles of stationery and groceries and 376 pieces of jewellery. Over £260 in Value The accused was charged on 20 informations of theft, said DetectiveSergeant Walsh, who prosecuted. The total value -of the alleged stolen goods was assessed at £262, a conservative estimate of the actual value. In 14 of the charges, Detective-Ser-geant Walsh continued, the articles were identified by employees of different city stores as being the exclusive stock of their respective firms. The value of the property described in the 14 charges was £42. There were six further charges embracing the alleged theft of 2641 articles described as the property of persons unknown. The value of that property was estimated at £2OO. The accused, said Detective-Sergeant Walsh, was arrested on November 4. She was detected in the act of stealing a carton of honey valued at lOd. from the counter of a city store. Her arrest led to a search of the accused’s room, where this vast mass of property was found. When interviewed by the police, the accused explained that practically all the property seized was brought by her from Christchurch some three and a half years ago and that it had been purchased at various auction sales by her late husband. Typical Collection Evidence would be called to show that the articles before the court were of recent manufacture, many of them having been on the market for a short period only and, at the most, two years. An inspection showed that the goods were obviously in new condition. “I wish to stress in the present case,” Detective-Sergeant Walsh concluded, “that no person in the accused’s position in life would be in possession of tile wide assortment of goods displayed before Your Worship to-day. The 3400 articles exhibited in this case are typical of a shoplifter’s collection and all the circumstances point to the conclusion that the property has been stolen.” After a witness had been crossexamined by Mr. Aekins, the case was adjourned.