MISTAKEN IDENTITY.

Hokitika Guardian, 19 July 1924, Page 2

MISTAKEN IDENTITY.

£IOOO COMPENSATION CLAIMED. The unpleasant experience of being arrested as a wholesale forger through being mistaken for Bradley, the Gisborne man who perpetrated cheque frauds throughout the North Island over a period of several years, was the lot of a Tnurnnga farmer, who is now petitioning Parliament for £IOOO compensation.

The petitioner is Thomas Steele. Duncan, and in his petition, which was presented in Hie House of Representatives by Mr ('. E. Macmillan, he sets out the circumstances of the case. Tie states that on December 27th, 19211, he was conveying his daughter, a nurse at Waikato Public Hospital, to Rotorua. when ho was arrested on a warrant issued against him for false pretences at Morritisvillo. lie was taken to Morrinsvillc, and was remanded for eight days, hail being refused. TTe was subjected to an identification test at tin' polite station, and was further compelled to undergo the indignity of public iilcntilicaii-n on Morrinsvillc railway station. While under remand he was taken by tbe police to Matainata, To Aroha, Paoroa, Thames, and Auckland, for identification tests, but at all these places the complainants were positive lie was not the guilty party.

Duncan further alleges that a telegram whieli he sent to his wife shortly after his arrest to allay to some exlent her natural anxiety at his disappearance was apparently delayed, and not delivered for several days, by which time the police had searched

his home. On January 17th Duncan was released on hail to appear at Morrinsvillc Police Court to answer the charges of false pretences, but when the case tame on he was advised that the police had received a telegram from Gisborne announcing Bradley’s arrest anil confessing to all tho crimes of false protonces with which Duncan had been charged. Duncan further stated that subsequently all the parties concerned identified Bradley, and that the police admitted petitioner’s innocence. During Duncan’s absence crops were neglected on his farm, anil he lost 80 acres of turnips through being unable to attend to them. II" was also put to heavy expense preparing his defence in tho action, hi- farming losses being estimated at WOO and bis legal expenses at £lO. He claims that be ami bis family naturally suffered coiiMdoruble pain and anguish of mind through the odium east upon them through his arrest anil through unnecessary pub--I,city given to the arrest, and also through bis wrongful imprisonment, f„ r which, as already stated, he claims £1(100 compensation.