THEFT OF RINGS

Hokitika Guardian, 20 September 1933, Page 7

THEFT OF RINGS

WOMAN PLEADS GUILTY

AUCKLAND, September 19

A sequel to the recent duping of several jewellers in the city was heard before Mr W. R. McKean, S.M., in tbc; Police Court yesterday, when Dorothy Meyrick, married, aged 28, was charged with stealing a diamond ring valued at £l7 10s ,the property of Read Brothers, and diamond rings valued at £SO and £3O, the property of P. Hayman and Company. Mr Flail Skelton represented accused, who pleaded guilty. Detective-Sergeant O’Sullivan said accused cailled at Read Brothers’ premises on September 1 and asked to be shown a number of rings. She examined several trays of rings, and, by some means, substituted an inferor ring and left the premises with one valued at £l7 10s. This she later sold to a gold buyer for £4. On September 4, she visited Hayman’s* warehouse, and again she managed to obtain, by means of substitution, a ring valued at £SO, which was shown to her by a young woman assistant. The attention of the assistant was distracted at the moment. The ring was sold by accused for £6 los. 'She returned to the premises another day and stole another ring, which was pledged to a pawnbroker, PREVIOUS CONVICTIONS. Mr O’Sullivan said accused had a long list of convictions, and she was before the Court two years ago. She was sent to a home at Waikowhai, but her conduct was so unsatisfactory that she Was sent to the Mount Magdala Home, Christchurch. Nothing morn, could b© done for her. “This is one of those cases which are more a matter for an alienist than a lawyer,” counsel stated. Accused was married and had a family. Her conduct had been good for two. years, and the. case was one which was hard to explain in the language of oathology. What brought about her downfall was tliat she had just come out of hospital and wanted money for her child. She had undoubtedly been treated very shabbily by a m'an in the city, who, of course, would not he required to face the consequences. It was what pathologists called pregnancy kleotomania. and counsel understood accused had committed offences because of. that cause on previous occasions.

REMANDED FOR EXAMINATION

Counsel said accused had good references as a housekeeper, and would have a situation to go if she were given an opportunity. In this situation, she would be under control, and a rebuke perhaps would meet the case under those circumstances. It might do her more good than sentencing her, and counsel said that', in such cases, sentences did not always operate to good effect. The situation was available with a well-known family, which would look after accused. “The man who brought about this state of affairs gets off scot, free,” counsel added, “He is a well-known citizen, and ought to he horse-whipped.” The magistrate said he had received a report, and the woman appeared to be a typical case. There might be something in what counsel said, but that did not account for everything. He was informed that accused was an extremely good worker. She had had opportunities, but she had previous convictions. When counsel asked whether the Court would like to have a report from an alienist, the magistrate consented, and remanded accused for a week for sentence.