ALLEGED THEFT.

Manawatu Herald, Volume XXXI, Issue 464, 22 July 1909, Page 3

ALLEGED THEFT.

CASE DISMISSED. At the local police court this morning before Messrs Thomas Rimmer and F. W. Frankland J’s.P., John William Anderson was again brought forward on a charge of having on July 3rd stolen one pair ot boots value 16s 6d, the property of William Aparima. The evidence for the prosecution in this case had been heard at the sitting of the court held on Thursday the 15th inst., when the case had been adjourned in order to give the accused an opportunity to j have witnesses present. 1 Mr Barnard, who appeared for accused, said that one of the men (Langley) whom he had expected to give evidence, had since said that he did not remember accused purchasing a pair of boots in Napier, and therefore he did not intend to call him. He handed in a sworn statement from a man named Badden to the effect that he was with accused at Napier and remembered him purchasing a pair of boots there. The following evidence for the defence was given :

George Wright, bootmaker, said that it was about eleven months ago since he had sold Aparima a pair ot boots. The boots produced might have been purchased from his shop, but he did not sell a pair similar to them to Aparima. The laces produced were not the same kind as he stocked.

John William Anderson the accused, on oath, stated that the boots produced were his property. He had purchased them in Napier. Langley and Badden were with him at the time, but waited outside the shop for him. He had cut pieces off both of the laces.

To Constable Woods: He did not have any interview with Badden previous to his making the sworn statement. Had only spoken to Aparima once since last court day. Did not see Aparima at all on the 3rd inst. At the request of the bench the accused put the boots 011 and walked in them.

William Wright stated that Aparima had not purchased any boots from him for fully nine mouths. Boots similar to the ones produced were stocked by almost all boot dealers. He did not stock laces similar to the ones produced. Did not know a native named Puki.

Mrs Walter Anderson stated that accused had boarded with her since last Christmas. Had noticed a pair ot boots similar to the ones produced, in his room. Saw a new pair there after he returned from Napier. Had not seen them during the last fortnight. In reply to Constable Woods, the witness said that she had never told any person that the accused had asked her to give certain evidence in this case, and that she had told him she did not want to, as she was afraid ot a case of perjury being brought against her.

This concluded the case for the defence.

The ‘ Bench decided to recall William Aparima, who stated that he purchased the boots two or three months ago. Puki was with him at the time, and he paid for them.

The Justices said that the evidence was very conflicting, and they did not think that the police had proved the charge, and therefore the case must be dismissed.

The police stated that they intended to again bring on the case, and Anderson was placed under arrest on a charge of stealing the boots.