ATTEMPTED ROBBERY

Otago Witness, Issue 4031, 16 June 1931, Page 19

ATTEMPTED ROBBERY

JEWELLER AND WIFE ASSAULTED TWO MEN CHARGED. The sequel to a desperate attempt by two men on the night of May 11 to rob the premises of Mr W. G. Rossiter in George street, combined with a violent attach on Mr Rossiter and his wife, washeard in the City Police Court on Friday, when Thomas William Wilson and Rupert Saunders appeared, charged with having assaulted Walter. Gabriel Rossiter with intent to rob him, and with having intentionally done actual bodily harm to Jane Rossiter. Mr White represented Saunders and Mr H.. Baron appeared for Wilson. Mr H. Bundle was the presiding magistrate. DETAILS OF ASSAULT.

Walter Gabriel Rossiter, who gave his age as 73 years and that-of his wife at 65 years, identified a plan produced by the police as that of his premises in George street. There was a large and a 'small window in the front of nis shop, and there was a show case just inside the dodr. A small door at the back of the counter led from the shop into a recess, •from which two doors opened—one into the' living room and one on to the stairway. The top half of the front door of the shop was glass, the bottom half being of wood. Witness lived on the premises with his wife and daughter. About 11.20 p.m. on May 11 he was working in his ehop -when his attention was attracted by ■the blind on the outside of the front window being'disturbed. He opened the door and looked out, but he could see no one; on turning to go inside again, however, he saw the accused, Wilson, in a crouching position. Wilson said, “ I am very bad,” and witness told him he had better go •home. The accused Saunders then approached from the North-End, and drew .up alongside witness. Witness suspected danger, and attempted to close the door, but one of the meh put his foot inside and prevented his doing so. Witness was not strong enough to keep the men out. and they pushed their way inside and closed the door behind them. They immediately attacked him, and it seemed to him that both of them were holding his mouth. He managed to cry for help, but the two men pushed him towards the counter, and whilst the taller man (Saunders) held him down on the floor the other went behind the counter. Witness, still.being .held by Saunders, was calling for help, and the shorter man (Wilson) in the meantime had made for the recess at the rear of the shop. The taller man was neither brutal nor cruel —he confined his attention to holding witness down. The smaller man then returned to the shop, and, leaning over witness, stuck his fingers down his (witness’s) throat and worked them around like a corkscrew. Witness could not call any more; he was completely done, and he heard Wilson say, “ I’ve fixed them, they’ll not bother us.” TIMELY ASSISTANCE. Wilson then made for the window-, but he had only been there about a minute when witness heard a crash at the front door, and someone enter the shop. At this interruption Saunders stood up, and witness arose and went through the doorway at the rear of the shop to find his wife lying insensible in a pool of blood near the foot of the stairway. Witness •knew that the shorter man had not gone out through the front door, and he immediately rushed upstairs to make a search. He could find nothing, but he noticed that -the window- of the bathroom had' been broken open. On returning downstairs he saw the tall man standing with Mr Vennall and a constable. The man said to him: “ You have never seen me before, Mr Rossiter,” to which w-itness replied, “ I shall never forget you, and I never want to see you again.” Before the accused entered his shop, w-itness considered that he would be carrying a stock valued at £3OOO or £4OOO. There were eight trays of assorted rings in the window, one of them being valued at 250gns. The jewellery removed, but later restored, was valued at £9OO. Three £1 notes and a 10s note had vanished from a till in the counter, but these had not been discovered. -From the bathroom w-indow to the ground ■was a distance of about 20 feet.

In reply to a query by Mr White, witness stated that he was certain that Saunders had taken no part in the assault on Mrs Rossiter. Moreover, he had had every opportunity of handling witness roughly, but he refrained from doing so. To Mr Baron: He did not recognise the smaller man, although he considered he could identify him by his voice. A SUMMONS FOR HELP. Rosie Mary Rossiter, daughter of the previous witness, stated that on the night of May 11, her mother had retired about 9.30 o’clock, whilst she went to bed about an hour later. About 11.20 o’clock she heard her father’s voice calling for j help, and imagining that he had taken ill, she called to her mother, who w-ent downstairs, calling to Mr Rossiter as she did so. Witness was about to follow her mother when she heard someone running and a scuffle at the foot of the stairs, and realising that something was wrong, she ran out on to the shop veranda and called for help. She saw two men come from the other side of the road, and heard the glass of the front door break. She was assisted downstairs by one of the men, and on reaching the foot of the stairs, she found her mother lying on the floor in an unconscious state. At a later date a number of rings that had been recovered from various parts of the house, were handed to witness. So far as she knew, all the jewellery that had been taken had been recovered. Her mother’s mind was still a perfect blank with regard to the occurrence, and she had no recollection whatever of what had happened. Witness identified a hat produced by the police as one which she had found on the premises. PAINFUL INJURIES. Dr N. C. Speight stated that at 11.45 p.m. on May 11, he was called to the premises of Mr Rossiter in George street". On examining Mr Rossiter he found him to be suffering from a wound in the tongue and abrasions of the tissues of the mouth and throat. His wife was suffering from shock caused by injuries. The

left- side of her face was badly swollen, being almost three times its normal size; her left eye was completely closed, and there was, on the left side of her forehead, a deep cut which was bleeding freely. Witness considered that the swelling had been caused by a direct blow. Cross-examined by Mr Baron: Witness said that it was possible, but not probable, that Mrs Rossiter’s injuries were caused by a fall. Dr F. Hodgkin, a house surgeon at the Dunedin Hospital, stated that when Mr Rossiter was admitted to the Hospital he was suffering from shock and a septic mouth, the result of bruising and laceration of the mouth. The injuries were consistent with their having been caused as Mr Rossiter had stated. A SEVERE SHOCK. Dr P. C- Anderson, house surgeon at the Dunedin Hospital, stated that Mrs Rossiter was admitted to the Hospital in a semi-conoscious and shocked condition, and was unable to say how she received her injuries. There was a laeterated wound on the right side of the forehead and extensive bruises and swelling on the left side of the face. In witness’s opinion the injuries were caused by Mrs Rossiter receiving a heavy blow and being knocked down. It w-as improbable that the injuries could have been caused by Mrs Rossiter falling against the banisters. After she was discharged from Hospital Mrs Rossiter continued to receive treatment, and she was still in such a physical and mental condition that she could not attend the court proceedings.—To Mr White: Witness stated that the injuries could have been caused by one blow. The wound On the fore.head w-as close to the hair, and appeared to have been made by a blunt instrument. The gash might have been caused by Mrs Rossiter striking the banisters. A STARTLING DISCOVERY. Albert Victor Smart stated that on May 11 he obtained a room at the Criterion Hotel. Shortly after 11 p.m. he was walking along Princes street w-ith one, Kenneth Harle, and when he reached Moray place north he turned to go back, w-alking back on the west side of George street. When-he was opposite Mr Rossiter’s shop he saw Miss Rossiter climbing out of a window. She beckoned him to come over, and told him that there was something wrong in the shop. He looked into the shop and saw one man lying on the floor, another standing at his feet, and a third man behind the show case. Witness then asked his friend to get the police. The man on the floor had blood on his forehead, and seemed to be lying quite still. Mr Vennall then came across the road and broke open the door of the shop, witness immediately going to get a policeman. When witness returned Mr Vennail had one man, Saunders, in a corner. He then went to the back of the shop and saw Mrs Rossiter lying in the passage moaning, and he went back into the shop and told the others to get a doctor. The third man witness had seen had disappeared by the time the constable arrived. Witness then went outside the shop and climbed on to the veranda and helped Miss Rossiter to get* back into her room. When witness re-entered the shop the man who was handcuffed said, “Hello! How are you?” That man was Saunders. He could not describe the other man who had been in the shop.—To Mr White, witness said he could not be certain whether Saunders was behind the counter or not when he first looked into the shop, as he ■was partly hidden by a show case.

Kenneth Harle gave evidence in support of the previous -witness’s statements. A SUCCESSFUL “ BLUFF.”

Charles Vennall, a watchmaker with premises opposite those of Mr Rossiter, said that in company with another man he was coming downstairs from his workshop about 11.20 p.m. on May 11 when he saw two men in the middle of the road who said that there was murder being committed in Mr Rossiter’s shop. As he went across the road he could see Miss Rossiter standing on the veranda, calling for help, and on looking into the shop he could see Mr Rossiter on the floor with a man, whom he afterwards identified as Saunders, attacking him, and holding his hand across his mouth. Witness smashed the glass of the door with a screwdriver which he carried in his pocket, and, undoing the Y'ale lock, opened the door. He challenged Saunders, and, pointing the screwdriver at him, told him to put up his hands, which he did. Saunders appeared to make a move towards his righthand coat pocket, but stood still again ■when w-itness threatened to blow his brains out. Saunders appeared to be very sorry for himself, and he remarked that he supposed he would get something for what he had done. While he had Saunders bailed up, he heard two panes of glass smashed upstairs. After Saunders was handcuffed witness rushed upstairs and picked up about 50 diamond rings off the bathroom floor; he later picked up two handfuls of rings off the shop floor. ARRIVAL OF POLICE.

Constable AFGrail stated that whilst on duty in George street on the night of May 11 he received some information which sent him to Mr Rossiter’s shop. On arrival he saw the witness Vennall holding Saunders up with a screwdriver, and was told by- him that Saunders was the man who had attacked Mr Rossiter. Saunders denied that he was concerned in the assault, and explained his presence in the shop by stating that he had been pushed into the shop with the crowd. Saunders was handcuffed, and witness went upstairs. He heard glass break on two occasions, and on looking through the bathroom window he saw a man getting through the window of a dental surgery opposite. Saunders was asked who his mate was, but he denied that he had a mate, and asserted that he knew nothing about the occurrence. A search was made of the dental parlours, but no trace of anyone could be found. To Mr White: Saunders gave no trouble at all when he was arrested. He appeared to have been drinking. AN UNCERTAIN WITNESS. Albert Henry Ramsay, a taxi driver, said that he kept his car on the Morayplace east rank. On May 11, in consequence of something he heard, he followed a sergeant of police down to the Octagon. When he got to Sprosen’s corner he saw a man on the verandas in the Octagon,

moving towards the Oban Hotel. Just about that time he saw a constable with a man handcuffed to hini. Witness then identified Saunders as the man he had seen on the verandas.—Cross-examined by Mr Baron, witness said that the man on the veranda was wearing a blue suit and had no hat.—At the conclusion of witness’s evidence the magistrate said that in making an identification the witness should always be perfectly sure in hie mind that he could make such aft identification, for it was obvious that in the present instance he had made a mistake, Saunders, whom he had identified as the man on the veranda, having at that time been handcuffed to the constable in Mr Rossiter’s shop. MEDICAL ASSISTANCE. Robert Marshall, licensee of the European Hotel, stated that in consequence of information he received he went to Mr Rossiter’s shop and on going into the living room he saw a number of rings lying on the floor. Mrs Rossiter was lying at the foot of the stairs covered in blood, and after she was attended to by Dr Speight, witness took her to the Hospital. When witness saw Mr Rossiter he 'was bleeding at the mouth. POLICE EVIDENCE.

Constable Gjerson stated that on the evening of May 11 he was on plain clothes duty in the vicinity of Dowling street. At 10.40 p.m. he was standing, at the parapet on the top of the steps when he saw the two accused walk above him and stand looking down towards Stewart Dawsons jewellery- shop. He asked them what they were doing and told them he was a constable. They- moved away shortly afterwards. —To Mr White, witness said that he thought the men were drunk and told them to go home.—lnspector Cummings stated that the two accused admitted having spoken to the constable. Detective Gibson said that at 1.10 a.m. on May 12 he was standing in front of Mr Rossiter’s shop with Sergeant Wade. There were a number of people standing nearby, one of them being the accused Wilson, who was wearing a dark suit and had no hat. Later in the day witness again saw Wilson standing in Hanover street reading a newspaper. Witness asked him who he was, and he stated his name was Wilson. and on being questioned further, said he would go to the Police Station with witness. W’ilson then asked if they wanted to see him in connection with the occurrence of the previous evening. W’ilson was told that it. was alleged that he had been in Saunder’s company the previous night, ami had assaulted Mr and Mrs Rossiter. He denied having had anything to do with the assault. At the time of his arrest Wilson was wearing a light coloured suit and- a light felt hat.

Detective Turgis corroborated ail the evidence given by the previous. witness. The accused W’ilson stated that he had come from Invercargill about 10 days previously. During the time he was in Dunedin the accused, by his statement, said he had slept in railway carriages and in the Gardens. When arrested he had over £lO in his possession. Detective Power gave evidence of having found a pearl and sapphire ring lying at the back of Mr Rossiter’s shop, about an hour after Saunders was arrested. Detective Sergeant Nuttall stated that in company with Detective Jenvey, he had visited Wilson’s lodgings on the evening of May 12, and had found a blue suit (produced), with several small tears in the trousers, and a pair of shoes, cut about the toes and showing a graze in which ground glass could distinctly be seen. Witness later arrested the accused, who, after receiving the customary warning, made a statement. A statement was also received from Saunders. Witness had examined the window through which W’ilson said he made his escape. This window was 18 feet from the ground and at right angles to it, seven feet away, was another window in Myers’s buildings. Both windows were broken. WILSON’S VERSION. In his statement to the police, W’ilson said that after drinking with Saunders on the afternoon of May 11, the two of them met again in the evening, and after wandering about town they stopped in the vicinity of Mr Rossiter’s shop. Saunders remarked, “ That is Rossiter’s; what about giving it a go ? ” They both walked to the door of the shop, and seeing the door open, the accused pushed his wayin followed by- Saunders. Mr Rossiter was in the shop, and the accused grabbed him by the throat, but he could not see what Saunders was doing. While he was wrestling with Mr Rossiter, he heard screams behind him, and just then the door of the shop waj opened. He released Mr Rossiter, and Saunders rushed in from the back of the shop, saying that he had knocked a woman out, adding “ Grab what you can and get out.” Saunders then rushed to the window, and grabbing a tray- of rings, said “ Go for your life.” The accused took the rings from Saunders and rushed to the stairs, at the foot of which he saw a woman on the floor apparently- unconscious. He rushed upstairs, and, kicking the bathroom window out, he got through and jumped across to another building. He lost all the rings either when going upstairs or at the top of the stairs. "When he got on to the other building, he had to kick in another window to gain entrance, and, passing through the building, he got out on to the roof of the veranda that faces the Octagon, climbed down a pole into the Octagon, and walked round into George street, where he joined the crowd of people there. He went to the door of the shop, but was pushed back by a constable; but later he was inside the shop when it was suggested that the building should be surrounded. After getting home that night he found that the blue suit he had been wearing was dirty and that the trousers were badly torn. He repaired the tear with sticking plaster. To get away he considered he must have jumped about 12. feet from Rossiter’s building. When kicking in the window of the bathroom he scratched the toe of one of his black shoes, and during the scuffle with Mr Rossiter he was bitten on the ring finger. The suit and black shoes shown him at the Police Station were his property, and were worn by him the night he and Saunders attempted to rob Mr Rossiter’s shop. Witness added that he did not strike Mrs Rossiter. It was Saunders yvho had done this, and he had heard her scream when she was struck.

STATEMENT BY SAUNDERS.

Saunders stated to the police that after drinking during the. afternoon with a man whom he had previously met at Forbury Park, he met him again in the evening when, after walking about for some time, the two of them repaired to Mr Rossiter’s shop. The man he was with walked to the window and unhooked the blind over it. Just then a man in the shop opened the door about a foot, and immediately the other man pushed his way inside. Saunders, according to his statement, followed, and although the man in the shop tried to keep him out he got inside, but in doing so he came to grips with the man and he thought it was then that he fell on the floor. The accused realised that the man he was with was up to no good, and, becoming frightened, he would have liked to get out and run away. He did not remember if Mr Rossiter called out whilst the two of them were on the floor, but the other man was away in another room. He returned to the shop, however, and after making some remark about having fixed the woman, he jumped on Mr Rossiter. At this time, Saunders heard a woman screaming, and the other man jumped up and ran out of the shop. Just then the front door of the shop was forced in, and a man put something to his head, threatening to blow his brains out if he moved. The accused was certain that he did not strike or injure Mr Rossiter in any way. and he did not put his fingers into his mouth. If a woman was struck, nobody but the other man could have done it, as he- (Saunders) never left the shop. He did not go round the counter or touch any jewellery, and he did know if the other man had done so, as he lost sight of him from the time they went into the shop until he returned and said that he had fixed the woman up. When he was held up by- the man yvho entered the shop, the accused realised that something was yvrong and that he had no right to be there. Detailing his movements prior to May--11, Saunders stated that after signing off the steamer Waihemo at Auckland on April 21 he came to Dunedin a yveek later. While in Dunedin he had done a fair amount of drinking with seafaring men, arid on the day of the occurrence he had been drinking all day. The man yvith whom he went into Mr Rossiter’s shop yvas only a casual acquaintance, and the accused did not even know- his name or where he lived. At the time he went into Rossiter’s shop he was in a muddled state with liquor, and had he been sober he would never have been mixed up in the affair. He did not go into the shop with the idea of stealing anything or doing anyone any harm, and if anyone said that he had injured Mr Rossiter or Mrs Rossiter that was not the truth. ACCUSED REMANDED. At the request of counsel, who stated that they wished to consult their clients, the accused were remanded. WILSON PLEADS GUILTY. MEN COMMITTED FOR SENTENCE. The accused men appeared in the Police Court yesterday morning before Mr H. W’. Bundle, S.M. W’ilson and Saunders pleaded guilty- to assaulting Walter Gabriel Rossiter with intent to rob, and W’ilson pleaded guilty to the second charge of doing grievous bodily harm to Jane Rossiter. A similar second charge against Saunders was struck out.

On the application of Inspector J. Cummings, Saunders’s name was deleted from the charge concerning Mrs Rossiter. “On the evidence before the court it would be inadvisable to proceed with the charge against Saunders in view- of the statement now made by- the accused W’ilson,” commented the magistrate. Both accused were committed to the Supreme Court for sentence.