SERIES OF BURGLARIES.

Shannon News, 20 November 1928, Page 4

SERIES OF BURGLARIES.

GANG OPERATES ON CLARK’S-

LTD.

YOUNG MEN PLEAD GUILTY AND ARE SENT UP FOR SENTENCE.

The cases arising out of the burglaries at the premises of 'Clark’s, Ltd., drapers, Oxford Street, Levin, were heard before Messrs H. J. Richards and E. S. Lancaster, J.’sP., in the Magistrate's Court at Levin last week. The evidence against Keith Drysdale and William Rikihana having been heard and these two committed for sentence, the. Court proceeded to hear cases against the first-named accused in conjunction with other young men, also a separate charge against Drysdale concerning a burglary at the premises of the C. M. Ross Co.

Messrs Adams and Todd appeared for the defence.

Keith Drysdale and two young men whose names were suppressed were feharged with having, broken into ! Clark’s, Ltd., on or about July Ist, .1928. and on divers dates between that time and November Ist, and having stolen articles to the value of £36 2s 9d. Another young man was joined with these three on a charge that, on or about November Ist, 1927, and on diviers dates'between then and June 30th, 1928, they broke into Clark’s, Ltd., and stole clothing, etc., to the approximate ; value of £36 2s 9d. William G. Clark, of the firm of . Clark’s, Ltd., stated in evidence that I a kit-bag, belt and shirt exhibited in j Court were similar to goods st'oeked by ; his firm. Another collection that was isimilar to the firm’s stock consisted of ! three shirts, two pairs: of trousers, twb ; pairs of socks, a scarf, six collars, a ! tie and a hat. Some of the goods proidticed bore the firm’s name. Witness also described as similar tp Clark’s goods, four shirts, one suit, one cap, one pair of gloves, one belt, a pair.of trousers, a Stetson hat, and a Borsalino hat. Some of these goods were marked with the name of the firm. Another parcel comprised suits, a sports coat, • a pullover, five shirts, two silk shirts, a scarf, three belts, eight linent collars, a singlet, a cardigan, a sweater, a paifl ;of cream trousers, and sundries. Some -of these goods bore the firm’s name. Witness had hot to his know-ledge sold any of the property to any of the four -lads. There was no trace of forcible entry to the premises to account, for the goods, which were valued in all at -about £7O.

In answer to a question by Mr K. E. Adams, witness stated that the only ‘ articles in Drysdale’s collection which he could identify with the firm’s name on were the collars. The names on the suits had been removed.

Constable Bagrie, giving evidence, stated that on November 4th he visited ithe home of one of the accused and recovered the kit-bag, belt and’ shirt. Other property pertaining .to the same accused was found at the house of another member of the party—namely, one hat and a shirt. He visitqd the residence of the latter, who handed him three shirts, one of which he now said he had bought himself; two pairs of trousers, two pairs of socks, one scarf, six collars, one tie, one Stetson hat, and ; one key. The accused said that the key (produced) "was the one used for getting into the shop. Witness had tried the key and it opened the front -door of Clark’s, Ltd. Witness went to Drysdale’s home the same day, and Drysdale handed him one suit, four shirts, one cap, one pair of gloves, one belt, one pair of trousers, one Stetson hat and one Borsalino hat—all now produced—-which he stated he had taken from Clark’s shop. At the same time he handed witness goods which.he said belonged to the fourth accused —one suit, one sports coats, one pullover, five shirts, one dress shirt, and sundry other articles (exhibited). Witness showed this accused the property, and he admitted that it.had been taken by him from Clark’s.

Senior Detcctive-Serg'eant Quirks stated that all the lads had given the police every assistance. Constable Bagrie: Yes; they placed 1 no obstacle to the recovery of the property. 1 Detective Russell, of Palmerston N., stated in evidence that, on November 4th, he, with Senior Detective Quirlce, interviewed the three young accused at Levin. The detoetives told the lads .that they (the detectives) had reasons to suspect that they had broken and entered Clark’s on several occasions. They each made .statements, which witness took down and which.they signed. One of the accused, in his statement, said that during the last few months, on two occasions he, with Keith Drysdale, had entered Clark's about 2 a.m. and they had taken certain goods. He had taken some away, and was prepared to hand them back. He.did not know why he took the articles, but he Supposed it was due to excitement. He Committed the act of his own free will. The next accused said in his statement that he had “knocked about” with two of the others. Four months back he went into Clark's with Drysdale and another. He took some of the articles, and was prepared to hand them back. The statement of the third accused said that about twelve months ago, in company with Drysdale, he went into Clark's by the front door, at 1 a.m., and took certain goods, which he was prepared to hand back. He had also been into the premises on one occasion with the other two accused. * All four pleaded guilty and were committed to the Supreme Court at Palmerston North for sentence. The police offered no objection to an application for bail for the three younger accused. Senior Detective Quirk e stated that' they liad not been in custody before, and had put in a voluntary • appearance at this sitting.

Mr Todd nrked if the Court would consider suppre sSing the na mes of the three 1 in the meantime'. They ha d : not

been before the Court previously. In the Supreme Court they would be in the hands of the Judge. They belonged to good families, whose name had to be considered. The Bench stated that the request would be granted pending the sitting of the Supreme Court. Their Worships were rather loth to do this, owing to the seriousness of the offences and the fact that they had been carried on very extensively. • Bail was granted each of the three , junior accused in two sureties of £25 ‘or one of £SO. RAID ON C. M.'ROSS’S; Keith Drysdale Was furthfer charged that, between December Ist and 7th, 1927, he did break and enter the premises of the C. M. Ross Co. and steal ■therefrom a quantity of men’s wearing apparel, valued at £2O. Lauritz T. W. Freeman, a shop assistant at Ross ’s, stated that the premises were entered about December, 1927, entry having been effected through a window at the back, the catch of which was forced. He identified a coat, two pairs of pyjamas, a hat, a tie, a singlet, and a blazer coat, of a total value of about £B. He did not remember having sold these goods to the accused. The total value of the goods missing was about £2O. He believed a suit was missing and knew that a suit-ease and- a pair of braces were. The matter was reported to the police at the time. . Constable J. Bagrie. of Levin, stated that on November 4th, he visited premises recently occupied by the accused, and, amongst other property, recovered the clothing identified by the last witness. He interviewed the accused, who admitted that the clothing had been taken by him from Ross’s. Asked if, he would make a statement, to that effect in writing, he said he would. In his statement, Drysdale said that, some considerable time ago, he broke into Ross’s and took a quantity of clothing. There was no other person with him at the time, and he was only in Ross Von one occasion. The accused pleaded guilty, and was committed for'sentence. His application for bail was opposed- by Detective Qflirke, who stated that this' accused was apparently the ringleader of the others. He had only to wait in custody until Tuesday of next week for the Supreme Court session. The application for bail was; refused.