THIEF AND ‘FENCE’ CAUGHT

Sun (Auckland), Volume III, Issue 760, 5 September 1929, Page 1

THIEF AND ‘FENCE’ CAUGHT

Deal in Stolen Goods BOTH COMMITTED FOR SENTENCE THE theft,'and disposal of a gramophone and records, valued at £llß 16s, which were stolen from a Karangaliape Road music store on August 24, were investigated at the Police Court this morning when Nathaniel Cameron Gow was charged with breaking, entering and theft, and Harry Foreman was charged with receiving. Both men pleaded guilty and were committed to the Supreme Court for sentence.

LmiJiuiuc j-ux atriiLciict:. Gow, a bricklayer, aged 44, was charged with breaking and entering the shop of Ethel Mary Grant in Karangahape Road on August 24, and stealing a gramophone, accessories, and 350 records, of a total value of £llß 16s. There was a further count of stealing tools valued at £l9 belonging to Frederick James Watson, Wynn Sheath, and others, on March 23. Foreman, a dealer, aged 27, was charged with receiving 240 gramophone records, valued at £66, from Nathaniel Cameron Gow on August 24, knowing them to have been dishonestly obtained. Mr. I. J. Goldstine appeared for him. According to Ethel Mary Grant, she locked ui) her shop on Saturday, August 24, about 1.15 p.m. She had returned at 4.30, and found that she could not get in, and had to wait until Sunday morning, when a back window was forced. It was then discovered that someone had broken into the shop by getting into the cellar and forcing up the floor. The front door had been bolted on the inside. Missing from the shop was a portable gramophone (produced) and 350 records. Witness had noticed accused near the shop, but had never spoken to him. MISSING TOOLS On Saturday, March 23, at a house that he was working on at Epsom, said Frederick James Watson, a carpenter’s foreman, all the men’s tools had been securely locked up. On Monday it was discovered that the room had been broken open and that tools valued at £2O were missing. Witness identified certain tools as belonging to himself and fellow-workmen. Of tools valued at £l2 which had been stolen from him witness estimated that only £3 worth was in court.

Detective Knight was of the opinion that to enter Mrs. Grant’s shop, the intruder must have scaled a brick wall at the near of the shop. He had taken the lock off the basement door and forced up floor-boards from beneath. Witness and Detective Snedden had searched accused's room on August 28. Certain of the goods stolen were found there. Later on the same day, accused and witness had recovered the gramophone. HOW SHOP WAS ENTERED Witness produced a statement made by accused at the time he was arrested. There had been a second interview last Monday when another statement had been made. The statements were produced and, in one of them, accused described the manner in which he had forced his way into the shop. He had borrowed a ladder to scaie the wall at the back. He

unscrewed the lock on the basement door and forced up the flooring with a heavy piece of timber he had found in the yard.

He had taken the gramophone and a suitcase full of records home in the tram. He had also removed some of the records in a sack. He had taken the tools -while he had been looking for work. Accused was a single man. Detective Knight added that he and Acting-Detective Davis had obtained most of tbe balance of the missing goods, 236 records, from Harry Foreman’s second-hand shop in Karangahape Road. The tools produced had been found in accused’s room when it was first searched.

Gow had nothing to say before being committed for sentence, after pleading guilty on both charges. Stepping into the witness box for the second time to give evidence on the charge against Foreman, Mrs. Grant identified the records recovered from Foreman’s shop as those stolen from her shop ip Karangahape Road on August 24. DISPOSAL OF RECORDS

Gow told the court that he had taken the records to Foreman, whom he knew quite well. They had previously had dealings together. There had been an arrangement that, if witness could get some gramophone records, Foreman would take them off his hands. Foreman had taken delivery of some of the records at a shop occupied by his wife, opposite his own shop. Other records had been taken to the back entrance of Foreman’s own shop. There had been some discussion about destroying the boxes and covers by which the records could be identified, and witness had been told by accused he had taken that precaution.

Detective Knight said that, on accused’s buying book, there was no record of any purchase on August 24. A search had revealed no trace of the records, but accused had later procured 236 records, which had since been identified as those stolen from the witness, Grant. Accused had then made a statement admitting the offence.

Mr. Goldstine asked for bail for his client. Foreman was a married man with a young child. He would not, of course, be able to carry on business as a second-hand dealer again, even though it was his first slip, and he wanted time to wind up his business.

“That’s reasonable," commented Mr. F. K. Hunt, S.M., and fixed bail in one surety of £250 on the condition that the man reported to the police station every day.