BRIBERY OF DETECTIVES

Sun (Auckland), Volume III, Issue 871, 15 January 1930, Page 11

BRIBERY OF DETECTIVES

Hamilton Bookmaker Faces Charges STORY OF £lO AND PIPES From Our Own Correspondent HAMILTON, Today. CONSIDERABLE interest was displayed in the hearing today before Mr. Wyvern Wilson, S.M., of charges of the alleged bribery of two detectives by Harry Abraham Samuels, aged 33, tailor, of Hamilton, who a fortnight ago was fined £3OO for bookmaking. He was charged under the Police Force Act “that he did, on December 21, 1929, not being a member of the Police Force, give a bribe of a case of pipes and £lO in money each to Detective-Sergeant John Thompson and Detective Alfred John White to induce them to forgo their duty.” Alternatively, Samuels was charged under section 127 B of the Crimes Act. Inspector S. Rawle conducted the case on behalf of the police. Accused was represented by Mr. R. A. Singer, of Auckland.

Inspector Rawle said he proposed to proceed on the charges laid under the Crimes Act. Detective-Sergeant Thompson said that on December 21 fcist, he reached home at 1 p.m. and discovered that a packet had been delivered to his house by the postman that morning. Inside the package was a case of pipes and a card containing the picture of a horse, below which was written the name “Harry Samuels.” The card was in an envelope along with a £lO note. The signature was in ordinary handwriting. The only “Harry Samuels” witness knew was defendant, whom he knew to be a tailor and a convicted bookmaker. He could have had no legitimate reason for sending witness presents. The following day; at his first opportunity, witness reported the receipt of the packet to the Inspector of Police. Acting on the inspector’s instructions,

on December 28, witness and Detective White rang up accused at bis shop and made an appointment to see him that afternoon. Witness and Detective White kept the appointment, where they saw Samuels standing at his shop door. When Samuels saw them he approached them saying, “It’s no use going in there. There is a ,‘nark’ about.” Witness said “All right. Where shall we go?” Samuels replied, “Go to my office in the Railway Buildings, and I will follow you.” They did so, and a few moments later Samuels arrivqri. He said, “You know about this place,” meaning the office. Detective White said, “Yes. I know all about it.” Accused opened the door with his keys, and the three entered. There was a port wine bottle there, and accused invited them to have a drink. He expressed regret that he had nothing better than port on the premises, and offered to go out and purchase a bottle of whisky, but the visitors declined to partake of the liquor. Witness remarked, “About these presents you sent us through the post.” Samuels rejoined: “Yes,” Witness then produced the card and the £lO note and showed them to accused remarking: “Who, besides yourself, knows you have sent us these?” He answered that he and his father were the only two who knew. He was careful not to register the package so that nobody in the post office would know. White then asked accused what sort of a day he had on Boxing Day. He replied that he did very well. White then asked what Hunting Cry paid in the Railway Handicap. Accused said £l2 Ss. White said, “What sort of a dividend do you pay on a price like that?” Accused said, “Ten pound limit,” and added that other Hamilton bookmakers could not Compete with him; that he could give the best price on doubles, and that he acted for an agent in Wellington. Witness then detailed a conversation that followed in which Samuels promised to put money on a “good thing” for both of them on the following Monday. Samuels had approached him on a previous occasion suggesting an appointment at witness’s private house. Witness replied that his house was not the police station. (Proceeding.)