SYSTEMATIC THIEVING

Sun (Auckland), Volume III, Issue 915, 7 March 1930, Page 11

SYSTEMATIC THIEVING

NEARLY TWO TONS OF METAL STOLEN FIRST OFFENDERS FINED Their records hitherto unblemished, two men admitted at the Police Court this morning the systematic theft of more than one and a-half tons of metal which they sold to a dealer. William Thomas Phillips, caretaker of the building from which the metal had been stolen, was lined £2O and Alfred Norton, who had aided him, was fined £lO. Phillips was ordered to make restitution of £3O 13s 7d and Norton of £IS 11s 3d. Phillips, who is aged 37, and Alfred Norton, a wharf labourer, aged 41, were charged with stealing 1.4851 b of type metal, valued at £37 2s 6d. and Phillips was charged with the theft of 1,5171 b, valued at £39 3s 6d. There were five charges against both accused and four against Phillips alone. The metal was the property of The Sun Newspapers, Ltd., and the thefts were committed in December and January. Mr. Clark appeared for Phillips and Mr. Sullivan for Norton. Pleas of guilty were entered on all counts. Detective-Sergeant Kelly said Phillips had been caretaker at The Sun Newspaper Offices for three years He lived on the premises with his wife and one child. He was an ex* Imperial Navy man and nothing was Known against him previously. Norton was also a married man. When they were working together, Phillips had. handed the metal to Norton, who had sold it under fictitious names. When the men were interviewed on March 3 they admitted the offences. TWELVE YEARS IN NAVY “I realise that my man is the worst offender,” admitted Mr. Clark. “There are nine charges against him and he held a position of trust. He was 12 years in the Navy, with a good record and was discharged as a firstclass petty officer. He gave all his wages except 5s to his wife, who speaks highly of him as a good husband and father.” Counsel held that the man’s lapse had been due to gambling. The discovery of a theft had been made when a dealer endeavoured to sell back some of the metal to the owners. Phillips had been suspected, and, when taxed, made a full admission. The man’s wife, who supplemented his income by dressmaking, had saved £l5O, and restitution could be made. Mr. Clark suggested that if probation was out of the question, a short term of imprisonment followed by probation would be best. COUNSEL’S PLEA A record of 19 years in New Zealand without a blemish was advanced by Mr. Sullivan in support of a plea for leniency for Norton. He had been assured by Phillips that the metal was “scrap stuff.” After the first few lots had been disposed of, he had had nothing to do with the thefts, as the charge-sheet would show. Norton would make restitution also if given a chance. Counsel asked that the man be given an opportunity to rehabilitate himself. Phillips was fined £2O, in default three months imprisonment, and placed on probation for two years. Norton was fined £lO, in default one month. He was placed on probation for one year, and ordered to make restitution. The men were given a week in which to pay their fines. “It’s your last chance, and you’re lucky you are not getting three months,” commented the magistrate. “You have neither of you been in trouble before, and I don’t want to start you off with a conviction.”