FORGED “TOTE” TICKETS.

Taranaki Daily News, 11 May 1921, Page 5

FORGED “TOTE” TICKETS.

REMARKABLE COURT STORY. QUESTION OF IDENTITY. CHARGE NOT PROVED. By Telegraph.—Press Association. Wellington, Last Night. Some unusual circumstances were related at the Supreme Court to-day in connection with a case in which Robert Fox was charged with forging totalisator tickets and altering them at Trentham. The pay-out clerk at the machine said three tickets presented were not in order; they had their numbers obliterated and fresh numbers inserted. The dividend totalled £BO. The alteration or forgery would appear to have been made with type. The clerk said he asked the man to wait and closed the window, but when he went back to the window’ the ma had disappeared. He could not describe him. Another totalisator employee said that when the tickets were held up he sent for a detective. He went to the window to identify men who were there but did not see accused. Three days after the meeting five and a half tickets were still unpaid. He saw a man named O’Brien at the window. O’Brien, a builder and contractor, said accused was in front of him at the. machine. While the pay clerk was scrutinising the ticket the man was very nervous, and as soon as the clerk said ‘‘Wait a minute,” the man turned towards witness and then bolted towards the station. Witness watched him out of sight. Witness collected his dividend. At the station he again saw accused and pointed him out to his wife. Later he saw him on a railway carriage, tie saw him again at the Christchurch Easter meeting, and pointed him out to a racecourse detective. He- knew it was solely on his evidence that the charge was brought against accused. Counsel: Did a policeman put it to you that you were the man? Witness: Yes, he did. Were you in possession of those tickets when you knew the police were searching for the man? —Yes. You knew there were police at the station at Trentham, at Petone, and at Lambton, and yet you say accused was in the carriage with you all the time? —Yes.

Witness said he was perfectly candid with the police and gave his name, address, and all particulars about himself. Witness’ wife identified accused as the man in the carriage coming from Trentham, and at the Riccarton Easter meeting. Witness had no rubber stamps in his bag at Trentham. Counsel: Has your house been searched?—No.

Chief-Detective Mcllveney gave evidence of having had a conversation -with accused, who made a statement. Accused said he had backed the winner of the race in' question and he went to the machine and was paid his dividend, after which he proceeded to the train. He saw O’Brien at the timber yard, where he (accused) was employed. He said that at Christchurch a detective suggested he should tell the Justices that -someone gave him the tickets and everything would be nil right. Counsel: Who was the man? —A little man with a cap. He thought he was in charge of the detective office. Is O’Brien telling the truth?—No; he is a liar.

Do you think he forged the tickets?— Quite likely. Evidence was given by accused’s employer that he was an ‘ honest young man. The jury returned a verdict of not guilty.