AN UNUSUAL CASE.

Taranaki Daily News, 7 March 1922, Page 8

AN UNUSUAL CASE.

MARRIED WOMAN CHARGED. COMMITTED FOR TRIAL. (From Our Own Correspondent.) Eltham, March 6. An unusual case under the Post and Telegraph Act, in which the prosecution alleged that a married woman named Mabel Brooking had fraudulently made a statement to the effect that she posted a postal packet containing money, contrary to fact, came before the Eltham Magistrate’s Court to-day. Mr. A. Chrystal appeared for the accused, and DetectiveSergeant Cooney conducted the case for the police. Detective-Sergeant Cooney said the accused and her husband owed some money to McGarry, of Eltham. They went to Palmerston North, and, according to accused’s statement, she had posted £26 by registered letter in settlement of the debt. A registered letter duly arrived at McGarry’s office, but it contained no money. McGarry wrote to the postmaster, stating that there was no money in the envelope. McGarry and the postmaster conferred with and got particulars from Mrs. Brooking. On January 21 the detective saw Mrs. Brooking, and she stated that it was impossible that she could have mislaid the money, and that ii was posted. Her father had stated that he did not know how much money was put in the letter. She later told the detective that she had lost her handbag containing the money. M. McGarry, land agent, of Eltham, gave evidence of money transactions with accused’s husband. He had lent £25 to the husband on a promissory note. Witness received a registered letter from accused purporting to contain money to meet the promissory note, but there was no money in the envelope. Mrs. Brooking came into his office after her return from Palmerston, and it was suggested that they should examine the envelope more closely, and witness then noticed that it had apparently been opened at one end and then sealed again.

W. H. Anderson, postmaster at Eltham, stated that he received a letter from McGarry, dated January 14, and in consequence he had made enquiries throughout his office regarding the registered package. Previously McGarry had taken accused to interview witness, and she complained that the sum of £26 was missing from a registered letter. In the time mentioned there was very little opportunity for anyone to tamper with the letter in the post office. Witness had every confidence in the post office staff. He examined the envelope when interviewing accused, and its condition was pointed out to him. He filled in a missing letter memorandum (produced) from information gleaned from accused, which included the designation of the notes and the number of a £1 note.

Detective-Sergeant Cooney said he had been making inquiries into the reported loss of money from the registered letter. On January 21, in company with the postmaster, he saw accused at her home, and she then asserted that she had pos'.ed the money and that she could not have mislaid it. Later she admitted that when she was going to Palmerston North she lost her handbag, which contained the money she had to pay McGarry. Witness took a statement from accused, which she signed. Mr. Chrystal objected to the statement being produced, on the ground that it was procured by improper means. He said it had been held out to accused that if she signed the statement it would be the last she would hear of the matter. This the detective flatly denied, stating that the matter he proposed to drop was certain alleged forgeries. The defence was reserved and accused pleaded “not guilty”, being committed for trial at the next sitting of the Supreme Court at New Plymouth. Bail was allowed in self of £lOO and one surety of £2OO, or two sureties of £lOO each.