THE ORMOND BURGLARY.

Gisborne Times, Volume XXVI, Issue 2313, 5 October 1908, Page 1

THE ORMOND BURGLARY.

ACCUSED BEFORE THE COURT.

INTERESTING EXPERT EVIDENCE.

An interesting case was heard at the ;i>olieo Court yesterday, when the young man Boniface was charged beforo Sir. AY. A. Barton, S. M that on or about* 27t«li May, 1908 ho did break andt outer Messrs. r leat and Friar’s store, Ormond, and commit theft therefrom of 20 packets oi cigarettes, value 10s, and 2s in coppeis. Tho chief ovidenco for the prosoeution. was that of Mr. Quartorniam, of tho Eingov-Print Department, V oliington. . , ' , Sergt. Hutton conducted the caso for tho prosecution, and .accused was not represented by counsel. Fred rick Friar, manager of tho Ormond stoic, said that on May 27 ho retired to lied in a room ’ adjoining tho storo, leaving' tho promises securely fastened. Ho got up at 6.30 the next morning and on going into the shop lie found tho right hand front window brolcon, with somo of tho bro'kon glass lying outside and some inside. About half tho pane was broken away and loft a. gap about 2ft squaro. On looking round tho shop ho found tlie front door open, and the P.O. till on tho counter broken open, 2s in coppers being missing. Half a box of cigarettes was also missing, which contained about 20 packets valued at 10s. This box hail been left on a ledgo behind tho counter on: tho provious night. Tho loss was reported to tho police and Detective Rawle came out the same day. Detective Rawle took some of tho broken glass away—a portion of tho shattered window. Detective Rawlo stated that ho went to Ormond on May 28 to Teat and Friar’s store. On'ox aming the premises lie found the right-hand window partially broken. He examined the portion of the glass remaining in tho window and took possession of some of the glass containing fingerprints. Tho glass, produced, was what ho took and it was forwarded to Wellington through Sergt. Hutton. Accused, Boniface, was employed at Ormondi on the date of tho alleged offence. Witness arrested Boniface on September 28 in company with Sergt. Hutton, at Onnond, and when charged at the Police Station with tho present offence, accused replied “I didn’t do it.”

Charles Davy, gaoler, said that accused was an inmate of the gaol on September -22nd. It was part of witness’ duty to take finger-prints of prisoners, and the copy, produced, bore the impression he had taken of accused’s finger-prints. Arthur G, Quartermain, finger-print expert of the Police Department, Wellington, said that the glass produced was received at “Wellington on June 4th.. The photographs of the fingerprints, produced, were true and enlarged copies of the marks on the glass. On September 25 the prints, sworn to by Constable Davy, were received in the finger-print office, and the remaining photographs were true and enlarged copies of the right thumb, index, and middle fingers. He had compared the finger-prints in the photographs with those on the form and the glass, and was satisfied beyond all doubt that the impressiosu were made by the same fingers. He was also positive that the prints on the glass wore made by the person whoso prints were on the form sworn to by the gaoler. There were twenty-four distinct points of similarity and none of dissimilarity in some of tho photographs, and in others 14 points and 8 points respectively. Tho chances of finding all those points of similarity between any impressions, other than those of the same fingers, were so remote that, from Ins knowledge of finger-prints, lie had no hesitation in saying, would ho absolutely impossible. Some of the finger-prints oil the glass were in blood. This concluded the evidence, and accused, who reserved his defence, was committed for trial to the next sitting of the Supremo Court to bo held in Gisborne. Bail was allowed, accused in £IOO and two sureties of £SO each.