Young Man's Prank Print E-mail
__________
 
Opera House Verandah
Scene
____
 
SUPT. RITCHIE AND CAT
BURGLARS.
 
 
At Workington Court on Wednesday, Fletcher DEANS (22), an upholsterer, of 7 Apple Grove, Workington, was charged with having been found in an enclosed area, the verandah of the Opera House, Workington, for an unlawful purpose, at 12-45 a.m. on November 15.
 
Mr. J. N. ST.GEORGE CURWEN appeared for the defendant who pleaded not guilty.
 
Joseph MURPHY, a motor driver of 99a Church Street, Workington, stated that on Saturday he was in Lady’s Walk, behind Woolworth’s store, up to 12-30 a.m. He had a good view of the Opera House. His attention was attracted to the Opera House where he saw someone climbing up the spout and get onto the verandah. Whilst he was on the verandah he walked along and tapped at the windows, Witness then sent for Mr. BAILIFF. He did not know who the man was at the time. Witness saw Mr. BAILIFF in the office at the Opera House, and later saw a light being shone on the verandah from one of the windows, and the man he had first seen climbed from the verandah on to the roof. Someone called “I’ve got you.”
 
Replying to Mr. CURWEN, witness said he would not like to climb up the spout to the verandah. There had been an Amateur Operatic show in the Opera House that night. He learned since that the windows looked into the dressing rooms.
 
Johnstone BAILIFF, of 33 Brow Street, manager at the Opera House, stated that he was in the Theatre office at 12-30 a.m. on Sunday, when the last witness came to him. He phoned the police, and went outside to the rear of the building in Brewery Lane. He inquired of a person of a person who was standing there but he had seen nothing. The Police then arrived, and he took the inspector in by the stage door to the dressing room which overlooked the verandah. There were no doors on to the verandah, only windows. After putting the lights on from the main switch, witness opened a window and flashed a light, and saw a man crouching on the verandah.
 
The inspector told the man to come out of there, and witness heard sounds of the man getting on to the roof, so he took Inspector BERTRAM through a door on to the roof, witness going one way and the inspector going another. Witness who did not see the man, went back into the building,  leaving the inspector on the roof. Witness went in to Pow Street, and the next he saw was the man being caught in Udale Street by the Police.
 
In the dressing room at the theatre were the costumes and properties that had been used by the Amateur Operatic Society in their production of “Blue Eyes” during the week. The dresses were not locked up. Anyone could have got from the dressing room into any part of the theatre.
 
Police-Inspector BERTRAM said that the verandah was 20 feet from the ground at one end and 21 feet at the other. There were three sets of spouting to it, and there were marks up one spout. At 12-35 a.m. on Sunday, in response to a telephone call, in company with P.C. RODDICK, he went to the Opera House, and instructed the Constable to wait at the front. He saw Mr. BAILIFF and Mr. GRAVES in Tiffen Lane, and entered the building with them proceeding up three flights of stairs to the dressing rooms, which he searched. On going along the passage, Nos. 1 and 2 were clear. He entered number 3 and opened the window, while Mr. BAILIFF flashed his light on to the verandah. Witness flashed his light and saw some person crouching on the verandah, with his overcoat right over his head.
 
CHASE ON A ROOF.
 
Witness called him to come out, and he jumped up and got onto the verandah railings, and eventually on to the roof. Witness left the dressing rooms and with Mr. BAILIFF and Mr. GRAVES went through a door on to the roof. He made  a search and at the end of the building furthest away from the stage he flashed his light on to a shed in Holliday’s Court, and saw defendant on the roof of the shed. Witness called to P. C. DODDICK that the man had dropped and was running down Holliday’s Court. Witness immediately left the building and proceeded up Pow Street. He saw the prisoner with P.C. RODDICK in Udale Street. He was arrested and conveyed to the Police Station, and when cautioned and charged with being found on the verandah at the rear of the Opera House, for an unlawful purpose, he replied, “You saw me there. I have nothing more to say.” The windows of the dressing rooms were very dirty, and witness was unable to see through them. On Sunday, the following day, witness made an examination of the roof, and found no instrument of any sort. There was no instrument in his possession at the Police Station.
 
By Mr. CURWEN: Defendant smelt of drink. His manner showed that he had had some drink. It would take a person with some courage to climb 20 feet up a spout that might give way at any time.
 
Mr. CURWEN: It is a thing that might require a little “Dutch courage?” - Maybe.
 
Have you, as a police officer, found that people in drink will take greater risks?
 
Yes, frequently.
 
The clothes were for the period of Bonnie Prince Charlie and the Duke of Cumberland. One could hardly walk up the street in such clothes without attracting attention?
 
No.
 
What did you think defendant was on the balcony for?
 
As a police officer I drew the conclusion that he was there for an unlawful purpose.
 
Supposing a person, a young man, who had had taken drink, knowing that those were dressing rooms, found a police officer calling at him, it was only natural that he should run away?
 
Yes. I was not surprised at that.
 
RISKED HIS LIFE.
 

He risked his life on the roof?
 
Yes.
 
Supt. RITCHIE: It is not unusual for a cat burglar to climb up a spout?
 
No.
 
You have heard of such things?
 
Yes.
 
P. C. RODDICK stated that he saw the defendant come out of Holliday’s Court, and he chased him up Pow Street and caught him in Udale Street. At the Police Station, defendant mumbled that he did not know what he was doing up there. He wondered what his mother would think. The defendant had had drink.
 
Supt. RITCHIE stated that when defendant was bailed out, he said he did not know what had made him do it.
 
Defendant stated that he had been out of work for just over a year. He lived at home with his father and mother. During the greater part of Saturday night he was drinking, and then he went to a dance, leaving about 11-10 p.m. Later, he was wandering about town and at 12-10 p.m. he spoke to a boy called Richard HODGSON and parted with him at the bottom of Tiffen Lane. He went on to his home in Apple Grove, but witness did not go in then, as he did not want his father and mother to know he had been drinking. He walked up to the Opera House and climbed up to the verandah. They had often climbed up to the verandah when they were kids, but he had not done it since. He walked along the verandah, but did not know whether or not he had tapped at the windows. He could see someone watching him from the corner. It frightened him when the light was flashed on him, and he climbed to the roof.
 
He had had a bit of drink that night, and when he came to the verandah he thought that he would like to see if he could climb to it again, just for a prank. He had no intention of breaking into the Opera House, and had no jimmy or chisel with him.
 
Replying to Supt. RITCHIE, defendant said he could not remember how many drinks he had had. He thought it was about nine drinks, pints of beer, and a small rum. He did not drink regularly. He knew the Opera House well, and knew where the office was. A friend stood him two pints and a glass of rum, and he bought the other drinks.
 
Mr. CURWEN said that the charge was laid  under the Vagrancy Act of 1824. It was not an offence to be on someone’s premises, unless the Court was satisfied that he was there for some criminal purpose. The Court had to be satisfied that the person was about to commit an offence for which he could be prosecuted criminally. It was always awkward when they found a person running away from the Police. When he risked his life running away from the police, it made it worse. What the Court had to decide was, “Are we abundantly satisfied that this young man was there to commit a crime, which was a larceny?” Was there any evidence beyond the stupid action of this boy, fuddled with drink, to lead them to believe he was there for the purpose of committing a felony?
 
After a retirement lasting quarter of an hour, the Magistrates found defendant guilty.
 
The Chairman, Mr. J. H. DUDGEON, said that the Bench regarded the offence as very serious. As it was a first offence, defendant would be discharged under the Probation of Offenders’ Act, and would be bound over for 12 months in the sum of £5, and would be under supervision of the Probation Officer for 12 months. He would also have to pay 11s 6d costs. Defendant’s father, Fletcher DEANS stood as surety.
 
 
< Prev   Next >