Lubin v Henry

• Jurisdiction: St Lucia
• Judge: Bishop, J.,Peterkin, J.
• Judgment Date: 29 July 1968
• Neutral Citation: LC 1968 HC 18
• Date: 29 July 1968
• Court: High Court (Saint Lucia)
• Docket Number: Criminal Appeal No. 5 of 1968

West Indies Associated States Supreme Court. (High Court)

Bishop, J.

Criminal Appeal No. 5 of 1968

Lubin

and

Henry

Appearances:

K. Foster for Appellant.

Attorney General for Respondent.

Criminal law - Appeal against conviction — Theft — The appellant was charged with the theft of $60 contrary to section 350(1) of the Criminal Code. The appellant was a policeman. The question was whether the decision was unsupported by the evidence. — The evidence showed that the sum of money was received by the defendant and that there was no warrant for collection of money from the person involved. Appeal dismissed.

Bishop, J.

1 Aron Lubin, the appellant was charged before the learned Magistrate of the Second District Court that between the 19 ^th September 1966 and 2 ^nd of March 1968 at La Caye Police Station in the Quarter of Dennery he stole the sum of Sixty dollars the property of Georgiana Edwin to which he had means of access by reason of his office as police officer in charge of the said La Caye Police Station contrary to section 350(1) of the Criminal Code of St. Lucia.

2 He was convicted of this offence and he was fined Ninety dollars or three months. Notice of appeal was given to the Magistrate and the opposite party in open court. No reasons for the appeal were submitted and therefore the appellant was permitted to rely on the statutory grounds of appeal. The grounds were that he was not guilty of the offence; and that the decision is altogether unwarranted by the evidence; and that the punishment is excessive.

3 In his reasons for his decision the learned magistrate found as facts that Georgiana Edwin gave Police Constable Israel an amount of Sixty dollars for which he gave her a temporary receipt. He also found that Police Constable Israel handed this Sixty dollars to the defendant, and in effect that the defendant stole the Sixty dollars.

4 The learned magistrate also expressed his opinion on the demeanor of the defendant in these words: “On the whole his demeanor on the witness stand gave me the impression that he was not speaking the truth.

5 We feel that some of the observations of counsel for the appellant were reasonable comment on the reasons for decision; in that they did not state clearly and as fully as could have been laid down all the facts that were found.

6 There is evidence that, on the 17 ^th September Georgiana Edwin went to the La Caye Police Station to pay court fines. Police Constable Israel was there and she gave him Sixty dollars, telling him that she had come to pay fines. He took the money from her – and because the Corporal, who is the appellant, was absent – he...