Parker v R [1912] HCA 29

OF AUSTRALIA. 681

n essential ingredient of the charge, and the onus of showing H. C. or A. is on the prosecution. As an isolated instance the act might eas

e innocent—even though done neither by accident or mistake. Tay Kine jut if shown to be part of a system in itself fraudulent its ranted aracter may be found not to be innocent. I will only add, that,

the evidence tendered does not tend to show that the offence is part of one system, it is not admissible, but if the Judge thinks evidence is sufficient to connect the act charged with the other acts as parts of one system, then it is admissible.

Isaacs J.

Appeal allowed. Order appealed from dis- charged. Conviction restored. Case remitted to the Supreme Court to do what is just and consistent with this judgment.

_ Solicitors, for the appellant, Lawson & Jardine for F. L. Stow, rown Solicitor for Western Australia.

Solicitors, for the respondent, 1. Waaman for Penny, ITill &

B. L.

{HIGH COURT OF AUSTRALIA.]

PARKER ' . s : F Z . APPELLANT ;

AND

'THE KING 4 fi . A 4 F . RESPONDENT.

ON APPEAL FROM THE SUPREME COURT OF

VICTORIA. H.C. or A.

1912. —

- . MELBOURNE, Where it is proved that a crime has heen committed resemblance of finger 5 May

prints may of itself in connection with other circumstances be sufficient evi- _ deuce of the identity of an accused person with the person who committed Griffith

é Barton and the crime charged. Tsaaes JJ.

Criminal Law—Lvidence—Inentification of person charged —Finger prints.

H.C. or A. 1912.

PaRKER

Tur Kine.

HIGH COURT (1912.

Special leave to appeal from the Supreme Court of Victoria: R. v. Parker, — (1912) V.L.R., 152; 33 A.L.T., 215, refused.

ApPLicaTION for special leave to appeal.

Edward Parker was tried at the Court of General Sessions at Melbourne on a charge of breaking into a shop and stealing therefrom the contents of a safe between 1 p.m. on Saturday 3rd February and 8 a.m. on Monday 5th February.