THEFT CHARGES.

Ashburton Guardian, Volume 61, Issue 5, 17 October 1940, Page 3

THEFT CHARGES.

INSURANCE AGENT GUILTY.

RECOMMENDATION BY JURY.

(Per Press Association)

CHRISTCHURCH, October 16

Ernest Clement O’Malley, insurance agent, was found guilty in the Supreme Court of theft in failing to account for £SO received on December 2, 1938, from Flora Jessie Gillies, of West Melton, and for £5 17s 2d received on April 25, 1939, from Samuel William Higgins on terms requiring him to pay the money to the Australian Provincial Assurance Association. Mr Justice Northcroft presided. Mr A. W. Brown, for the Crown, said O’Malley had received the money from Mrs Gillies and instead of paying it to the company had opened a personal account at the Commercial Bank with it. When a policy was not forthcoming O’Malley informed Mrs Gillies that he would repay the money. He gave her £3 in cash and a cheque for £47, which was dishonoured for lack of funds. O’Malley had received from Higgins a sum for the renewal of a premium and had not paid it into the company. He had no authority to re tain the money. Addressing the jury, Mr E. S. Bowie, for the accused, said there had been no concealment by O’Malley, who had given Mrs Gillies and Higgins receipts on the company’s form, copies of which were sent by him to the company. He submitted that the accused had no intention of depriving Mrs Gillies oi, the company of the money. In other cases O’Malley' had been permitted to use premium moneys and to have them debited against his account. The same thing had been done with the amounts in the charges. His Honor said it was true that moneys had been paid to o'’Malley fox’ the company but had been used by him personally. The question was whether this was done fraudulently or innocently. The company’s behaviour in retaining O’Malley’s services for a time might suggest that it did not consider his action criminal. Against him was the fact that he did not inform the company that he had kept the money. O’Malley’s conduct in the witness box might help in deciding whether his actions were fraudulent or innocent. After a brief retirement the jury found O’Malley guilty but added a strong recommendation for mercy as the company had more or less condoned the offence.

O’Malley was remanded for sentence oil this charge, and also on two charges of false pretences by issuing valueless cheques to which he pleaded guilty. The charges were that he defrauded Annie Blaney at Dunedin on September 7, 1939, of £4 19,s 6d and Reginald John Scholium, at Rnkaia, on June 3, 1939, of £4 los.