SUPREME COURT Trial On Charges Of Theft By Failure To Account

Press, Volume CIX, Issue 31904, 4 February 1969, Page 3

SUPREME COURT Trial On Charges Of Theft By Failure To Account

Two contractors who worked together on the demolition of the Old Black Bridge at Methven during 1967 and 1968 accused their third partner in the Supreme Court yesterday of withholding from them some of the proceeds of the sale of timber from the bridge. Robert Lester Syme, aged 52, a contractor (Mr J. N. Matson), is charged with the theft of $178.68 by fraudulently failing to account for it to Bruce James Edwards and Donald McTainsh, and with the theft of $666 by fraudulently failing to account for it to Edwards. The Crown Prosecutor is Mr N. W. Williamson and the trial is before Mr Justice Macarthur and a jury. Mr Williamson said in his opening address that the three men formed a partnership for the purpose of demolishing the bridge and selling the materials. Edwards and McTainsh were to do the demolition and Syme was to arrange the sales. Of the first four cheques totalling $1032.83, Syme withheld $178.68 from the other two. In October, 1967, McTainsh became dissatisfied and pulled out Various sales were made to the Marlborough Harbour

Board, and of cheques totalling $1332 received from the board, Syme failed to pay $666 to the remaining partner, Edwards. Edwards complained to the police. Mr Williamson said that at that time Syme was financially embarrassed and was overdrawn at his bank to almost twice his overdraft limit. .

Syme’s explanation to his partners was that Wright, Stephenson and Company, Ltd, which was handling the sales, was slow in paying out. When interviewed by the police he had at first claimed that he was paying his own expenses, but later admitted that his expenses were coming out of the joint bank account.

Mr Williamson said Syme told the detective that he had withheld the money from Edwards because he wanted Edwards to decide what he was going to do about the bridge. “Flew Into Temper”

Edwards said in evidence that McTainsh had withdrawn after dissension and disagreements with Syme. After Syme arranged the sales in Marlborough he said they would have to wait for payment because all payments had to be approved at board meetings. The sale was made early in February, 1968, and on April 5 when Edwards telephoned Syme at his home, Syme flew into a temper and said he was sick and tired of people asking him for money.

Edwards said he was highly suspicious and telephoned the harbour board himself. He then closed the bank account and arranged to do all the factoring in his own name.

On a pretext he got Syme to his house and confronted him with his knowledge that the harbour board had paid the account, six or seven weeks before. Edwards said that Syme at first denied it, but then hung his head down, turned ashen, and said: “Yes, I’ve had it.” Edwards said Syme invited him “to belt him up” two or three times. Edwards said he told Syme to pay up in cash or he would place all the books in the hands of the police. Unknown to Syme, a neighbour of Edwards was secreted in the kitchenette as a witness. Syme signed a statement promising to pay $621 in cash by April 16, and withdrawing from the bridge project. The statement said that he understood that unless he paid up, all the documents would be produced to solicitors for action to commence. Cheque Stopped Edwards said that Syme also wrote out a cheque but the cheque was stopped before he could cash it. Syme later telephoned him and said that the whole deal was off. Early in August he telephoned Syme and said he had heard that he was ready to settle up. Syme said, “That’ll be the day.” Edwards said he indicated that he had heard it from the police, and Syme immediately agreed to a meeting. When they met, near the hospital, Syme asked for an assurance that the police would be called off but he was told that could not be

done. Edwards said that Syme agreed that the amount owing was $735.36. Cross-examined by Mr Matson, Edwards agreed that he had received several large amounts from Syme. He recalled splitting a cheque for $l2OO with Syme at the Trust Hotel in Hornby, receiving another cheque for $606.50 and one for $247.50. Edwards agreed that Syme often pressed him about getting the job finished. He said Syme never pressed him after he suggested that Syme help with the labour. He denied that Syme had ever offered to pull out and let Edwards keep the bridge and the forward orders.

He agreed that he told Syme at the meeting near the hospital that he would forget the whole thing if Syme paid s7so—but not before Syme had agreed that the figure was correct.

Edward agreed that he telephoned Syme’s wife, but denied that he abused her. He said he told her what was happening in the hope that she would influence her husband to pay. McTainsh said in evidence that he pulled out of the partnership because he was not happy with the way things were being done. Proper records were not being kept and Syme failed to produce bank statements when asked for them. He said Syme led them to believe that all Wright. Stephenson cheques were being paid into the joint account. “We could never get a very decisive answer when we asked what the financial situation was,” Mr McTainsh said. The trial was adjourned until today.