Housewife denies $¼m false-pretence charges

Press, 9 June 1977, Page 5

Housewife denies $¼m false-pretence charges

PA Wellington Susan Mary Pilmer, a housewife, had obtained more than $250,000 during a period of three months as a result of representing that she would use the money for specific business deals, the Supreme Court at Wellington was told.

The Crown prosecutor, Mr K. G. Stone, said that the case for the Crown was that in none of these instances had Pilmer applied the money for the purpose she had indicated to the people who had been advancing it. Pilmer, nee Caldwell, aged 26, has pleaded not guilty to 16 charges of obtaining by false pretence. The trial, before Mr Justice White and a jury, will continue today.

Pilmer is represented by Mr B. D. Inglis. Q.C., and Mr R. J. D. Buddle. Mr Stone said that the 16 charges related to several financial transactions in which

Pilmer had been involved be- i tween September and November, last year. Pilmer had run a cheque account at the North End I branch of the Commercial i Bank of Australia, Lambton i Quay, Wellington. i In essence, the offence of obtaining by false pretence I was a false statement or , promise inducing some other 1 person to part with a sum 1 of money, whether by hand- i ing it over or writing out a ) cheque or some other docu- t ment, Mr Stone said. 1 During a period of three i months, Pilmer had acquired ; from the persons named in the charges a sum well in 1 excess of $250,000 which had i not been repaid. I AH of this had been ob- i tained as a result of Pilmer’s i representing to the persons j concerned that she would t use the money for specific 1 business deals. The Crown said that the ( representations made by PiL i

mer had been completely untrue and known to her to be untrue, Mr Stone said. During the period covered by the charges, Pilmer had used money borrowed from one creditor to repay another creditor. The evidence would show that in some instances the proceeds of the cheque or telegraphic transfer advanced by a particular person or persons on the strength of Pilmer’s promises to invest it a certain way had been paid by her to some other that very day or the next day, Mr Stone said. The deals on which Pilmer had claimed that she could invest money had varied from the purchase of house properties and flats in Wellington to shops in Auckland, and from investment in steel to the purchase of antique furniture. Mr Stone said that the Crown expected to call 52 witnesses.