Shopkeeper arranged fire, burglary — Crown

Press, 28 August 1979, Page 5

Shopkeeper arranged fire, burglary — Crown

A shopkeeper in tinancia. difficulties arranged for a friend to burgle his subur-1 ban dairy and set fire to it' so he could claim the insurance, Mr Justice Mahon and a jury were told in the Supreme Court yesterday. Phillip Arthur Brooker, aged 30, a glazier, has: pleaded not guilty to' cnarges of wilfully setting fire to Brookers Dairy at the' comer of Cranford and Berwick Streets, St Albans, and to breaking and entering the! shop with intent to commit I a crime. It is alleged the of-| fences took place on May 6. ; Mr D. J. L. Saunders: appears for the Crown j which is calling 18 witnesses, and Mr C. A.| McVeigh for Brooker. The trial is expected to' take more than two days. Opening his case Mr I Saunders said that in the: early hours of Sunday, May I

i,v, a lire oroke out ui iirootiker’s dairy. The blaze was -i first noticed by Philip Brian t Wattereus, a taxi driver, - who called the fire brigade I and then entered the building to see if there were any occupants in it asleep. Because of the prompt aril rival of the fire brigade the > J fire was soon put out and ;>the property saved. The : • scene was examined by a -Ifire safety officer and the I;police to establish the cause ilof the outbreak. : The investigation established that the fire had been {deliberately started in varii ous parts of the building. It i also appeared that the dairy I had been broken into as a . | quantity of property was reported missing, and drawers i'had been emptied on the floor of a bedroom of the house adjoining the shop. After inquiries were made I by the police, Rodney James

Birchfield, a friend of Brooker, was arrested on Tuesday, May 8. Evidence would be given by Birchfield that on the night of the fire he was at a house-warming party at a residence owned by Brooker in Mackworth Street. Birchfield admitted that he had entered the dairy and started the fire at the instigation of Brooker. The Crown’s case was that in April Brooker was in financial difficulties. The lease on his dairy could not be renewed and little interest had been shown by persons to purchase the business. He was also committed to making hire-purchase payments on two vehicles and had recently purchased the house in Mackworth Street, and the property had two mortgages on it. It was alleged that in April Brooker told Birchfield of his financial problems and a plan was formulated to set fire to the dairy and to make it appear that the blaze had been lit by a burglar. On May 5 Birchfield called at the dairy in the evening — and before it closed removed a quantity of stock, which he took to his home before going to the Brooker’s house-warming party in Mackworth Street.

Before leaving the shop with the goods in blue-plas-tic rubbish bags Birchfield was given a key by Brooker so that he could enter the shop later. The key was returned next morning when Brooker visited Birchfield to tell him how much of the shop had been burnt. It was alleged that Birchfield had the same financial motives as Brooker for committing the offences. Birchfield owed Brooker $250 and he was told that when he did the job the debt

would be wiped out and he would be given an additional $750.

The Crown’s case against Brooker was that he had aided, encouraged and procured Birchfield to break into his shop and deliberately set fire to it so that an insurance claim could be made, Mr Saunders said. Rodney James Birchfield, aged 31, a prison inmate, said that he had been dealt with for his part in the burglary and arson of Brooker’s Dairy in May. He had known Brooker for about 20 years.

After receiving a demand for $305 from a finance company Birchfield said he borrowed $250 from Brooker in April. Birchfield said he had been guarantor for a friend who had purchased a motor-cycle, and because no payments had been made he had to meet the debt. Later Brooker told him that he had lost, $lOOO over a house which he wanted to purchase and that he needed money. Birchfield had suggested that Brooker dump his Holden van in Lyttelton Harbour but Brooker did not want to get rid of the van. Other means of getting money were discussed and it was decided that Brooker should have a burglary and fire at his shop. Birchfield was tp get $lOOO for his part. It was decided that the

fire should be the night of Brookers house-warming party.

After discussing the arrangements Brooker gave him the key to the shop. While Brooker’s wife was running the shop the stock, which was supposed to be stolen in the burglary, was removed. Birchfield said that he and his de facto wife attended the Mackworth Street party that evening. They left about 1.30 a.m. to go home. Brooker and his family were going to spend the night at their new home.

After parking the car in Madras Street near Edgeware Park he walked to the shop and entered the front door with a key, Birchfield said. He broke a glass panel in the door to make it appear that someone had broken in. Bottles of kerosene and turpentine from the shelves in the shop were poured on the floor and drawers in the bedroom were emptied on to the floor to make it look as if the place had been ransacked. He put newspapers on the floor and lit them so that he would have time to get out before the kerosene ignited. Brooker had told him that there was plenty of kerosene in the shop.

He ran to the car and drove to Mackworth Street where he told Brooker how

it had gone. He picked up. his wife’s handbag which!: had been left at the house‘s by arrangement and then i went home, arriving about i 3.30 a.m., Birchfield said. About 8 a.m. Brooker arrived at his home and Birchfield said that he gave him the shop key. Brooker said that the fire had been “50-50" and told him to get rid of the goods which had: been taken from the shop. | The goods were dumped in the Waimakariri River bed' under some trees. On the Tuesday morning he went back and picked up some cartons of cigarettes and some confectionary, which he was going to sell to a friend, said Birchfield. Later that day when he called at a business in Fitzgerald Avenue he was questioned by a detective and subsequently charged with burglary and arson. While on bail he spoke to Brooker who told him that he did not want to get involved. He was told that he would get his money “after it was all cleared up.” Brooker asked him to take all the blame for what had happened and Birchfield said that he agreed. The only money he had received from Brooker was a loan of $6O his wife obtained to pay the rent, Birchfield said.

To Mr McVeigh Birchfield: j said that in May his finan- I icial position was reasonable i except that there was a warrant for his arrest for the < failure to pay the money to the finance company. He de- ; nied that he was behind in his hire-purchase payments for a car.

Birchfield admitted that he had been out of work for three weeks and that his de facto wife was expecting- a child. He had not told her the full story about the burglary and fire. He had said that he was going back to the party to get her handbag.