“A CONFIDENCE TRICK”

Dominion, Volume 18, Issue 130, 26 February 1925, Page 9

“A CONFIDENCE TRICK”

GUILTY OF FALSE PRETENCES WOMAN DEFRAUDED AT WELLINGTON Bi Telegraph.—Press Association. Napier, February 25. At the Supreme Court to-day John Francis Jackson apepared to answer charges (1) that on or about August 5, 1924, at Wellington, he obtained £lOO /from Violet Helena Boyd-Turner by false representations; (2) that on August 14, 1924, at Wellington, obtained £6O from Violet 'Helena Boyd-Turner by false representations; (3) that on September 17, 1924, at Auckland, he obtained £4O fiom Violet Helena Boyd-Turner by false pretences; (4) that’.on August 14, 1924, he made a false document purporting to be a cheque signed by D. . J-. McKinnon, for £26L 3s. Bd., drawn on the Bank of Next South Wales, Sydney, thereby committing forgery; (5) that on August 14, 1924, at Wellington, knowing the cheque to be a forgery, ne caused Violet Helena lioyd-Turner to act upon it as if genuine. Opening the case for the, Crown, Mr. Lusk said the offence was really an example of what was known as a “confidence trick,” and if the accused was found'guilty, he was nothing more or less than a "confidence man.” He had worked his way into the friendship and trust of the Boyd-Turners, and used that trust as a means to fraud.

Mr. Hislop, for accused, said that his client and Mrs. Boyd-Turner were evidently on terms of friendship. They addressed each other by first names, and accused maintained that the money was lent by Mrs. Boyd-Turner ,out of friendship. She had not told her husband anything at all. That was natural, as a married woman would not wish to tell her husband that she had lent money. Accused was a man with no ties, and could ■ have got clean Sway. As it was, he kept Mrs. BoydTurner posted as to his movements. Mr. Justice Alpers, in summing up, said that although counsel for the defence had treated Mrs. Boyd-Tumer with all courtesy and respect, there were several matters he wished to point out clearly. Firstly, there was nothing in the fact that the accused and Mrs. Boyd-Turner called each other by first names. Accused had called Mrs. Boyd-Turner by her name since the days prior to her; marriage, and it was perfectly natural that the emtom should co-Ttijiue after her marriage. Secondly, me money used. by her was absolutely her own, and'the fact that she did not tell her husband did not betray a guilty secret. She could invest it in any ’ manner she wished, with or without her husband’s knowledge. The jury, retired at 3.30 p.m., and returned at'4.2o p.m. with a verdict of guilty on all counts. Accuse! was remanded for sentence till to-morrow.