WOMAN TRICKED.

Hawera Star, Volume XLVIII, 26 February 1925, Page 5

WOMAN TRICKED.

BY FORGED CHEQUE.

LOSS OF £IOO. (.BY TELEGRAPH PRESS ASSOCIATION. NAPIER, Feb. 28. At the Supreme Court to-day: John Francis Jackson appeared to answer charges (1) that on or about August 5, 1924, at Wellington, he obtained £IOO from Violet Helena Boyd-Turner by false representation; (2) that on August 14, 1924, at Wellington, he obtained £6O from Violet Helena BoydTurner by false representations; (3) that on September 17, 1924, at Auckland, he obtained £4O from Violet Helena Boyd-Turner by false pretences; (4) that on August 4, 1924,. he made a false document purporting to be a cheque signed by D. J. McKinnon for £261 3s Bd, - drawn on the Bank of New South Wales, Sydney, thereby committing forgery; (5) that on August 14, 1924, at Wellington, knowing the 'cheque'to be a forgery, he caused Violet Helena Boyd-Turner to act upon iti «s if it was genuine. In opening the case for the Crown, Mr. Lusk said tho offence was really an example of .what is known as tlie confidence trick, and If the accused were guilty, he was nothing more nor less thau “a confidence man.” He had worked his way into the friendship and trust ol Airs. Boyd-Turner, and had used the trust as a means to fraud.

Air. liislop, for the accused, said the accused and Airs. Boyd-Turner were evidently on terms of friendship. They addressed each other by their first names, and accused maintained that Lhe money was lent by Airs. BoydTurner 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. What was to prevent the ‘accused from absconding? Hd was a man with no ties, and could have got clear away. As it was, he kept Mvs. Boyd-Turner posted as to his movements.

Air. Justice Alpers, in summing up, said that although counsel for the defence had treated Airs. Boyd-Turner with all courtesy and respect, there were several matters he wished to point oiit clearly. Firstly, there was nothing in the fact that the accused and Mrs. Boyd-Turner called each other by their 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 custom should continue after marriage- Secondly, the 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 4.20 p.m. with a verdict of guilty on all counts. The accused was remanded for sentence till tomorrow.