SUPREME COURT

Hokitika Guardian, 4 November 1932, Page 6

SUPREME COURT

FOUND guilty:

CHARGE OF THEFT

(Per Press Association — Copyright.)

AUCKLAND, November T The trial Oi Charles Stewart Leahy, aged 44, solicitor, of A'uckland, tni'ecl at the .Supreme Court when a verdict, of guilty on one charge was votiiriied. Leahy was charged'on two counts with fraudulcnt.y applying tlie funds of a client, Frederick John Young,, to another purpoi-.e than that' for which lie received t./em. The amounts w-re £25 and £ll4’ 12s 4d. Accused, who pleaded not guilty, had been represented by. Ait Dickson. Summing up, His Honour po.nted out that the essential feature of the ensgi was thgt.a sum ot ,£176 was handed over by Young, to Leahy with a definite instruction that it should: be paid pro rata for the benefit of Young’s creditors, who were pressing him. “What you. have to decide,” said His Honour, “is whether accused, after receiving this money xs trustee, acted' honestly or d'shonesvly. If you d-cide that ha was not guilty of criminal intent and had! merely got his accounts into a muddle, then its is your duty to acquit hint... If iiteybur opinion, the Crown has not established its. case,.'' Leahy, is: ' entitled: tun your, verdict in his. favour, but, if- taking into acount all the facts of the case, ly.ou decidd- that he- is ’ guilty, then you must have no' hesitation in: fihdiiig a vkydiot a'ccordluglfjr.*’' Dealing with the e vidence'in detail? His Honour I pientioned* that' Young, ih> evidende,had ' denied having- authorised Leahy• tor invest Young’s money. Had this■money been invested?- There was lio evidence- that it had. AVhen- the regulations'regarding auditing of solioi* ■tors’ trust accoiintS'came into force, 'it was necessary that tliess accountsshould be ' balanced; Evidence re- . gardiiig' Leahy’s acounts: was contrary I to this.

* The. jurj T returned a verdict of gnil,ty on the second count, that regarding £ll4. Accused was remanded until Afondoy for sentencei