ALLEGED ATTEMPTED BLACKMAIL.

Otago Daily Times, Issue 19513, 23 June 1925, Page 2

ALLEGED ATTEMPTED BLACKMAIL.

TWO MEN ACCUSED. CASE FURTHER ADJOURNED. Two middle-aged men named Robert Murray Newlands and James Alexander Fraser were charged before Mr H. W. Bundle, S.M., at the City Police Court yesterday with having, about May 11 last, at Dunedin, with menaces, demanded £SO from James Errol Nicol, with intent to steal the same. Robert Murray Newlands and James Alexander Fraser were further charged with having, about the same date, at Dunedin, with menaces, demanded £SO from. Jean Algeson Stevenson, . with intent to steal the same. Mr Neil! appeared for Newlands and Dir Hanlon for Fraser. Chief-detective Lewis represented the police. . James Errol Nicol stated that he was a married man residing in Richmond street, South Dunedin. He was a fibrous lerer. On May 12, 1925, witness received a registered letter through the post for which he signed. The letter read: “Dunedin, May 11, 1925: Sir,—l beg to inform you that I have information to hand of your trip to Christchurch with a married lady, and with regard to your performance at Palmerston. I have solid evidence against you and the lady, Mrs Stevenscm. I have been much upset about this affair, and have had some difficulty in keeping the other party from speaking. If you could find £so'l would be able to square it and keep my own mouth shut. If not, I shall inform Mr Alex. Stevenson and your own wife of the true facts and evidence of the whole affair. I sha 1 give you till Friday, 15th, to think about it. I wii) ring up your office at 3.30 p.m. on Friday afternoon. —I remain, yours obediently, Friday. 1 ” . Continuing, witness said he knew a Mrs Stevenson, of Dunedin. He travelled to Christ church with a Mrs Stevenson on a Friday. That was a week before he received the letter. Mrs Stevenson was m the same carriage with him going to Chnstchurch. He did not break his journey, and neither did Mrs Stevenson. At Christchurch witness mot his wife on the railway station, and Mrs Stevenson met relations of hers. Witness did not know either of the accused before receiving the letter. He thought he knew Fraser by sight,_ and on the day he was taking tho letter in to sec Mr Stevenson he saw a man on a bicycle he thought was Trascr, ana he accosted him. Ho asked him if ho was Fraser, and the latter said yes. Ho showed him the letter and asked him what ho knew of it. Fraser asked witness if he suspected him of writing the letter, and witness replied no. Witness then took the two letters in to Mr Alex. Stevenson, and showed them to him. He had Mrs Stevenson’s letter at that time. Fraser sard he knew who had written tho letter, hut ho would not tell. Witness saw Fraser again at Stevenson’ fi house in. Park terrace Fraser said he had come to tell them all about it, and that was that they (Mrs Stevenson and witness) were supposed to have been at Palmerston and had tea there, later in the evening engaging No. 9 room. Accused said the constable at Palmerston was a witness to say that they had taken No. 9 room. He also said that “the parly was after the money—it was a moneymating concern. Ho then shook hands wit It Mrs Stevenson ami witness, patted witness on tho shoulder, and said, “You U get them some day, my lad; if they don’t got you this lime they will come at you again.’’ Ho also said if the persons were not shrewd he (witness) might bo able to catch them with a cheque if he wore going to pay the money over. Ho said it was not likely they would come to witness’s office for the money, but would probably want it left somewhere. On May 15 witness received a telephone ring. He recognised Fraser’s voice. Ho asked if witness had had tho ring ho was expecting (tho telephone ring referred to in the letter), ami witness replied that he had not. Fraser asked what witness was going to dq. Witness said he would just as soon pay the money over to save making a noise. At that time he suspected Fraser of wiring tho letter. Fraser said not to bo foolish, not to pay tho money over when witness know he was in tho right. Ho would not sav who had written tho letfor. Later that day witness got another telephone ring. He thought: it was Fraser who spoke, but was not sure. 'lho person spoke about the letters. Witness saw Fraser again on May 29 at tho New Zealand Express Company’s buildings. Stevenson worked about there, and Fraser worked for tho company. Ho said to Fraser, “I’ve got them, my lad.” Fraser said, “Yes, you’ve got them,” and asked witness not to make it too hot for him. He said ho had stuck to his mate, hut his mate had not stuck to him. Witness spoke to Fraser on May 31, in company with Stevenson, at Fraser’s own home. Witness o-sked Fraser how it was that Newlands came to write tho letters, as he did not know him (witness). F’raeer did not. answer, and witness asked him straight if he asked Newlands to write the letters for him, and ho said. “Yes, I’ll have to take tho brunt of it all, as lam the only man in it.” There was no truth in the .statement that witness stopped at Palmerston. He had known Mrs Stevenson since he w ae about eight years of age.

io Dir Neill: When ho received tho letter ho was not a bit frightened. Ho knew it to bo untrue. Ho offered to pay tho money only as a trap. Ho had absolutely no intention of parting with the money.

Jean Algoson Stevenson, married, with a family of six children, said that she received a registered letter through tho post on May 12, for which she signed. Tho letter was tho ono produced. She had known Mr Nicol for a number of years. She travelled to Christchurch on the same train with him on May 1. She was in the same carriage with him. Neither broke tho journey anywhere. She met her friends at Christchurch that evening. Witness had known Fraser for about three years. She did not know Newlands. Fraser’s name was mentioned in the letter. It said: “I _ rang up your friend, Sandy Fraser.” Witness asked Fraser if anyone had said anything to liim about her trip to Christchurch, and ho said yes. She asked him if it were a man or a woman, and he replied that it was a man. He asked what was the trouble, and witness said alto had received an anonymous letter through the post, and his name was mentioned in it. He asked where witness was ringing from and she said that it was from a telephone box. Ho asked her to bring the letter down to him to look at, and she said she was going to hand tho letter to Mr Nicol to take to her husband. She saw Fraser at her house on May 13, Dir Nicol also being present. Fraser said ho wished to explain what lie knew about the party ringing him tip. He said it was a moneymaking concern. Witness corroborated wbat had been staled by the previous witness. Fraser said witness and Nicol hud lunch at Palmerston, wont for a walk, and had tea, and that the policeman at Palmerston was a witness to the fact that witness went upstairs at a quarter past Y o’clock to No. 9 room with Mr Nicol The remainder of witness’s evidence was nearly all corroborative. Fraser had staled that he knew who wrote the letters, but he refused to say who it was.

Alexander .Stevenson, married, and residing at Park terrace, said he was a motor driver for the. New Zealand Express Company. Ho was. the husband of the last witness. He knew Fraser, who was also employed by tho New Zealand Express Company. Frasor visited witness’s house and was a particular friend. He had asked witness if his wife were going to Christchurch on Dlay 1 and witness had said yes. Fraser said it would bo a cold trip Witness replied that he had not said she was going in the train. On a later occasion he had asked if Dlrs Stevenson were corning home that day and lie had replied no; that he had got £ wire saying she was not coining homo till the next day. The following day accused, Fraser, said Dlrs Stevenson would have a cold trip homo. Witness said it would not be cold in the train, and Fraser said, “Oh. coming home in the train.” The remainder of this witness’s evidence was principally corroborative. Witness stated that Fraser had said Newlands had written the letters for him and ho would have to bear the brunt. He asked witness to say if money would square it. At (his stage tho case was adjourned till Monday next, accused being admitted to bail as before.