ALLEGED FRAUD

Otago Daily Times, Issue 25457, 11 February 1944, Page 4

ALLEGED FRAUD

TIMBER COMPANY CASE

EVIDENCE FOR THE DEFENCE (P.A.) CHRISTCHURCH, Feb. 10.

The submission that there was no case to go to the jury was made by Mr H. F. O’Leary, K.C., counsel for the accused, in the Supreme Court trial this morning of Wilfred Henry Banks, manager of the Papanui Timber Company, on a charge of attempting to obtain £2BO Is 3d from the United States Joint Purchasing Board by a false pretence that the quality of the timber supplied was higher than m fact it was. Counsel submitted that there was no evidence of the personal knowledge of the accused of the alleged false pretence, and asked his Honor, Mr Justice Northcroft, to direct the jury accordingly. - -His Honor said he was not prepared at that stage to withdraw the case from the jury, or to give a direction for acquittal.

Exception to Statement Mr O’Leary said he agreed with the statement of the Crown Prosecutor that it was a case of * great ] m P° r * anc ® only to the Crown, but to the accused. He took exception, however, to Mr Brown’s statement that “ some person or persons had almost succeeded in a cruel, shameful, and cowardy fraud vn the allies who are fighting so magnificently on our side.” Though he had protested against it at the time, counsel said, the court had ruled that Mr Brown was entitled to make it. Mr O’Leary contended that the statement had been made to raise prejudice and animosity against the accused. The case was not to be dealt with by the jury by prejudice and indignation 'on the one side or sympathy or sentimentality on the other. When the jury had heard the evidence of the defence it might well be that it would regard it as a cruel prosecution. Mr O’Leary said It would be shown that there had been an unusual demand for timber during last .year, with the result that it had been delivered in Christchurch as quickly as possible. There had also been great difficulty in obtaining labour for the yards, and consequently Banks had had to rely on inexperienced men for classifying the timber. Doubtless some of the timber had got into the wrong “ pockets ” in the yards. The order in question was a rush order. That fact had not been disputed. On some nights the men were working on it until 11 p.m. “ The Crown's case was based on Mr Lysaght’s grading, but we do not accept that grading as acceptable to timber merchants, builders, and other practical men,” said 'Mr O’Leary, who also emphasised that the regulations by which Mr Lysaght had graded had no legal force, and in any case were not accepted by all in the trade and particularly in Christchurch. Mr Lysaght had rejected far more of the timber than practical men In the trade would have done. There was a great divergence in the views as to grading held by the trade and Mr Lysaght. The latter, he submitted, had been “ altogether too sweeping.” Evidence for Defence Evidence was given by Frederick John Andrews, yardman employed by the Papanui Timber Company, Gilbert Radford, head yardman at the company s Papanui road yard, and by the accused, Banks. 1 The accused said that he was in partnership with his father and his brother in the Papanui Timber Company, and he also had a similar interest with his brother in the North Canterbury Timber Company. He stated that the order for the Americans had been a rush one, and he was not present when the loading took place, as he was then on holiday. Being short-handed in his office, witness added, he had not been able to supervise the despatch of the order. The court adjourned at this stage to enable the jury to inspect the timber. “As this case may have excited some interest outside,” said Mr Justice Northcroft, “ I want you to understand that you must not discuss it with anyone. No outsider is to discuss It with you, however harmlessly.” The case will be resumed to-morrow.