ALLEGED CONSPIRACY

Otago Witness, Issue 4066, 16 February 1932, Page 34

ALLEGED CONSPIRACY

CHARGES OF FALSE PRETENCES WELLINGTON, February 10. False eyebrows, a wig, horn-rimmed spectacles, and a clergyman’s garb were alleged by the Crown at the trial in the Supreme Court to-day to have been affected by Charles Alfred Remmers in negotiations to purchase motor cars. There were 12 charges alleging false pretences and forgery, and evidence was given of the accused having represented he was the Rev. Harold Harris, of Taihape. Counsel for the Crown said that the 12 counts in the indictment really all arose out of two separate transactions under which the accused, by alleged false pretences and forgery, either obtained or attempted to obtain a motor car on a promissory note. TRANSACTION WITH MONEYLENDER TWO MEN CHARGED. ’ WELLINGTON, February 12. At the Supreme Court to-day Charles Alfred Remmers was charged, jointly with John Edward Fitzgerald, in respect of a transaction with a money lender, in which h.. and Fitzgerald had allegedly been concerned. It was a charge of con spiracy to defraud John Faine, money lender, of £l5. Remmers was charged also with forging and attempting to utter two promissory notes. Both pleaded not guilty, and conducted their own defence. The case for the prosecution was that on July 9 Fitzgerald called on Faine, and told him that be had sold some motor accessories to a minister of religion ; that the minister was unable to pay cash, but would pay in two months’ time. Fitzgerald asked if Faine would accept the minister’s promissory notes and give

cash discount. He told Faine the minister’s name was the Rev. Mr Renner, and that the amount of cash he was prepared to take was £l5 on promissory notes for £l7 12s. Later he called again with a person in clerical garb Fitzgerald introduced him as the Rev. Mr Renner. The “ minister" told Faine he was connected with St. Peter’s Church, and had come to the city to assist with work among the. unemployed. He signed the promissory notes and filled in the application for a loan. He signed as Charles Alfred Renner. Accused’s full name was Charles Alfred Rcmmers. Witness subsequently rang up the Rev. Mr Bullock, of St. Peter’s, ami discovered that there was no such person connected with that church as the Rev. Mr Renner. Witness informed the police, and later identified Rcmmers in a parade at the police station as the person who had posed as the clergyman. Fitzgerald protested that the procedure adopted by the Crown was irregular. Four witnesses had been called, but only one, John Faine, had mentioned his name. Faine and Detective Fell were, the only witnesses against him. Mr Justice Reed said the indictment joined Fitzgerald in the first instance with Rcmmers on the charge of conspiracy. The other counts were against Rcmmers alone. It was perfectly regular to take the whole case together, and accused need not concern himself with any evidence dealing with Rcmmers. Fitzgerald did not call evidence. When it was announced that the other witnesses Rcmmers wished to call were not present Rcmmers asked for an adjournment, but the judge said that was ridiculous. Addressing the jury, Rcmmers declared that the money lender had stated definitely yesterday that he was not sure accused was the man who went to his office with Fitzgerald with the alleged object of endeavouring to defraud the money lender of £l5. As to tlie evidence of identification by two other witnesses, Rcmmers suggested that they had mixed up an identity with double peculiarity. Unfortunately he had had a wig for the past 16 or 17 years, and he claimed that

garding the handwriting evidence, Bommers recalled the Dreyfus case, which the two witnesses had associated that peculiarity with some other person. Reshowed that handwriting experts were not infallible. Remmers denied that he wrote the documents allegedly forged, and claimed that the police had failed to adduce evidence that he bad been seen in clerical garb. Fitzgerald protested that he had been placed under arrest and not dealt with on summons. He also wanted to know why he was placed in a dirty, filthy cell with seven or eight other persons. He challenged the world to prove that be knew Remmers before September 25 of last year. There was not one business transaction he was ashamed of, and the charge against him was preposterous. In the name of justice he demanded a favourable verdict.

The jury returned a verdict of not guilty. Remmers, who was convicted yesterday on charges of forgery and attempted uttering, was sentenced to IS months' imprisonment.