A LEGAL DILEMMA.

Poverty Bay Herald, Volume L, Issue 16424, 7 May 1924, Page 5

A LEGAL DILEMMA.

JURY’S VERDICT.

UNPARALLELED CASE

(Per Press Association.)

PALMERSTON N., last night

At the Supreme Court, before Mr. Justice S,almond, five cases wherein Henry Simpson was charged with Arthftr Melvin Taylor, John Jens Sorens Thomasen, Otto Kreighen Richard Gairgan, and Alfred Wright, with conspiracy to defraud in connection with the supply of cream to the Cheltenham Dairy Company, were continued. Simpson pleaded guilty and Thomasen pleaded not guilty. Simpson left the dock and the trial against the second accused was proceeded with.

There were no witnesses for the- de fence.

An extraordinary legal situation arose when the jury returned with a. verdict in the case of Thomasen of not guilty of conspiracy, but guilty of defrauding the company through Simpson’s neglect.

The verdict caused some consternation., His Honor confessing lie could not understand it. He pointed out that the question was whether the accused Thomasen had conspired with Simpson with, intent to defraud. The Foreman: The jury finds there was no agreement between the two men.

His Honor: In that case I shall take the finding as orie of not guilty. Does the jury understand that Simpson has already pleaded guilty to having conspired with Thomasen? The Foreman: The jury dealt with the caso from Thomasen’s point of view and found no fact of conspiracy. The Crown Prosecutor suggested that the jury be asked to reconsider their verdict, bub this was disallowed by His Honor, who said tine best way would he that Thomasen be. discharged and as other charges were pending against him, that he be detained till to-morrow. The Crown. Prosecutor said Simpson should be allowed to withdraw his plea and he discharged. His Honor: Bub he will have been arraigned on a criminal charge and discharged without trial or'plea. As it required' two to form a conspiracy, Simpson, according to the. jury, was not guilty. In. addressing Simpson, His Honor Mr. Justice Salmond said, “You have pleaded guilty to conspiracy. You may have thought you were guilty, but the jury has found there was no conspiracy.” _ The Crown Prosecutor searched vainly for a parallel case'. Both prisoners were discharged, though. Simpson was detained on other similar charges in respect to several other fa.nners.

THE SECOND CASE

(Per Press Associntiond PALMERSTON N., this day,

The second of the cream test cases was commenced this morning in the Supreme Court.

Henry Simpson and Alfred Wright were charged that during October last they conspired to defraud the Cheltenham Dairy Company of £2B by furnishing false cream tests to the company. The accused pleaded not guilty. The case is similar to that heard yesterday,, when Simpson and a supplier named ■Thomasen were acquitted on a like charge.