EXTORTION OF MONEY

Poverty Bay Herald, Volume LXV, Issue 19555, 10 February 1938, Page 16

EXTORTION OF MONEY

MAN FOUND GUILTY BLACKMAIL CASE VERDICT STATEMENTS RETRACTED (Per Press Association.) CHRISTCHURCH, last night. Allegations of systematic blackmail over a period of four years lay behind two charges of making threats for the purpose of extortion, which were preferred against Joseph Dyer, in the Supreme Court to-day.

The jury found Dyer guilty and the accused was remanded for sentence.

The charges against Dyer were that on November 1, 1933, and August 6, 1937, with intent to extort money, he accused the complainant of a crime punishable by imprisonment with hard labour for hve years or upwards— indeccnr assault on a male. Mr. Justice Northcroft was on the bench.

Mr. A. T. Donnelly, Crown Prosecutor, conducted the cast for the Crown and Mr. J. T. Watts was counsell for the accused.

""This is a very baa case of a very bad class," said the Crown prosecutor. It was asserted, _and practically admitted by the accused in his statements to the police, that over a period of four years, the accused obtained from another working man, a friend, £6O or £7O in instalments by threats.

Mr. Donnelly said it was usual in such cases for the court to make some direction about suppressing the name of the victim.

His Honour: I do not think that it will be necessary. The press, in the very proper discretion they exercise, will withhold the name. Sad and Sordid Case

The case was a sad and sordid one, continued Mr. Donnelly. Blackmail, such as in this case, was a kind or slow murder. In 1932, the accused and the victim were on friendly terms, and occasionally the latter slept at the home of the former. On such occasions he slept with one of the"accused's boys, but no complaints ot impropriety were made until a year later when the accused in the first place wrote to the victim and later saw him personally, accusing him of having assaulted the boys. The victim denied any such suggestion, said Mr. Donnelly, but whether the allegation was true or not had nothing whatever to do with the present case. The victim was afraid of losing his job and the respect of his workmates and friends, and was aiso afraid of ~<he unpleasant publicity which would accompany prosecution. "The accused called to discuss the matter and said he was doing the friendly thing by shutting his mouth for the sum of £10," said Mr. Donnelly. "This was to be paid in fortnightly instalments, but the accused continued to extort money after the £lO had been paid. "In May, 1936, the accused demanded a sum of £lO, because he wanted to start a business. The accused was a war pensioner, and in 1937 the Unemployment Board and Pensions Department started inquiries into the accused's position. "Here the accused did another shabby and disreputable thing," said Mr. Donnelly. "The victim, under further threats, was forced to make false statements as to who owned the business and to support the accused in - his frauds on the Unemployment and Pensions Department. Near the end of 1937 the accused wanted £3O to pay accounts and the victim was then very nearly at the end of his tether. Before his further demands were satisfied, however, departmental inquiries resulted in a case being brought by the police." Accusation Admitted The complainant gave evidence along the lines of Mr. Donnelly's address. Detective J. J. Halcrow produced a statement in which Dyer admitted having accused the complainant of indecently assaulting his boys. { Mr. Watts, counsel for the defence, said the accused would say that when he gave the statement to the police, he was aware only of a charge at the instigation of the Pensions Department. He did not realise that a charge of extortion could be brought against him, and consequently was not accurate in his replies to the questions.

The accused, in evidence, said that any money that changed hands was in repayment of loans between the two. There had never been any di"> cussion or reference to assi.ilt charges in connection with money payments. Mr. Donnelly: You have accused the detectives of fabricating part of your statement? —No.

Were the statements you made to them true?—Some were partly true, and some were not,. The witness said that many of his answers to the detectives' questions were given on the spur of the moment. Both statements he made to the police' and to the Pensions Department were incorrect, said the accused. The jury was absent 12 minutes before bringing in its verdict.