RINGING IN CASES

Southland Times, Issue 19238, 8 May 1924, Page 5

RINGING IN CASES

ACCUSED FOUND GUILTY REMANDED FOR SENTENCE YESTERDAY’S PROCEEDINGS. (Special to the Times.) DUNEDIN, May 7. The Supreme Court was crowded all day when the hearing was continued of the charges in connection with the alleged ringing-in case of Kingsdale at the Gore Trotting meeting on October 20. • The whole of the morning was occupied in hearing the balance of the witnesses’ evidence, which concluded prior to the luncheon adjournment. The afternoon sitting was wholly occupied hearing counsel’s addresses and the Judges’ summing up. MORE CROWN EVIDENCE. Further evidence was called for the Crown, the total number of whose witnesses is twenty.

William Francks James, totalisator proprietor, was re-called to produce the butt of a commission book showing a bet of £lOO made by Richards on a horse called Kingsdale at Gore.

Detective Lean stated that on January 10 he interviewed Cameron, Mr Samson (of the Trotting Association) being present. Cameron said that Kingsdale was in a paddock at Sandy mount, and accused took them to a paddock where there were two horses. He handed one over to the Trotting Association as being Kingsdale. It was taken to the Southern stables and had "been there ever since. Cameron had since picked out this horse from three horses at the stables. When Richards was interviewed he said he was present when the horse was bought at Lauder, and when it won the race at Gore. Asked if he had backed the horse at Gore, Richards said that it was a personal matter, and said he had nothing to do with the horse Kingsdale. A statement made by Cameron to the detective was read by the Registrar, Cameron stating in it that he had had nothing to do with any horse but Kingsdale. To Mr Sinclair: The detective said that his investigations were carried out on behalf of the Police Department and not on behalf of the Trotting Association. Arthur James Gibbs, a jeweller at Gore, said he was handicapper to the Gore Racing Club for the October meeting. There was a horse named Kingsdale in the Balfour Trot. It was placed on the limit. The nomination for the horse showed that it had no previous experience. Witness knew The Dingo only by repute. The Dingo had a record of 2min 14 l-ssecs on a clay track. The track at Gore was grass. He would have treated The Dingo as a 2min 18sec horse on the grass track, and if The Dingo had been nominated, its handicap would have been 144 yards behind. The time the horse entered as Kingsdale took, was 2min 24 l-ssec, and second horse (also on the limit) took 2min 24 4-ssecs.

James Martin Samson,* auctioneer, and the Otago and Southland representative of the New Zealand Trotting Association, gave similar evidence to that given by him in the Lower Court.

In reply to Mr Sinclair, he stated that a Mr Robert Haig who came from Lauder and who inspected three Jiorses in the stable yard, said that none of them came from Lauder. Witness said that Donnelly on inspecting the horses would not say which horse was the one Cameron purchased from him. He admitted that he knew Donnelly made a statement to the Trotting Association admitting that Kingsdale was the horse he sold to Cameron.

Detective Beer gave evidence of arresting accused Richards at Roxburgh on March 28 last. The following day he arrested Cameron at Timaru. Both refused to make any statement when arrested. Witness made efforts to trace a person by the name of “A. Dalziel,” but had not been successful.

John Bellamy Norris, Secretary of the New Zealand Trotting Association, said that no application had been made to change the name of the trotting horse The Dingo. An inquiry had been held by the Association and a statement had been made by Cameron. HANDWRITING IN THE LETTERS. John Challis, ledgerkeeper, at the Bank of New Zealand, said that he had had experience of the comparison of signatures for 38 years, and he held that the signature on the railway book of “A. Dalziel” corresponded with the writing on the letters addressed to the Postmistress at Dunback. Witness had also compared the writing of the latter letter with the writing of a letter sent by Cameron to the Trotting Association and gave it as his opinion that they were the same. Witness pointed out similarities to the jury, and about twenty minutes was taken while witness for the benefit of the jury made a comparison of the writing on the various letters in the case. Neither Mr Hanlon nor Mr Sinclair asked any questions.

Arthur Butterfield, contractor and owner of trotting horses for about 15 years, said that he rode and drove at trotting meetings. He knew The Dingo and had known it for about four years. It was owned by Mr P. McNeill. Witness had ridden and driven The Dingo in over a dozen races. Witness rode him on two occasions when he won. The last occasion witness rode The Dingo, was in August, 1923, when The Dingo won at New Brighton, the time being 2min 14sec for the mile. He reckoned that the horse lost 2 seconds on the mark. Witness saw The Dingo in a stable at Dunedin in March and saw it again at the time of the proceedings in the Magistrate’s Court. A horse could be raced after six weeks’ training, but races could not be won with it in that time. It would require at least five or six months to win races.

His Honour asked witness if he was likely to be mistaken with regard to The Dingo ? Witness: I am not likely to be mistaken. I know the horse very well.

To Mr Adams witness said he had been asked to take a trial spin on the horse in the stable at Dunedin, and was satisfied that it was The Dingo. Horace Ernest Martin, veterinary surgeon, also gave it as his opinion that the horse in the stable was The Dingo. He had known the horse at races for several years, and had attended it professionally when Mr McNeill was the owner. He also knew The Dingo because he had “fired” the horse’s legs. Witness went on to describe the operation of firing and said he knew Jiis marks on the legs. The horse was either ten or eleven years of age. FRESH EVIDENCE. Mr Adams intimated that he had a fresh witness, one who had not given evidence in the Lower Court. Mr Hanlon said the defence had no notice of what the fresh evidence was to be. Mr Adams said the witness arrived from Christchurch last night. He' bad notified Mr Hanlon five minutes after he knew the witness was available. His Honour permitted witness to be called. Oswald Edmonds Hooper, a neighbour of McNeill’s, said he knew The Dingo. He had seen it driven about the roads since it was young and about half a dozen times he had ridden and driven it himself That morning he examined a horse in the police yard and to the best of his belief it was The Dingo. To Mr Sinclair witness said he had come to Dunedin because he had brought some horses down for the meeting there the next day. When he was in Dunedin in January he went to Grant’s stable and recognised the horse in the box as The Dingo. This closed the case for the Crown. Both Mr Hanlon and Mr Sinclair in- . timated that they would call no evidence.

Prior to the resumption in the afternoon the horse was measured in the presence of the jury and Court, when its height was found to be 15 hands 2 inches. PROSECUTOR’S ADDRESS.

On resuming Mr F. B. Adams, Crown Prosecutor, said that there were three points he wished to refer to in elaboration of his opening remarks. In regard to the matter of the difference of height, the measurement which it had just been ascertained did not correspond with that which the breeder of The Dingo and its former owner, McNeill, had registered, he would point out to the jury that McNeill’s measurement was not official. It was simply the work of an amateur and had not been checked by the Trotting Association. It was quite unverified and no weight was attachable to it when confronted with the evidence cf Butterfield. Neither had James nor the Dunedin representative checked Cameron’s statement as to the height of the horse. In regard to the absence of Donnelly as a witness of identity the defence could have called him if he was certain the horse was Kingsdale. there was not a scintilla of evidence that the horse shown the jury was other than The Dingo. The evidence of the handwriting expert had not been controverted by the many experts in Dunedin whom the defence could have called if any doubt existed as to Dalziel’s letters not corresponding with Cameron’s writing. MR HANLON’S ADDRESS. Mr Hanlon, in opening his address on behalf of Richards said that under the first two counts both accused were charged with conspiracy and the other with attempting to defraud the Gere Racing Club by representing the home The Dingo as Kingsdale. It was plain that under the law they could not convict one and acquit the other. Both were equally implicated. It took two to make a conspiracy, and though there might be enough evidence to convict one, that did not necessarily lead to the conviction of the other. Under the other counts it was possible to convict accused individually. He impressed upon the jury the absolute necessity of disabusing their minds of anything heard in connection with the trotting scandals which had been for a long time the topic of public discussion, as only upon the evidence brought before them in the Court were they entitled to come to a decision. The case against his client, he maintained,* was particularly weak; so weak indeed, that he had not considered it necessary tn ask any questions of the witnesses brought forward by the Crown during the hearing. Referring to the Crown Prosecutor’s contention that no evidence of the innocence of his client had been brought, he said that it was not his duty to clear himself, but the onus was upon the Crown to establish clearly and beyond doubt the guilt of his client. The case turned upon only two or three points. Taking the incidents as they occurred, Richards had gone to Lauder, and while there a hcr.se had been purchased by Cameron and paid for by a cheque given him by Richards for £l7. Cameron was Richard’s employee, and the money had been re-paid to him by Cameron. Then he had arranged for a training track for the horse and .had attended during trials, timing the horse with his watch. He went to Gore as a result, and put his money on the horse when it started. Surely there was nothing against a man backing his fancy on the totalisator, and there was not any suggestion of an attempt to defraud when he won. He simply collected his money in the usual manner and put it in his pocket. If it had been a fraud, would he have conducted himself as he had? He had gone openly to James, the totalisator proprietor, and asked him for a betting book, put in his cheque and had been paid by cheque. It was all done quite openly, the jury would note particularly, and it was a most peculiar and unusual method of going about the perpetration of a fraud. Then it could be said that he had been allowed to make the bet without the money actually passing, because he was a respectable man and was allowed to make a credit bet. James had informed them that in credit betting he seldom made mistakes regarding the integrity of his clients, and had Richards been intending a fraud, would he in this manner have conducted himself, openly making evidence of his fraudulent practice? His conduct was quite inconsistent with the charge against him. Instead, his actions were those of a man acting in a perfectly honest manner.

Mr Hanlon here read from the statement made by Richards in reference to his alleged connection with Cameron, in which he denied being implicated in any way with the purchase of the horse. He would deny absolutely the evidence that he had ordered a box. From Lauder the horse had been consigned to the firm of Richards Brothers and the money refunded. In regard to the identification of the horse there could be no conviction unless the substitution of the one for the other could be proved. This was the crux of the whole case, but not however, as far as Richarda-was concerned, because there was nothing to show his connection with it. The Crown had promised clear evidence that The Dingo had been substituted fcr Kingsdale, but they could not prove the identity of The Dingo, and could only say the horse was like The Dingo. Except in regard to height, a horse’s appearance might be tampered with as far as colour went or size and shape of tail were concerned, but a horse’s height was something beyond the power of alteration. The Crown had placed their whole dependence on McNeill. Had he said the horse had been his, they would have been bound to place dependence on his statement. He, however, had sworn to having measured the horse not as was contended by the Crown, in an amateur way, but by the only thoroughly accurate method that could be adopted, and the horse according tb his measurement was 16 hands 2inches. It had been done years ago for official purposes, and now the Crown had produced a horse measuring 15 hands 3 inches and asserted it was The Dingo. Could the jury entertain the absurd notion thot the horse had shrunk? This evidently was one of the mysteries referred to by Mr Adams in his opening remarks, and the Crown had no explanation to make as to the discrepancy. Then again the vet. had recognised the horse but it must be remembered that the vet. had fired the horse two years ago, and in the interim had been on a trip to the Home Country. After this lapse of time could it be said that he would re member his marks? Many horses had been treated by him in a similar manner and it seemed impossible that he had placed different marks on each individual horse so that he could recognise each one when it was presented to him after a lapse of a couple of years. If the horse had been substituted for Kingsdale then why had not the Crown gone to Donnelly, who knew the horse, and got him to identify it. If it was not the horse he had sold he would have said so. Donnelly should be in the forefront of the attack; he should have been placed in the box. The one inference was that if Donnelly had said it was not his horse, he would be there; but Donnelly had told the Trotting Association that it was the horse he had sold to Cameron, and consequently the police, knowing Donnelly would say the horse was that which he had iold, had not placed him in the box. That was a serious aspect of the case.

In conclusion he submitted that his client had nothing to conceal. He had been quite open in his statements to the detectives’ and it did not follow that because he backed a horse that he was in any way connected with it, and it would be absurd to hold such a man as guilty of conspiracy. THE CASE FOR CAMERON. Mr Sinclair, who appeared for Cameron, in opening his defence, contended that the evidence fell short of that requisite for the establishment of a charge of conspiracy. To do so there must be the production of an actual agreement between accused, or facts from which such conspiracy could be deducted. In relation to these demands

the Crown’s case fell far short and fed far below that necessary to establish the identity of The Dingo. His client he contended had acted in a manner directly contrary to that usually associated with the conduct of people who were acting in a criminal manner. When the stake was not paid over he had written the Gore Club as an honest man would do. in reply to rumours and asked the secretary to come and inspect the horse. On every occasion on which he had been approached by the police or Trotting Association he freely explained every question in connection with the history of the horse. No one could say he had ever refused to answer questions. He had even gone on his own initiative to the Trotting Conference in Christchurch and submitted to a searching examination.

Mr Sinclair repeated Mr Hanlon’s critb cism of the absence of Donnelly, the seller of Kingsdale, and the evidence of McNeill, the breeder of the horse, in regard to its height, and also of the evidence of Martin, the veterinary surgeon, on the practical impossibility of his again identifying Ihe horse. Mr Sinclair went on to refer to the length of time that had elapsed before the police had established the horse’s identity. The race had bee run on October 20, yet it was not until five months after that they could find someone to identify the horse, and the second witness to do so that morning. That was the only evidence of identity. These witnesses, had said that the horse was easy to identify, yet that length of time had elapsed before the police could attempt to prove the horse's identity. The horse Kingsdale, he suggested, might not have been as green as had been contended. Cameron had found that he was broken mouthed and he placed before the jury the theory that possibly the horse had been in Donnelly’s hands for some time and had broken down and been turned upon the grass, w’hich would give him ample lime for recovery to a condition corresponding to that requisite for track work. Donnelly had not of course mentioned the previous work of the horse, but if his theory were correct, his silence was consistent with the general practice of horse dealing. Cameron had found the horse in the condition for racing on purchase, and lost no time in entering for races. Coming to the handwriting in the letters of Dalziel, here again upon the Crown devolved the onus of proving that the writing was Cameron’s. The expert witness was not reliable, he, maintained. He occupied the position of ledger-keeper only, which was not by any means evidence of his ability to the degree stated by the Crown. He read an extract from a writing expert stating that bank clerks were not reliable witnesses in regard to handwriting. So far as the bank’s regular customers were concerned, it Was probably acceptable, but in regard to unfamiliar writing their skill was by no means undeniable. The discrepancy in the dates between the arrival of Kingsdale and the registration of the horse might possibly be due to an error on the part of James-who had shown remarkable recollections of the date, and the facts in connection with his seeking it on the almanac, but a remarkable variation in his evidence was shown with regard to the recollection of what day had fallen on the date, though his memory of the circumstances in connection with the ascertaining of the correct date as he had stated in evidence showed the possibility of error being made. He suggested to the jury that this would give a reasonable explanation as to the want of correspondence of whjch the Crown had made a particular point. Concluding, he stressed the honesty of Cameron in all his dealings in connection with the inquiry, and the open manner in which he had courted the fullest inquiry, which were inconsistent with the actions of a man perpetrating a fraud. On the conclusion of the Gore'meeting he had not rushed away or hidden the horse, but had waited about three days, keeping the horse in a public stable where it was accessible for anyone having suspicions as to its identity. He had brought the war into the prosecution camp and upon the spread of the rumour had offered himself for examination and sought the fullest publicity for all his dealings in connection with the horse. These were not actions compatible with guilt. So far as his relations with Richards were questioned, he knew nothing of Richards’ bet of £lOO and did not share in it in any way. HIS HONOUR’S SUMMING UP. His Honour, in summing up, stressed the importance of the case first to accused and to the general public. In the interests of clean sport, even those not approving of racing must recognise the necessity of anything savouring of improper methods being eliminated from the sport of racing. The whole case, he said, turned upon the question of substitution. That point decided the question of liability naturally followed. Ho directed the Jury as to the relative positions of accused under the counts they were charged with. The care for the Crown was that Kingsdale was The Dingo, not the Lauder horse. He commented .on the absence of Ltonnelly from the case as a witness. The nniy evidence producer! to show Donnelly had affirmed the horse as the one he sold was given by Samson, who stated that Donnelly had sworn at Christchurch that the horse was the one he sold to Cameron. One would conclude that the man who sold the horse could identify it, but the other witness had stated that Donnelly was brought to Grant’s stables to identify the horse, and had first said it was Look Out, another horse connected with the trotting case. He then said the second trotter might be the horse. Finally he thought the carthorse w'as one he had sold. These statements were peculiar to a man used to horses. It was evident that if a man was not to bb believed it would have been better not to call him. On the other hand, the evidence of Hooper, Butterfield and Martin was apparently reliable, but the evidence of McNeill was not satisfactory. lie said he hud measured it. in the recognised way, but could not definitely state the horse was The Dingo he had "owned. The evidence of the hand-writing expert was not necessarily required to be conclusive. His position was merely to assist the jury in recognition of similarities which he pointed out to them, so that they might arrive at a decision which they must do not on an expert’s authority but according to their own judgment on writing. The expert’s position was merely advisory and explanatoiy. His Honour then handed the jury samples of the hand-writing of accused, and pointed, to similarities for their inspection. The necessity of proving the identity of Cameron with Dalziel! was to show the purchase of The Dingo and its substitution for the Lauder horse, upon which fact the whole ease rested. The Jury was entitled to infer a conspiracy by their dose association throughout the whole of the dealings in connection with the purchase of the horse from the time Wilson was interviewed at Lauder as to procuring a trotting horse to the time of the win at Gore They would be justified is making an inference from these facts. His Honour also presented to the Jury a complete list of dates of events in connection with the purchase, regirt rat ion, nominations and coincidence of Dalziel’s letters in reference to the purchase of The Dingo and the delivery of the horse, and participation of the horse in an active trotting career and a discrepancy between Kingsdale’s delivery and registration and nomination. VERDICT OF GUILTY.

The Jury, after a retirement of half an hour, returned with a verdict of guilty against both accused on the first and second counts and added a recommendation to the New Zealand Trotting Association to exercise greater rare in accepting registrations. The Judge complimented the police on the manner in which they had collected evidence. Sentence was deferred.