“BRILLIANT MAN”

Star (Christchurch), Volume LXVI, Issue 20296, 4 May 1934, Page 7

“BRILLIANT MAN”

ACCOUNTANT SENTENCED BY JUDGE. Once Worth £40,000. GOES TO GAOL ON THEFT CHARGES. Leslie Cecil Johnson, convicted on four charges of theft, was sentenced to two years' reformative detention by his Honor Mr Justice Johnston this morning. Johnson was originally charged on twenty-four theft counts and eight forgery counts, the complainant being C harles Seymour Trillo, proprietor of the Gold Band Taxis, where prisoner was employed. At the trial the Ciown concentrated cn four of the theft charges, and when prisoner was found guilty on those a

formal “ not guilty ” verdict was returned on the other twenty, while a stay of proceedings was applied for on the fotgeiv counts. Appearing for Johnson this morning, Mr Young said that prisoner was fiftythree years of age, a native of Australia. He was educated at Newington College, Sydney, and at the age of sixteen he left school to join the Phoenix Assurance Company, and after twelve years became the firm’s chief accountant in Australia. He had also achieved the degree of F.I.A.A. Money Lost. He then founded the well-known accountancy firm of Johnson, Johnson and Edwards. When he retired he was worth £40,000. That money he lost in business enterprises, including the failure of the first taxi firm to institute such a service in Sydney. He went to Wellington and was employed by the J. C. Williamson Company. He was fined £5 for some trouble in connection with changing the num-ber-plates of a car, and later fined £SO and put on probation for manipulating cheques in much the same manner as on the occasion under notice. His firm stood by him through his trouble. At Hokitika he took a prominent part in the flotation of the Rim a dredge. Then he came to Christchurch and founded the International Advertising Company, in which capacity he became acquainted with Trillo. “He saved Trillo’s business in brilliant manner,” said Mr Young, “ but his salary was far from adequate and he yielded to the temptation provided by the loose business methods of the office. Like most brilliant men, he needs a solid influence behind him, and such an influence was entirely lacking in Trillo’s business. “ Prisoner did not steal anyone’s savings. The money he took was what he himself had made for Trillo. If leniency is shown, then no doubt restitution in full will be made to Trillo.” A Difficult Case. “ Your counsel has said all that can be said,” his Honor remarked in addressing the prisoner. “ I have your lecord before me. You were convicted lor false pretences and forgery in Wellington and fined £SO, as well as being admitted to probation for two years. You were also fined £5 for theft in the Magistrate's Court. “ Your case gives me great difficulty, because of your education and qualifications, which make it clear that you must have known what you were doing. Your ability, which must be considerable, makes you a menace to the public unless you are honest. When you are dishonest your possibilities for usefulness to the community are rendered a danger. “It is true,” his Honor continued, “ that in Trillo’s business the remuneration appeared inadequate and the method of conducting business was such that fraud could be committed easily. Apparently you had not the character to resist temptation. “ I believe that on a previous occasion you refunded the money, and it is possible that you would do so this time, but I do not think I would be doing my duty to the public if I allowed you the benefits of probation. On the other hand you are a man of fiftythree and so much depends upon your own behaviour that I do not want to give you a long term of imprisonment without the possibility of review. If I send you to reformative detention the matter can be reconsidered. Of course, I cannot give you an inadequate term.” The judge then sentenced prisoner to a period of reformative detention not exceeding two years.