AIR FORCE OFFICER TO BE DISMISSED FOR SMUGGLING OFFENCES

Wanganui Chronicle, 20 July 1950, Page 5

AIR FORCE OFFICER TO BE DISMISSED FOR SMUGGLING OFFENCES

AUCKLAND, Last Night (PA). —Found guilty on charges of smuggling a refrigerator into New Zealand by air on November 26, 1949, smuggling goods by air on October 2, 1949, and with conduct to the prejudice of good order and Air Force discipline on November 26 and October 2, Flying Officer Arthur Cyril Hilliam, of No. 41 Transport Squadron, R.N.Z.A.F., was dismissed His Majesty’s service by a General Court-martial at Whenuapai tonight. His dismissal is subject to confirmation by the convening authority of the Court. Accused, a flight engineer officer formerly engaged on the Dakota courier flights from Singapore,' was acquitted by the Court on three further charges of smuggling watch straps and artificial pearls. In his closing address, Mr. Cleal, who prosecuted, said that smuggling was defined as landing goods with the intention of defrauding customs revenue. The parcels were brought in by air on November 26 and, although dutiable pearls and watch straps were in them, no duty was paid. Accused was a party to bringing the goods In and was connected with the goods as he was in charge of the case. Counsel said the evidence called proved that accused brought a refrigerator into the country and he did it to defraud the customs. Pearls and th e goods brought in on October 2 were not available to be produced, but they were found concealed under the floor-boards and there was only one reason why they had been hidden goods. For the defence, Mr. Turner said accused was in a somewhat disadvantageous position and it was inevitable that in a case that was already cause celebre in < the Air Force that members had heard something of the case. He was confident that members would put anything they had heard outside their minds. Dealing with the charges of November 26, counsel said it was perfectly plain that somebody brought the goods in by air in a wrongful manner, but the evidence did not show who it was beyond all reasonable doubt. The refrigerator was carried on the aircraft with accused’s commanding officer’s permission, so accused could not be guilty of misusing service facilities. Accused had paid duty on the refrigerator some time later and had probably given a completely satisfactory explanation, as the duty payment was accepted. The Court returned with its verdict after deliberating for 45 minutes. In mitigation of the sentence, Mr. Turner pointed out that prisoner had a blameless service record. A denial that, ground crew members were blackmailing officers by refusing to hand over imitation pearls, watch straps and pen refills that had been taken off an aeroplane from Singapore, unless they got half, was made by Sergeant Ernest William Rogers, the 12th Crown witness. Rogers testified that members of the duty crew which removed the goods from the plane of October 2, refused to return them to the plane crew, because they considered them to be contraband. Later, the duty crew said they would return half, hut accused wanted all the goods. They were eventually left on an independent officer's desk. Cross-examined, Rogers denied that h e was upset because his plan to get half the goods had fallen through. “I did not inform the Customs, possibly because I hoped that by not doing so I would get a share of the goods. I do not think it would be fair to describe that as blackmail,'' Rogers said. He neither suggested nor participated in the search of the plane.