TRIAL NEARS ITS END

Chronicle (Levin), 7 November 1947, Page 5

TRIAL NEARS ITS END

Press Association)

iillett's Counsel Begins His Address

(Per

WELLINGTON, Nov. 7. Thp trial of Peter Edv/ard Millett, aged 24, a" clerk, on charges of forgery, uttering forged aocuments gnd thqftj eqtered the niHth day of hearing in the Supreme Court today. * Giving evidence for the defejkpe, G.eorge Go4jsm^h Ljttlejohn, retirea banker, said he had been 46 year& in a bank, He Jiad been assistant general manager of the National Bank of New Zealand and had worked among hand-wr.iting all liis life and as ledger kgeper was responsible for detecting several forgeries^ He gave many instances

which, in his opinion, were marked dis.-similarities between Millett's hand-writing and figuring and those of the forger of the documents, in the present case. Dr. O. G. Mazengarb, K.C., for a /3cused, produced a specimen pf hand-writing of the Reserve Bank ofjlcer tq whoip - he referred as "Mister X."- * Witness 'said he was able to pick many instances ih which this writing was more similar to the forger's than was Millett's. Cross-examined by Mr. Cunningham, witness said he entirely dikagreed with the evidence of Samuel HaH, Post. Office offlcjal, that the similarities were enoqgh to reveal Millett as the forger.. This witness cqmpleted the* ca.se for the defence. Dr. Mazengarb said that the writing of "Mister X" had been produced solely to show how unwise it was for an. expert witness to rely on similarities alone for his opipion. Cqunsel submitted . that the Crown had failed to establish that Millett was the one who received Ihe memorandum of transfer over the counter .at the bank. He had not at any stage acted in a manner suggesting guilt, having handled the document just as in the ordinary course of his duties. If he was the forger would he not haye avoided putting his figures on it? Mr. Hall did not recognise them as accused's figures, but suggested that they were his disguised figures, Counsel traversed ih some detail the evidence on the handwritin'g and fingerprints on the envelope exhibited. Accused's attitude throughout persistent police questioning had been that he did not kn.ow anything about the crime, Why had the police not revealed in the evidence in chjef that there was an identjfiable fingerprint inside the envelope? Find the man whose print it was, the man wfip had put the receipt in the enyelope and the case would be solved.