BLACKMAIL ALLEGED

Hawke's Bay Herald-Tribune, Volume 81, Issue 33, 2 November 1937, Page 3

BLACKMAIL ALLEGED

-Press Aasociation.)

Charge of Extortion Under Threat of Exposure MAN TO STAND TRIAL

(By Telegraph-

CHRISTOHURCH, Last Night. As a victim of threats he had paid £50 in four years and had signed a Pensions Department form at the direction of the accused, declared a man described in the Court as "Mr. X" when giving evidence to-day in an extortion charge laid against Joseph Dyer. The complainant adided that. fearing Dyer's threats he had paid £1 a month and certain other sums. He had received a letter from Dyer eontaining a statement that if he paid all his life he would not be able to pay the debt he owed. The charge was that from November, 1933, to August, 1937, at Christchurch, with intent to extort money from a man, he, accused him of a crime punishable with imprisonment for five years or "upwards — indecent assault on a male. Dyer pleaded not guilty and reserved 'his defence. He was committed to tho Supreme Court for tnal. Dyer was remanded till to-morrow on two other charges to which he pleaded guilty, that being a claimant to a pension under the War Pensions Act, he •failed to disclose faithfully particulars ,of property and income and that he . rnade or presented to pensions officers Statements or documents which were false in important particulars. • Questioned by Detective-Sergeant T. E. Holmes, complainant said he had formed an aequaintance with accused in 1928. Dyer had several times suggested that he should remain at Dyer's house after playing cards in the evening. At Dyer's suggestion he had shared a bed with one or another of Dyer's three feons. There had been no attempt at assault, and no complaint had been made about his conduct towards the boys. In 1932 his visits to Dyer's house ceased because he found them inconvenient. About November, 1933, he had a letter from Dyer demanding an apologv for an alleged attempt at indecent assault, Dyer threatening that "he would make things awkward if he took the mattcr any further." The lfetter had been destroyed. Complainant said he had replied that there was nothing to apologise for. There was no truth in the allegation. Accused called on him some days later and said he could do with £10 and that he- was being a f riend by not taking the matter further. "I told him I was prepared to pay 10s a fortnight until £10 was paid," complainant said. "I was afraid of newspaper publieity and the effeet it. would have on my workmates. That was why I paid the money." He said he had received another letter when he had been late in the payment of an instalment. He had destroyed this letter, too. In 1936 Dyer had asked him for £10 to finance a business. Complainant said he got the money from relatives. In a letter -in July Dyer asked for £30, as he w;as pressed by a Wellington firm. Complainant had not replied to that and tEubsequent demands. Dyer subsequently visited him and wss given another £1. Complainant Said that between November, 1933, and this year he had given Dyer about £60. Questioning witnes3, Dyer asked if it were not true that complainant had, •when accvsed of attempted indecent 'assault, nodded his head and said: "Givo me a fortnight. and I'll do myself in." Witness denied thia.