JOHNSON CASE

Hokitika Guardian, 18 June 1932, Page 2

JOHNSON CASE

(By Telegraph —Per Pren Attociation WELLINGTON, June 17.. When the Court resumed to-day, counsel for the Commercial Union Co. began his address. Replying to a question by counsel, His Honor .-aid that in coming to the conclusion Mrs Johnson’s signature had been' forged, in addition to comparing the writing on questioned documents with the authentic writing ol Mrs Johnson, lie had taken other matter into coii'Udoration, tlie evidence relating to the witnessing of signature, and that in regard to the dates on which the documents were said to be 'igiied. He had studied tlie documents again since the Court rose yesterday, and was still more firmly of the opinion that the document's were forgeries. His Honor said further that he could not conceive anyone looking at the documents and comparing them without seeing that the signatures were obviously forged. Frankly, he said lie would very lnudii like to come to any other ronohiskm becau'e one naturally sympathised with insurance companies when they had paid out, but the view that the documents were forgeries was absolutely forced upon him. While making no suggestion that Mrs Johnson has perjured herself in the witness box; council submitted i he must, have impressed the Court as being unreliable in evidence. Counsel deal: witfi the question of whether ill view of th ( . delay that had 'been incurred in bringing the action Mrs Johnson wa.s not stopped from recovering from the insurance companies, and he quoted cases in support. Counsel for the T. and G. Society said that lie did not despair, and was not without hope of being able to convinca the Court that the signature " to the document on which the T. and G. paid out should be accepted as genuine. If the document, on which the company paid out, was not proved to be a forgery, then tlie company must succeed even though every (signature after it might be a forgery. His Honor: I think you are quire right, but the fact that the whole lot o; other documents are forgeries certainly would assist in con.-ideration of whether this document is a forgery. Counsel went on to refer ' to the evidence, stressing that Mrs Johnson certainly signed some document in 'Bowen Street Hospital, shortly after her operation, and the T. and G. document was dated the day after the operation. June 17. The hearing lias concluded in the Johnson insurance claim. Decision was reserved.