UNUSUAL SCENE

Hokitika Guardian, 18 April 1933, Page 5

UNUSUAL SCENE

MOSCOW TRIALS

“WHOLE CASE IS A FRAME UP.”

(British Official Wireless.)

RUGBY, April 15.

There ws a remarkable scene wnon the tlie trial of the six MetropolituiiV inkers engineers was resumed at Moscow to-day. Mr A. Monkhouse asked to he allowed to make a statement. He was three times interrupted by the President of the Court, but succeeded in stating in English that the evidence of Sliuklioruchkiu .showed conclusively that “the whole case was a frame up” against Metropolitan-Vickers, based on the evidence of terrorised Russian prisoners.

He got 'as far as saying, “I know from my own experience in being subjected to eighteen hours’ uninterrupted interrogation . . . .” when the Presi-

dent requested him to postpone his statement until the proper time. The whole proceedings were disorganised, and all messages were stopped until the official stenographers supplied the exact words.

Another of the Russians who pleaded guilty, Krsashetnimikov, then gave evidence for the prosecution, alleging that he had been bribed by Thornton for machine-wrecking at the Moscow electrical station, and also for espionage, and for concealing defects in plant supplied by Motropolitan-Vickers. The prosecution secured similar evi-

dence from Zorin and Oleinik, who also pleaded guilty, and the latter tried to incriminate Monkhouse as well.

Defects in Plant

In questioning Krsashetnimikov, Thornton was able to show that all tbe defects to which ho referred were well known to the management of the: electrical station.

. At one stage of the examination by the prosecution the witness Krashetnimikov was asked if lie understood the difference between a Soviet citizen carrying out wrecking activities and a foreigner doing so. He said lie understood it- was treason in the former case.

Cushuy was then examined. The prosecution questioned him in detail about bis acquaintances among the Russians, endeavouring to obtain admissions of espionage. Cushny answered fully, not accepting the apparent implication of the prosecution that an extensive acquaintance among his fellow Russian engineers was prima facie evidence of guilt.

Allegation of Perjury.

Cushny said the Russians who were giving evidence against- him were.perjuring themselves, and repeated this phrase when the proseenton suggested that he meant they were not telling tlm truth.

At the end of bis examination QusLn y requested permission to make a statement, but was told by the President that it must be postponed. The latter part of the session was spent in further examination by the prosecution of Oleinik, again directed against Thornton, who, according to Oleinik, arranged for part of the latter’s salary to be paid to him in England. His statement that 2000 roubles were transferred to the English account. it was claimed, was difficult to reconcile with the amount of his salary.

Military Information

He continued his allegation against, Thornton of bribery for machine wrecking at many places, but was able to name only one of them. He also stated that he provided military information, but when questioned, it transpired tnafi the information was based on an observation that troops were travelling in one train while he was travelling in another. 4 . . The session closed by Oleinik explaining that his espionage work was in the interests of a certain group and not in the interests of Metropolitan Vickers.

At yesterday evening’s session Lebedev, another Russian accused, who pleaded guilty, was examined. The prosecution obtained from him a similar story to that told in the morning session by his fellow accused. Lobanov aimed at incriminating Nordwall.

Allegatio s Denied.

Nordwall, giving his evidence in a confident, decisive manner emphatically denied Lebedev’s allegation of bribery for machine wrecking, and also tlio subsequent allegations of the same Lind made by Oleinik, who hud been in the employ of the company or of its associates for 20 years. The prosecution then took evidence of another Russian accused, Zivert, who said Thornton bribed him for providing information and delaying erecting work, and w’lo also accused Gregory of propaganda. When Zivert’s evidence concluded Gregory insisted upon making a statement on the ground that liis professional efficiency had been

impugned. He described his work at Dnionrcstroi, and challenged anyone to show it could have been done better

or more quickly

Soviet and Foreigner.

The latter part of the session was devoted to the examination of Sh"khoruchkin, who told the prosecution that Thornton bribed him for providing secret information, for machinery