ALLEGED PERJURY.

Manawatu Herald, Volume XLII, Issue 2203, 16 November 1920, Page 3

ALLEGED PERJURY.

CASE AGAINST E, S. EASTON,

JURY FAIL TO AGREE

NEW TRIAL ORDERED

The hearing of fhe charge of alleged perjury against Frederick Spencer Easton was concluded at the Supreme Court, Palmerston N., on Saturday. AIR. WILEORD’S DEFENCE.

Air T. AL Wiiford, counsel for the defence, addressed tin? jury at some length. He said it was insufficient to prove that the statements made hy Easton were false-. To convict him Tif perjury the jury must be satisfied that the statements made by him were false, and were intended to mislead Ihe Court. The prosecution would insist that Easton had said that the horse had never been back on Easton’s place after the sale to Wright. They would ((note the evidence of their numerous witnesses to prove ’that the hor-o had been hack on Easton’s

place, and that Easton knew it had

been there. This would be the ' Crown’s trap, and he warned the jury to beware of falling into it.

He asked them to keep carefully in

mind the dates of the various transact ions .in connection with the horse Slovens. Referring to the hearing of the civil case, Idas ton v. Wright lie said that Easton and his counsel had gone into Court to tight, a defence based merely on the statute of limitations. Gould there, in this case, he anything premeditated in Easton’s evidence to mislead the Court? “The Magistrate’s notes may he true, hut they were scruppily taken, wretchedly taken, and ungrammatically taken. In two cases sentences were not finished.

I will not -ay that the notes were.incorrectly taken, but that a lot. of what wa.- said was not taken down. The note.- were scrappily taken, because the case was a trivial one, based on a dishonoured cheque. On these notes no one could deprive a

man of his liberty. I am prepared to Jiang my case on Hie evidence of one witness,, (hat of Air J. P. Junes. There was no one in ibis Court who could fail to lie impres-

sed by Mr Junes’ evidence. If what he said was true, then Easton is innocenl. Air limes said that Easton

said in his evidence of a lease, 4 do

not think there was a lease; if so, it would he registered with the Racing Conference.’ If those words had been in Air Stoat’s notes, Easloii'Wm'ihl never have been charged

with perjury. Mr Ongley had said ilia I lie did md hear those words, but if Mr Tunes would g o into the box and swear on oath that Kaslmi had used them, he would not contradict' him.” Mr Will'ord then referred to the huge strain Em-lon had subjected himself to in depending on his memory Tor all his business transactions. “The breaking- strain must come, .and it did come.” said Mr Will'ord. “When in his delirium in influenza Easton lost something' of liis power id' concentration and 'something of bis administrative abilily. His memory still is not good at times.” My learned friend produces (be "Referee" to prove I ha! Easton knew of the registration of the lease. The mere fact that the registration of this lease was recorded in the “Referee” proves nothing. Jfeferring to (lie evidence given by Trask in the Magistrate's Court. Mr Wilford said that he and Ids client had been so badly handicapped by being deprived of Trask as a witness that he had almost thought of abandoning the case. Trask had never been cross-examined, and has evidence bad H,uis never boon tested. He claimed Unit the evidence given by Wright could not bo depended upon. The Magistrate’s notes sav (.bat W rigid a (Indited that Easton had asked Idm for payment fur Elevens in Whytes Hotel, !'oxtun. Wrighl has denied this in Ibis Court. Mr Wilford went on to review the evidence on llm hoi>e Steven,, having been seen in I he cemetery paddock at Moutoa. T want you to believe Mr Easton’s statement that be would-not take a horse that was in full training and put if in the cemetery paddock, which was deMituto of grass." There was a certain amount of evidence that a lease had been registered with the Macing Conference between Easton and Trask, but no proof that it had ever been brought under Eastons notice. Mr Wilford drew the jury’s attention to the evidence of reputable citizens, who had known accused for periods, of twenty and thirty years, and who bad found him honourable and upright in all his dealings. Was this reputation consis tent with that of a low hound who would extort money from a

poor man i ADDRESS FOR THE CROWN. Air Alacassey said it was the duly of the Crown Prosecutor to place the facts of the case before the jury as an advocate of justice and e\ith fairness to the prisoner. Counsel for the defence had twisted the facts of the case to create an atmosphere which would leave a false impression on the minds of the jury. He. had attacked Wright on every possible opportunity, because lie alleged that Easton had at one time ’befriended him. The jury was concerned with Wright only so far as his evidence was concerned, it was only necessary to. find Easton guilty of one of the charges brought a-o-ainst him to bring in a verdict of “guilty.” 'He detailed the inmsac--1 ions''with the horse Stevens, and -mid that all the evidence of these transactions had been straightforwardlv given. He stressed the unanimity of evidence abwit the lease, of the horse to Trask from Easton, and said that if this lease were considered'proved, then the statement that Eastern took the horse back

from Wright must also he considered proved. Trask was 1 r:iin‘m.u Lesion's horses el the same lime as Ik- was racing Slovens. Was it likely that if the lease were not genuine, and the horse was being raced under Trask’s name, that Trask would go unehaHonied in a. little place like Eoxlun? Would not Easton have asked Trask how he came hy the horse? It had been suggested (hat ihere laid been some, arrangement asked Trask how he come by the between Wright and Trask. Tf this were so, why should Trask have returned the horse to Easton after it had broken down ? There was no suggestion that the evidence given by Mr Junes was intentionally untrue, but Mr limes was undoubtedly conflicting the evidence of Easton

with-that of Trask. There was also substantial evidence of the gift of Stevens to Trask. Besides Trask’s evidence, (here was the corroborative evidence of Procter, to whom the horse had been lent by Trask. Procter had ridden the horse about, had been seen by Easton, and had gone unchallenged. The fact that Easton had -cut a wire to the Racing Conference showed that he suspected thatjiis. evidence in regard to please was untrue. .When the lease had been confirmed by wire he had made no'altompt to-inform his lawyer or the Magistrate, hut had wailed. Imping to get judgment jn Ids favour. Was this the attitude of an honest man? He translated the letter of Easton to (he Magistrate as an appeal for sympathy, because the writer had always been good to Ids fellow men. Regarding the evidence brought by the defence 'of Easton’s failing memory, Jie drew the jury's attention to the accused's reluctance to answer some of the questions in his evidence that morning. Jn spite of (his, he could remember all the details in connection with the sale of Stevens, and even, (lie dividend paid hy Lady Monloa in* Hawke’s Bay some years before. “Gentlemen, my learned friend has been driven to desperate straits (o defend his case,” said Air Macassey, His defence reminds me of the man who was sued by another man because he had been bitten by the first man’s dog. The defence was; —(l)'That (he defendant's vale was shut, and that-the dog was inside: (2) that if the gate was open the dog was tied up to the kennel; (3) that defendant did imi own a dog. A man may .have home the highest reputation in the community, but, when hard pressed he may have descended to perjury to get him out of a corner. I want you to de-miss from your minds any feeding of sympathy towards a fellow citizen. Here is a ease where an extremely wealthy man' has gone into the box with the intention of. deceiving a .Magistrate. If it had been some poor devil pursued by his creditors, ■ae might (.real him with some feeing of sympathy and regret. This is I case in which a rich man has sought to obtain by false statements judgment, to which he was not ent died, from a poor man. IHS HONOUR GEMS UP. «

liis Honour outlined I he law iu repi rd-to perjury to (he jury. He referred to the attacks made on Const a hie Woods l»y counsel for tlit* dev i.'ence. There 1 was undoubtedly bud feeling hetween Woods and hast on. hut if.’ Huston had anythin-;’ to oMnplain of he liad never reported it to Woods’ superiors. Xo spite against accused could he alleged in the ca--e of -Mr Onglcy. The Magistrate's notes might or might not he regarded as snllicient. Magistrates’ and Judge’s notes wore sometimes extremely ‘‘scrappy,” indeed, it was not compulsory to lake notes at all in the case ot a ’Magistrate. There was nothing’ very strange about Wright's evidence in regard to Maston taking the horse hack, and it was ijuite consistent with a subsequent lease to Trask. Maston still said (hat I here was not a learn;, hut the jury knew that a lease had been soul down to Christchurch, liad been registered with I lie Macing Conference, and had been published in the “li’ei’eree.” In addition to this, Trask had sworn there was a lease, and in (he Magistrate’s Court had. given detailed evidence of it having been signed in Maslon’s office. Maston was a man who carried all his business in his head without the aid ,d’ any system of bookkeeping. Was the jury prepared to accept Jus story Hi at he could not remember a lease with Trask? There was a great deal of general medical evidence brought to show that influenza affected the memory, but no evidence was produced which indicated that this effect was permanent. The jury was not there to consider a case of rich man vermis poor man. hut was placed in a very exalted position to give its Haul judgment according to the evidence it had heard. JUKY iDISACrIIMM.

The jury retired at 3.5;> p.m., am) after an absence of four hours the foreman reported they were unable to reach an agreement. NEW TRIAL ORDERED.

Air Alaccassey then moved for a new trial, and asked that same he set down for Wanganui. Mr Wilford said he was quite agreeable to have the trial at Wanganui, and Hi* Honour lived same for November 25th, at 10 a.m. Easton was then released on hail, hi* own surety of £IOO. 1