JUDGE SUMS UP

Manawatu Standard, Volume LX, Issue 141, 15 May 1940, Page 8

JUDGE SUMS UP

CONSPIRACY TRIAL. DIRECTIONS TO JURY* Per Press Association. WELLINGTON, May 14. Mr Justice' Smith, summing up in the case connected with the charges of conspiracy and fraud against Gordon Percy Aston and Harvey Maitland Chrystall, said the jury had been listening patiently to a very strange story—the sort of case one might read of in fiction and perhaps think that such things did not happen in actual fact. It was a case that could be associated with centres oi laigoi population than this, but yet there iiad been witnesses saying that certain things were the case. ■ , From the viewpoint of the Crown, the Judge supposed the story told to the jury was one that received credence on the principle said to have I icon adopted by Hitler—that it apparently normal people were told an extraordinary story it seemed mor< ? than likely-that it would be believed than if those people were told some story not so extraordinary. Jhc Crown had to reduce the story to an indictment of seven counts. ine main count alleged that between October, 1937, and July 3, 1939, the two accused conspired with each other by deceit to defraud Sellers of £6 l bo. The essential thing to be proved b> the Crown was an agreement by accused to deceive and defraud. People who wilfully made statements they knew to be untrue could not complain if they were said to deceive another person. . r The Judge said he was going to cli•rect the jury later that they should not convict on the charge of stealing a £750 cheque. It was an alternative charge, and the proper charge was one of receiving. This charge contained three elements—the actual receiving, the theft of the cheque before receiving, and .the knowledge hy those who received it that it was dishonestlj obtained. The jury in considering the ease against accused had to consider whether the witnesses were biassed. Many Crown witnesses had no interest at all in the case, hank clerks and so on. It had been suggested that Bait and Palliser might have had a personal interest in the case and, therefore, their evidence was biassed, but. the jury saw both in the box and were able to judge whether their evidence was coloured or not. Accused had made statements to the police, and there were the reactions to the questions put to them to be considered, THE MAIN COUNT. The main count, which was one of conspiracy, was based on allegations that accused had agreed one with the other, and if the jury concluded there was such an agreement then the whole of the evidence was relevant If the jury found one was not the agent of the other, then the only evidence properly admissible on the other charges was the evidence againsi both. The Crown’s contention was that, having adduced all that evidence, the jury, as reasonable men. must say accused did conspire to defraud Sellers. Counsel for Clirystall, on the contrary, said Chrystall was a highly reputable citizen who bore the highest character and that it could not be said a man of that kind did not believe-in what he said. A further contention was that if Chrystall was not a highly reputable. citizen he was a “mug,” not a rogue. But the question was whether lie had a guilty intention to deceive. Counsel for Chrystall said it had not been established beyond reasonable doubt that Chrystall had entered into- an agreement to deceive. Counsel for Aston asserted that there was no evidence that Aston had authorised Chrystall to approach Sellers, or that Aston was the principal and Chrystall the agent. REFERENCE TO PATENT.

Chrystall had said that before the latter end of 1937 he was a partner with Aston in a patent of which the latter was the inventor. Aston was produced later as the inventor. It was .or the jury to conclude whether or not Chrystall and Aston were partners in the invention, did the invention have any existence in fact, was it an invention that had actually been sold to the Admiralty, were accused bound under the Official Secrets Act? The Judge said be did not think he would be going too far if he suggested that the jury might conclude no such invention ever existed. If the jury thought the evidence showed accused had conspired, the fact that one was the master and the other the servant did not make the slightest difference in law. The Judge said Chrystall’s letter to Davis was an extraordinary one if the jury took the view that there was no armaments contract and that the whole thing existed only in file imagination. Right at the beginning, was Chrystall an honest man who had become temporarily insane, of which there was no medical evidence, or did he know that what he was saying was untrue? Was he a rogue or suffering some delusion of such a kind that he really did not understand what he was doing, or that what he was doing was wrong? The Judge also referred to the absence of evidence of real experiments having been carried out on the launch, and said it was for the jury to say whether there had been any. The jury is considering its verdict. GUILTY ON SIX COUNTS. LENIENCY FOR CHRYSTALL URGED. , Per Press Association. WELLINGTON, May 14. A verdict finding each of the accused guilty on six of the seven counts in the indictment was returned in the Supreme. Court at Wellington to day by the jury at the conclusion of the trial of Harvey Maitland Chrystall and Gordon Percy Aston, who were charged with conspiring by deceit to defraud the. former secretary of the New Zealand Racing Conference, Hartley Roy Sellers, deceased, of £6765. They also faced six other charges of false pretences, attempted false pretences, theft, and receiving. The jury added a recommendation that leniency he extended to Chrystall. On the direction of Mr Justice Smith, the jury returned a verdict of not guilty in respect of both accused on the theft charges. His Honour’s summing up, which commenced at 10 a.m. to-day. occupied two hours 25 minutes. The jury was out for three hours 25 minutes, including the luncheon interval. It retired at 12.40 p.m. and returned finally at 4.5 p.m. At 3,16 p.m. it returned to put a question to the Judge on whether tile words in the count "did receive a cheque” included proceeds from the payment of the cheque. His Honour replied that, as it was drawn, the count related to the cheque itself as a negotiable instrument, and not the proceeds. Considerable public interest was taken in the'case, and when the jury returned finally 'the public gallery was crowded. Mr Justice Smith remanded Aston

till 10 a.m to-morrow for sentence and remanded Chrystall till the close of the criminal session for sentence, or till such earlier date as may be appointed. His Honour thanked the jury for the close and careful attention it had given to the ease,. and said lie desired as some recognition of its services to say it would be excused from jury service for the next five years.

The foreman said the members of the jury had asked llim to extend their thanks for the 1 excellent arrangements made for tlieir comfort during the case, and particularly for the splendid arrangements made for their entertainment. - The trial commenced on Tuesday of last week, and occupied Seven clays.’ ASTON _ SENTENCED. FIVE YEARS’ HARD LABOUR. Per Press Association. WELLINGTON. May 15. Gordon Percy Aston, who yesterday was found guilty with Harvey Maitland Chrystall of conspiring to, defraud the late Hartley Roy Sellers of £6765, was sentenced by Mr Justice Smith to-day to a maximum of five years’ hard labour. Concurrent sentences of two years and one year were imposed in respect of the other counts.