MECHANIC CHARGED WITH BLACKMAIL

Sun (Auckland), Volume II, Issue 368, 31 May 1928, Page 16

MECHANIC CHARGED WITH BLACKMAIL

LETTER TO EX-EMPLOYER TRUCK THAT WAS BURNED (From Our Own Correspondent) HAMILTON, Wednesday. Charged that at Hamilton, with intent to extort the sum of £2O from Henry Langguth, he caused Langguth to receive a letter containing a threat to accuse him of committing an offence punishable by law with imprisonment, Cuthbert Sydney Whyman, a motor mechanic, of Hamilton (Mr. Seymour), appeared in the Magistrate’s Court to-day before Messrs. J. W. Walsh and A. J. Bennett, J.P.’s. Henry Langguth, proprietor of the Rotorua-Taupo Freight Company, gave evidence that the accused was employed by him as a motor-driver from March, 1927, to October, 1927. Accused drove a certain truck owned by witness. On July 5, 1927, witness helped accused to load the truck for Taupo. TRUCK CATCHES FIRE The truck left early next morning, and about 9.30 a.m. accused returned and told him that the truck had been burned through the benzine catching fire. Witness said that accused was dismissed in October, and on February 10, 1928, accused telephoned him from Hamilton and told him he was in trouble. Later witness received a letter from accused, in which the latter gave witness three days in which to give him what he (accused? had been promised. “Otherwise,” accused said, “he would not keep quiet about the truck.” “I WILL CARRY IT THROUGH” Witness replied saying that he was at a loss to understand what accused was referring to. Whyman wrote again, saying witness had promised him £2O if everything was satisfactory. Whyman added that if Langguth did not carry out his promise before Friday he intended writing to the insurance company, giving full particulars. Whyman wrote that the truck was stripped, and was specially loaded before the fire. He concluded his letter: “And don’t forget—l will carry it through, no matter what happens, as it was done under your instructions.” Witness denied that any arrangement had been made with Whyman to destroy the truck. A fire insurance adjuster, Harold Warner, said he valued the vehicle at £ 400. There was nothing about the fire to show that it was deliberately caused. “GOOD MIND TO PUT A MATCH TO IT” Victor Berge, contractor, Oruanul, said he helped Langguth and Whyman to load a truck at Langguth’s garage on July 5. Witness was then in Langguth’s employ. He heard Whyman complain of the truck some time before the fire, and remark to Langguth that he had a good mind to put a match to it. . After the fire Whyman did not tell him that it had been deliberately destroyed. A HOSTILE WITNESS Detective White asked the Bench if he could treat Berge as a hostile wit-

ness, as his evidence contradicted the statement he had given to the police. The Bench consented. Witness, in reply to the detective, said he remembered telling Constable McMullin that he asked Whyman to take Langguth at his word and let the truck go. That statement was false. Witness admitted it was strange that his present statement should agree with Whyman’s. He treated the conversation he heard between Whyman and Langguth as a joke. ACCUSED’S STATEMENT Detective White produced a statement signed by accused in which he said the truck he drove for Langguth had defective steering gear, and he experienced considerable difficulty in driving it. He told Langguth that if he did not get the truck fixed up he would put a match to it. Langguth replied that it would be a good idea, as the vehicle was well insured. Several days later, continued the statement, Langguth agreed to witness’s suggestion that the truck should be burned, and added that accused was to receive £SO if he got rid of it. The conversation was heard by Victor Berge, said accused, who urged accused to take Langguth at his word. Langguth and accused prepared the truck for destruction. The vehicle was stripped of its tools and equipment, and was loaded with benzine, empty bottles, and potatoes. Early next morning Whyman said he left with the truck for Taupo. HARD PUSHED FOR MONEY Whyman said he twice asked Langguth to pay him the £SO promised, and Langguth replied that he would do so as soon as he could. Whyman admitted it was wrong to deliberately destroy the truck, but he was hard pushed for money at the time. He admitted writing to Langguth reminding him of his promise, and threatening Langguth if he did not let him have £2O he would inform the insurance company of the circumstances of the destruction of the truck.

Accused pleaded not guilty, and was committed to the Supreme Court for trial. Bail was allowed.