| Show WELLING OPENS OPENS' FRAUD DEFENSE Revenge Motive Laid Against Accuser Accuse By JENNINGS PHILLIPS I I f The defense launched Its counterattack counterattack counter counter- attack Monday in Secretary of State I Milton H. H Wellings Welling's third trial on n the tho charge of having presented a false salar claim to the state board boardo 0 of o examiners with fraudulent in intent intent intent in- in I tent in 1931 M Marking r the pie beginnIng of the second second sec see ond week Yeek and last phase of the trial trIa the defense called four witnesses t to support Mr Wellings Welling's plea of in in- in Two of at the witnesses one testifying test test- for tithe time in the case e told Judge P. P C. C Evans who is tryIng tryIng try try- Ing the case caso without W a jury that Harold P. P Richards former fonner state motor vehicle inspector and a a. key witness for the tho prosecution threatened threatened threatened threat threat- ened revenge against Mr Welling because of floss loss lose of his state job Mechanic Testifies Testimony was WM adduced from the others tending to show that Mrs Golda Richards wife of Harold in whoso name the false salary claim was issued had bat per performed performed formed services for which she was c entitled to compensation from the state One witnesses Sum Sim Walton auto mechanic changed his testimony test test- mon mony while the others in substance repeated testimony given at Mr Wellings Welling's second trial Tho The new witness was Andrew H. H 70 East North Temple street cat cat- He said he ho had bad a c conversation with Mr Richards at the Cullen h hotel hOtel ho hO- tel In February 1934 during which Mr Richards allegedly threatened to get Wellings Welling's guts Former Fonner Aid Heard On by District Attorney Calvin W. W Rawlings Bawling the Continued oa on Page FK Two I Column Three WELLING OPENS FRAUD DEFENSE Continued from Page One witness te testified ho had bad not previously made the Incident public because because because be be- cause I didn't want to o get ml mixed ed up in the case Miss Irma Irm Rice state and former of Mr Welling Welling- testified testified tes tee to a similar conversation with Mr Richards in the rotunda of the state capitol in January 1933 Mr Richards told her she said that he be had bern ben I let t out of ot his state Mate job by the secretary of state tate and had threatened to get even with that if its it's the last lut thing I do Mr Walton testified d at the Second trial that in April 1933 while he was employed by Clarence Claren e Kinder in a n. local garage Mr Richards told him himlie he lie was a motor vehicle inspector his bis wife was an inspector also and had bad received for tor her work Conferred on Trial On direct examination Monday fonday however he testified the conversation conversa conversa- tion took place in hi November 1934 explaining he ho had verified the date since the second trial On cro examination cross Mr Walton Walton Wal Wal- ton admitted ho had read newspaper newspaper per reports of the tho testimony of his former Clarence ence Kinder during the s second cond trial in which the garage owner denied Walton had bad be been n employed in 1933 Mr Kinder Kinder Kinder Kin Kin- der also denied Mr Val Walton's Waltons ton testimony testimony mony that he ho was present during the purported conversation with Mr Richards Richard Mr Walton also alo admitted having discussed the matter with J. J Weley Wet Wei- ley Horsley for tor Mr Welling Welling Wel Wel- ling prior to the c current tr trial aL aLCant Cant Can't Recall Co Conflicts Conflict The witness insisted that Mr Richards told him of his wife's wife service I ice e to tho the state several times although although al a- a though h he admitted he had never neverseen neverseen neverseen seen Mr Richards before that time or led him into conversation n He declared Mr r. r Richards Richard had bad volunteered volunteered volun volun- th the information without previous pre conversation with him Referred to other conflicting parts part of his testimony during the second trial the witness said laid ho recall so testifying at that time William Brooks of ot St St. George former sheriff of Washington county was county was tho the fourth witness He testified that Mr Mrs Richards assisted assist assist- ed cd him hint and Mr Richards in motor I vehicle inspection work during the spring of at 1931 and that he lie mentioned mentioned mentioned men men- her services to Mr Welling at the capitol in May of at that year ear Ho said Mr r. r Welling told him the thet t fact act ct had bad been called to his attention attention attention atten atten- tion end and he Welling would find some omo way to compensate Mrs Richards Richards Rich Rich- ards T Tells of Services Tho rho sheriff ex said laid he told Mr Richards of ot the conversation with Mr fir Welling on his r return turn to St St. StGeorge George and Mr RI Richards ard thanked him for the favor On examination cross the witness said Mrs Richards filled out seven seven or eight license applications in that perIod and anCl assisted in ch checking registration reg- reg of ot passing cars while he be and Mr Richards were were patrolling roads road Asked if he could not have done the work himself he admitted he could but added that there ther was wu more work to be done than the three of ot them could handle The state cont contends and Mrs Mr Richards testified last week that she w was never employed by or entitled entitled entitled en en- titled to compensation from the state and received none none Denies Denle Fraudulent nt Intent The defense ae maintains that Se Secretary Sec rotary Welling caused the salary sal sal- ary try claim to be issued in her behalf he thought she was entitled to o compensation and that he had no Intention of defrauding the state tate when he be presented the claim Mr Welling is expected to be bo called Tuesday with Tuesday with indications that he tho trial will end late Wednesday Tho The two pr previous trials were were con con- conducted ducted before juries the first re resulting re- re suiting ting in a a. conviction and the second second sec eec ond in a a. mistrial When the jury failed to agree |
