A Famous Liverpool Trial
| Published date | 01 October 1933 |
| Author | T. H. Spenceley |
| Date | 01 October 1933 |
| DOI | 10.1177/0032258X3300600406 |
| Subject Matter | Article |
A Famous Liverpool Trial
THE
STEPHENSON
CASE
By
T.
H. SPENCELEY
(Liverpool
City
Police)
IN a comparatively short survey it is impossible to deal
comprehensively with all the facts of the sensational trial
known as '
The
Stephenson Case,' which, at the Liverpool
Winter Assizes, 1933, occupied Mr. Justice Hawke and a
jury
for twenty-eight days.
Six accused were arraigned: Richard Balm Stephenson
(43), solicitor; Goodman Cohen (31), garage proprietor;
Myer Bennett (27), haulage contractor; Frank Thomas
Richardson (23), motor-driver; Solomon Isenwater (22),
solicitor's clerk; and Max Feintuch (24), solicitor's clerk.
They all pleaded not guilty to all
counts;
seventy-three
counts were in the indictment and nearly all of them arose out
of claims following motor accidents. A seventh defendant,
Thomas Joseph Aird (26), motor driver, appeared in the in-
dictment on accusations of conspiracy and perjury, but, owing
to illness his trial was deferred (though by the end of the general
conspiracy trial he took his place with the others in the dock
and was acquitted).
With very few exceptions the charges arose out of some
form or attempt to exploit the potentialities afforded by litiga-
tion in connexion with motor transport, whilst the general
conspiracy charge alleged that the accused conspired together,
'by
divers forgeries, perjuries, false pretences and subtle
devices ' to cheat and defraud of their monies the owners of
vehicles and public companies and firms insuring such owners
against liabilities arising out of collisions and accidents. Also,
4
Il
412
THE
POLICE
JOURNAL
with conspiring together by the fabrication of evidence and
by the invention of claims, and other false pretences, seeking
to maintain pleas in Courts of Justice.
Mr. Edward Wooll, Recorder of Carlisle, the leading
barrister for the prosecution, addressing the
jury
at the open-
ing of the trial said, '
It
is impossible to exaggerate the gravity
of this case.
If
the contention of the prosecution be true, you
are dealing with the operations of a number of men who were
utterly unscrupulous in their methods whilst some of them had
the exceptional legal knowledge essential to the perpetration
of their ends.'
A knowledge of the accused and others mentioned in the
trial will be helpful in studying the case:
Cohen and Bennett carried on a business in Liverpool in
the repair of motor vehicles under the name of ' C. and B.
Motors,' and a motor haulage business under the name of
, C. and B. Carriers.'
They
had a number of employees, in-
cluding two young
drivers-the
accused Richardson and Aird.
In
addition, they employed a couple of drivers of motor lorries,
named Hatton and Churchward, and had a mechanic in charge
of their repair
business-though
he frequently acted as an
extra
driver-a
man called Maudsley.
Stephenson was a solicitor who had built up a very success-
ful practice and for many years had carried on his professional
duties without apartner. During the four years preceding
this trial he had been concerned in no fewer than 167 actions
entered for trial at the Liverpool Assizes alone.
Isenwater was an articled clerk in Stephenson's office,
having entered it at the age of fourteen years. His wages
before and after signing his articles were ten shillings a week.
Feintuch was managing clerk for Stephenson
but
was not
articled to him.
Reputable solicitors, the secretaries and other officials of
insurance companies were all aware of the criminal and un-
scrupulous methods adopted by Stephenson and his clerks,
but
unless they had a concrete case or even a sound one, they were
in the habit of settling any action rather than go to court with
To continue reading
Request your trial