On trial for alleged arson, fraud attempt

Fire lit in hallway of house; man made insurance claim hours later

ALMOST two and ahalf years after a fire was deliberately lit in the hallway of his house, a Milton man is on trial for alleged arson and attempted insurance fraud.

The Chaucer St house owned by Bradley Graham Browne was damaged on the morning of Waitangi Day, 2015.

About four hours later, the 38yearold made an insurance claim in relation to his home and contents insurance.

The Crown says Browne used an accelerant to light the fire and, when he made the insurance claim a few hours later, he failed to disclose ‘‘a material particular’’, namely that he had lit the fire.

By making a claim in those circumstances, Browne was intending to deceive his insurer as he had no right to obtain insurance monies, Crown counsel Craig Power told a jury in the Dunedin District Court yesterday.

Browne, who is represented by John Westgate and Deborah Henderson, denies intentionally firedamaging his house on February 6, 2015 with the intention of obtaining a benefit and, on the same day, attempting to obtain an insurance policy payout, by deception.

His trial before Judge Kevin Phillips and a jury is expected to take several days.

Evidence yesterday was that neighbours heard the sound of car doors closing and two cars leaving the property some time after 10am. Browne’s partner, Naomilee Morrison, left first in her car, and Browne left maybe five to 10 minutes later, taking his dogs with him so they could go for a run out of the town.

About five to 10 minutes after the second vehicle left, nextdoor neighbour Andrew Williamson saw smoke coming from the defendant’s house and dialled 111.

That call was at 10.26am, and the first firefighters arrived at the house at 10.32am. They saw no flames but dense grey smoke coming from under the eaves and roof was visible.

Officers wearing breathing apparatus entered the house through a slightly open sliding door. They saw thick blackgrey smoke everywhere and flames in the hallway.

The fire was travelling up the wall from the floor near a cupboard in the hall. It had not really taken hold and was sprayed with water and extinguished.

In a written statement Ms Morrison said there had been some electrical issues with the house in 2014 but none since work had been carried out. She had done most of the renovations in the house, Ms Morrison said. She was not a smoker at the time of the fire and the children were not allowed to play with matches or lighters.

She lost everything in the fire. In his detailed outline of the Crown case, Mr Power said a fire investigator had tested for ignitable liquids in an area in the hallway and a charred aerosol can was one of the items removed from the area by police.

When Ms Morrison was later shown the burnt and crushed spray can, she said she had no idea where it came from as she did not store any cans in the hallway ‘‘junk’’ cupboard.

The Crown and defence agreed on several facts, namely that an accelerant was used; the fire was deliberately lit; the fire did not start in the switchboard; the floor and timber framing of one of the bedrooms sustained significant thermal damage at a low level, most likely by the burning ignitable liquid; areas of burning through of the timber floorboards most likely resulted from ignitable liquid; and the careless disposal of cigarettes did not cause the fire. Neither were children considered to have set the fire at 54 Chaucer St.

Mr Power told the jurors there was strong circumstantial evidence that the defendant’s financial difficulties were behind the fire.

Browne had a personal loan on one joint bank account on which $22,000 was owing at the time of the fire and he had a personal loan in debit to just over $14,600 and on which he was making fortnightly repayments of $189.

He had a home loan of about $102,500 and a Mastercard with a limit of $5500 but a debit balance of $6203.82 on which he was making fortnightly payments of $70 to Mastercard. From July 28, 2014, the account had been at the then limit of $4000 with cash advances and fees being incurred.

From the banking records of Browne and his partner, it appeared they had very little disposable income after direct debits or the like.