Carl Frankum was accused of two counts of theft – £475 in 2012 and £350 in 2013 – from the States of Jersey in 2012 and 2013 when he worked as a Payments and Electronics Submissions (PEST) officer. He had denied both charges.
The jury considered its verdict for three hours, but failed to reach a unanimous conclusion. Each member was subsequently required to individually give their answer to the Bailiff William Bailhache, who was presiding.
Reading the conclusion to Mr Frankum, the Bailiff said: “The evidence is insufficient for you to be convicted and accordingly you are discharged on both accounts of indictment.”
Mr Frankum dried tears from his eyes while the Bailiff summed up, thanking the jurors for having, “…clearly given a good deal of thought over this the last three hours or so.”
The verdict was the sum of a two-day trial in which Crown Advocate Chris Baglin had suggested Mr Frankum’s alleged gambling habits as a potential motive for stealing two Jersey companies’ ITIS payments – £475 paid by a local restaurant, and £350 from a bakery.
But defence Advocate Ian Jones successfully convinced the majority of the jury that there was sufficient “reasonable doubt” not to convict – notably, failings in the Taxes Office security procedure and in the investigative processes, which did not prove that Mr Frankum had been present at the office on the days of the alleged thefts.
Advocate Jones subsequently applied for standard costs to be covered by the Crown.