5 Evidence was also given at the trial by Mr Gary Wood. He was, from January 1997, employed in Curtin's telecommunications branch ("branch"). He reported to the appellant. He said that mobile telephones were purchased for use in the branch. He was asked to take on responsibility for the payment of telephone accounts. There were then five mobile telephones for which bills were received in the branch "on three or four accounts", although Mr Wood had seen only two telephones, being those used by the appellant and his assistant (transcript 160). He was asked by the appellant to consolidate the accounts into one account. When he did so, in January 1997, he asked the appellant who were the owners of the telephones and was told that the telephones were "issued on loan to other staff that wanted to use them" (transcript 161). He was also told that, when the consolidated account was received, he was to "assign the cost ... to various internal cost centres and to particular line items" (transcript 161). He said, in his evidence, that in relation to two particular mobile phones, service numbers 226 (which turned out to be the Tkacz telephone) and 439 (which turned out to be the Daniel telephone), calls were made and costs were incurred and these were paid for by Curtin. Mr Wood said, in this last respect, that he completed an authority to pay, referred to as an "allonge", in respect of each bill and that that document was sent to "financial services" which would attend to payment of it (transcript 174 and 231).