2.05PM: Confusion surrounding an employee's salary and the expenses associated with producing a Gay Guide have re-emerged in the third day of the Pride Centre fraud trial, along with an alleged attempt to deceive immigration authorities and the IRD. Martin van der Reit is charged with seventeen counts of fraud and one of perverting the course of justice following revelations of the financial collapse of his employer, the Auckland Pride Centre, in early 2004. At the core of the case are disputed versions of what salary Van der Reit, employed at the time as the centre's coordinator, was entitled to. A document, one of few relating to his employment or the running of the Centre's finances found in the Pride Centre office after van der Reit failed to attend a meeting to discuss financial problems, indicates he was entitled to an agreed salary of $55,000 per annum, but this has been disputed by a series of witnesses who say it had been tampered with, and that he was only entitled to a part time salary of $19,000. Van der Reit's application with NZ Immigration to become a NZ resident was again raised in court this morning in connection with the found document. Called as the first defense witness, van der Reit said that when Immigration had requested a letter confirming he was in full employment at the Pride Centre, he and the Centre decided to print two different contracts. One version stating his salary was $55,000 for full time work would remain on the Pride Centre files and, because he was concerned about income tax implications, a second version stating his full time salary to be just $19,000 was to be given to Immigration authorities. The latest witness to cast doubt on the accuracy of the claimed higher salary level was graphic designer Simon Stockley. Stockley said he has been a friend of longtime Centre stalwart Edward Bennett and on a casual visit to the Centre was asked to witness van der Reit's employment agreement which he stated showed the salary to be $19,000. Stockley says he specifically noted that figure "because I thought it was a bit 'tight.' I only noticed it because I am a bit nosey." Taking the stand this morning, van der Reit confirmed his understanding that the job he applied for was part of a job-split arrangement. He said the Pride Centre seemed to be in an expansionist phase, hence its interest in his suggestion for production of a regularly updated Gay Guide. One his first tasks after being appointed was to lodge an application for funding with the Lottery Grants Board to cover salaries totaling $26,000. That application was deferred by Lotteries as they did not consider a job vacancy advert in express newspaper to have been placed in a national publication. A subsequent application to the ASB Trust is claimed by Pride Centre trustees to have been tampered with to raise the requested salary figure to $55,000. When asked by the defense lawyer if some uninitialled pages in the application could have been interfered with, van der Reit responded "Never." Van der Reit is adamant that the much-disputed $55,000 salary amount included the projected $36,000 cost of producing the first two issues of the Gay Guide, which it was hoped would eventually become an income earner for the Centre. He said those costs included $10,000 each for for printing, design and research, plus a further $6,000 for distribution. During the past two days of questioning before the District Court jury, Centre trustees Edward Bennett and Joel Stutter have claimed that they sometimes pre-signed blank cheques which were handed to van der Reit in his capacity as Centre coordinator. The amounts these cheques were made out for, the stated reasons and where the money actually went are the basis of some of the fraud allegations. However, this morning van der Reit denied that he was ever given pre-signed cheques to complete later. "I never saw that happen," he said. "Either I filled them out first or [Bennett and Stutter] signed them and I filled out the rest of the details while they were there." Van der Reit this morning also acknowledged that several cheques for large amounts had been made out in his favour, but he contends that these were to reimburse his credit card. He says he had charged some Centre expenses to his personal credit card "because some people would not accept cheques... it was just more convenient." As well as cheques, bank authorities for regular automatic payments from Centre funds have also been called into question. Van der Reit says Bennett signed "a great many" of such authorities but only after all details had been entered on the forms. He says Bennett oversaw his work activity closely. "Mr Bennett was extremely thorough and checked absolutely everything I did." The case continues this afternoon and for the rest of the week, and GayNZ.com News will continue to file reports live from the court.