Charles Vaucrosson sat stone-faced and sombre yesterday as a Supreme Court jury returned unanimous guilty verdicts to eight counts of stealing close to $400,000 from the beneficiaries of the late Percy Ball's trust.

The 61-year-old lawyer, a one-time Parliamentary candidate for the United Bermuda Party, was remanded on bail because of his poor health but will appear in court this morning for sentence.

A formal not guilty verdict was recorded for the ninth charge -- fradulently converting $393,782.58 to uses not authorised by the trust.

It is understood the defence plans to appeal the conviction.

The jury returned and rendered their guilty verdicts at 3.30 p.m. exactly two hours after they retired after Puisne Judge Mrs. Justice Wade's four-hour summation of the evidence.

In the end the jury accepted that Vaucrosson was the moving force behind, and the sole benefactor of, a series of withdrawals from Ball's trust account in 1991.

Vaucrosson was the court appointed administrator for Ball's estate which went to his sister upon his death in 1987.

It was his job to take care of the trust, ensuring the bills were paid and that the beneficiaries were taken care of once the legal work was finished.

Around 1991, Vaucrosson used the money to pay off a series of personal debts including $31,000 to pay his staff, a $151,750 owed to Lois Perinchief for a mortgage and $15,839.35 owed to Ms Geneva Gihon.

The money came from the Ball trust account which had a balance of more than $390,000 in January, 1991 but was reduced to just over $25,000 by the end of February 1991.

In their submissions to the court, the defence team led by Jamaican Queen's Counsel Mr. Frank Phipps, argued that Vaucrosson had been told that the beneficiaries had given the accused permission to invest their money.

They said that Conor Griffin, who was employed at Vaucrosson's and dealt directly with the beneficiaries, told the accused permission had been obtained to invest the Ball trust money in Amulion Investments, a firm that Vaucrosson owned.

However this conversation between Griffin and Vaucrosson was not put to Griffin by the defence when he was on the stand earlier in the three-week-old trial.

Vaucrosson's lawyer Mr. Michael Scott and Ms Patricia Harvey will argue his mitigation in Supreme Court this morning.

The Crown were ready to proceed with the sentencing yesterday but Mr. Scott applied for sentencing to take place on Friday so that the defence could prepare its mitigation.

Mr. Scott asked that Vaucrosson be remanded on bail pending his sentencing hearing.

Mrs. Justice Wade said that she was not prepared to grant the defence request because of the seriousness of the offences and the jury's unanimous guilty verdicts.

However Mr. Scott said: "It is important that the bail application be heard.

I am worried about the stress my client is under and would be subjected to in jail. His health is an ever present concern and I ask the court to consider it and remand him on bail.'' Mrs. Justice Wade said "it was most unusual'' and even if there was a health issue involved, Vaucrosson's conviction warranted an immediate custodial sentence.

Since the Crown did not object to the bail application and noting that Vaucrosson was seriously ill just a month ago, Mrs. Justice Wade did not remand him in custody.

He was instead released and must appear in court today at 11 a.m. for sentencing.