Sacramento daily record-union. [volume] (Sacramento [Calif.]) 1875-1891, 1890-12-19
GLAcKEN AND FISHER.
Justice DevIne Declines to Hold Them
for Trial for Murder.

Justice DeviEe Declines to Hold Them
for Trial for Murder.
District Attorney Bruner concluded his
argument for the prosecution yesterday
morning in the examination case of John
J. Glacken and Charles Fisher, charged
with the murder of Antoine Menke. Jr., in
September lest. The case having been
submitted, Justice Devine said:
The Court and the counsel in this case are to
be congratulated on the fact that this long
drawn.out examination has come to an ending.
The counsel in this case have very closely con-
Quoted this examination. The prose cution, par
tieularly the Deputy District Attorney, A. J.
Bruaer, who had more particularly the charge
OF the case Than his superior officer, is entitled,
think, TO compliment from the Court for the
marked degree of ability and the earnestness
with which he has conducted the prosecution OF
this case. The attorney for the defense con-
Quoted the side OF his clients also ably as usual.
A. all times while have acted in the exami-
nation OF cases as committing magistrate l
have uniformly held to the view that it was IN
wise to withdraw from the province and con-
si0eratiol of @ jury case in which the COM
hitting magistrate WAS somewhat or in any
ways in doubt as to what the verdict of the Jury
OF the facts might be. In all cases where | en-
tertained that doubt have uniformly held the
defendant to answer
The code of this State holds that the commit.
ting magistrate must find from the testimony
before him, however: First that crime has
been committed; and, second, that there is suffi-
cient cause TO believe that tie defendant CON-
mitted that crime.
Now, while, as / said before I have always
hsd disinclination to withdraw from the jury
the question of deciding whether or not under
such and such state OF facts the de-
PENDANT might be guilty where / myselt was in
doubt, still at the same time have always
come to the conclusion that it was the dut- of
the committing magistrate to discharge a de-
fendant provided he came to the conclusion
from the testimony before him that crime had
not been committed, and that there was not
sufficient cause TO believe the defendant or the
defendants guilty. ! think whatever magis-
trate considers his duty to be, he should dis.
charge 1t fearlessly, whether or not the opinion
OF the prosecution or the defense is against him
There has been mass OF testimony taken in
this case The examination CONNIE need on the
4th of December, nearly two weeks ago. II is
sufficient for me to say that, without rehearsing
the testimony in full, have come TO the con-
ciusiou that the story detailed by the defend
ants Glacken and Fisher, notwithstanding some
contradictions and variations in their nara
fendant Glacken acted, so far as the Court can
conscientiously and honestly find from the testi-
mony before If, in selfdefense and that there is
no testimony to inculpate defendant Fisher of
the crime charged. And having come TO that
conclusion the order will be that the defend
ants will be discharged.
will say in addition, in relation to a matter
I intended to advert to- that 1 was very much
please 10 find that the prosecution in the open
ing argument admitted that the testimony OF
the Chinese witnesses was unreliable. came
to the conclusion after its submission 20 me.
that the testimony was decidedly perjured. and
have eliminated all that testimony from con-
sidaration in coming TO conclusion in this
case.
Defendant Fisher was not in Court De-
PENDANT Glacken was, however, and his
friends present congratulated him on the
result of the examination.