The record-union., 1894-12-31
THE STRYBE BROTHERS. SENTENCE.
1t Was Postponed in Consequence of
Afhdavits.
Lawyer Hiram W. johnson Attacks
the Validity of the Verdict on
Various Grounds.

Saturday afternoon was the time set for
hearing the motion of Hiram w. John
son for new trial in the cases of Manuel
and Richard Strybe, found guilty re-
Gently of manslaughter for the killing of
A. q. Damon at the Mobile House on
Second street six years ago.
Mr.. Johnson presented two motions.
First he asked that the verdict be set
aside on the ground that the jury re-
ceived evidence out of court, other than a
view of the premises, and which was not
permitted by the court; that the jury was
guilty of misconduct by which fair and
due consideration of the case was pre-
vented that the verdict was decided by
means other than fair eX preston of
opinion on the part of the jurors; that the
court misdirected the jury in matters of
law and erred in its decisions during the
course of the trial; that the verdict was
contrary to the law and evidence.
The other motion was that the charge
be dismissed and the information be set
aside on the ground that the defendants
had been acquitted, in that they are ac-
cused OF murder in having administered
poison to Damon, and that said crime is
none other than murder IN the trst de-
gree: that the defendants having been
acquitted OF murder in the first degree,
they cannot again be tried for that Of
tense.
The most important point observed is
that the crime alleged TO have been COM
mitted by the Stry DeS was done by pois
onlng, and as the statute makes 1t muir
der in the first degree. the defendants
could not be found guilty of mansla ugh
ter.
Mr.. Johnson then read an affidavit
from G. 7. Massey, who was foreman of
the jury that convicted the defendants, in
which Massey says he drew up the fol-
lowing paper in the presence of the other
jurors, and that the document was in
tended as a recommendation in connec-
tion with the verdict of manslaughter:
The jury have arrived at the verdict
of manslaughter in the case of the People
VS.. Manuel and Richard Strybe, after
long and patient deliDeration. The diff
Guilty was increased because of the char
acter of some of the testimony Introduced
for the prosecution, the witnesses being
such that, without a strong chain OF cir
cumstantial evidence, 1t would be dltfi-
cult to give any credence TO their words.
Our idea, however, was not to defeat
justice absolutely, but, considering that
immunity has been purchased by one
witness at least, who has displayed a
moral turpitude painful to contemplate,
and who was doubtless equally willing
with the defendants 10 share in any ma
terial gain to which the crime might lead,
we respectfully ask your honor to be as
lenient as in your judgment you reasou-
ably can when the day shall have come
upon which sentence is to be passed.
The paper, 1t was contended, was not
allowed TO be read 10 the court by MIR.
Massey.
MIR. Johnson also read an affidavit by
FNfafrf III
one OF the jurymen asked Deputy Sheriff
Ben ONeiI what the maximum penalty
would be for manslaughter, and O'Neil
replied ''ten years"
They also aver that up to that time the
jury stood six TO six for murder, and that
alter the juror who spoke to O'Neil re-
ported the information to his colleagues
The six jurors who until then voted for
mot guilty. consented To vote for man
slaughter, with a recommendation for
mercy, and that but for such information
the jury would not have agreed; that it
was brought out during the trial that the
defendants had been kept in close con-
tinement for more than TWO years, and
the jurymen voting not guilty, after
learning that the Stryb could not be
sentenced for more than ten years, be-
Heved the time of their confinement In
the County Jail would be considered
part of the sentence and reduce the
maximum by that much.
Also, that the recommendation for
mercy was not incorporated in the ver-
dict because of the ignorance of the jury
men, and because they believed the same
would be efficacious in its present form;
that f. II. Pierce, one of the jurymen,
visited the premises where the crime is
alleged TO have been committed and made
experiments as TO whether or not man
standing at the corner of Second and X
streets could see the Mobile House and
observe another man enter il. They
claim also that the evidence SO received
exerted an influence on Juryman Pierce's
judgment prejudicial to the defendants.
District Attorney Ryan moved to strike
out the latter affidavit, on the ground
that the Strybes could not possibly have
known what took place in the jury-room.
Superior Judge Johnson remarked that
it was very strange that the Stry bes
should know what took place in the Jury
room. He refused to strike out the atfi-
davits, but allowed the District Attorney
until next Saturday TO prepare counter
affidayits.