Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1894-09-12
A SECOND NEW TRIAL.
The Decision Today by Judge Cole In
the Leon Case.

"C DSVfSsV" hou's ny SoueC SosS IN
the Leon Case.
Judge Cole today. for the second time IN
the same case, reversed his own rulings and
granted a prisoner a second new trtals
The case was that of DIR. Edward Leon.
who stood convicted of manslaughter in
having caused the death, by abortion, OF
the unnamed child Of Miss Estelle L.
Beach, the 31st of last October. In the first
trial. which took place in January last,
the defendant was convicted of murder. A
motion for a new trial was entered. and.
after the motion had been fully argued.
Judge Cole granted it, concluding that he
had erred in not more clearly lnstructing
the jury as to the meaning of the terms
murder and manslaugnter. The second trial
occurred in June last, a verdict Of man.
slaughter being returned. A motion fer a
new trial was entered. and il vas fully
argued several dayssago.
The main contention relied on by counsel
for the convicted man was that the verdict
was not supported by the evidence. Miss
Beach, the governments principal witness,
they contended, was necessarily an accom-
plice of the defendant. il IL were true that
he had performed the abortion. That being
so, counsel for the defendant asserted that
her testimony, uncorrobora Ted, would not
sustain conviction
Where the Error Lay.
Judge Cole fc und that il had not onlz not
been corroborated, but that he had erred in
telling the Jury that there had been testi-
mony introduced by the government tend
ing TO corroborate- the testimony of Miss
Beach. The authorities, explained Judge
Ccle, held that such a rule was one Of prac-
tice and not one of law being addressed to
the discretion of the court and jury. The
CONFORMATION must. said Judge Cole. be of
some material fact--a fact which evidenced
the DEFENDANTS guilty connection with the
crime. The finding of a prescription written
by the prisoner In the possession of Miss
beach and her ability to describe fully the
interior of the defendants Office were re-
ned on, said Judge Cole, as co-roboratfng
Miss Beach. and he permitted the case to 90
10 inc Jury under the belief that she was so
corroporated He now was of a different
belief, and for that reason would grant the
motion for a new trial
Judge Cole further stated that while IL
was perhaps, competent for the jury to con-
testimony. he had faila to so Instruct the
Jury. Indeed. ne had told the Jury that
tnere was testimony tending to corroborat.
that cf the unfortunate girl. Hence. that
49,, an auoitionai reason for granting the
motion. Judge Cole commended the efforts
OF the authorities in endeavorine TO prevent
such crimes, but said that in the present
case there was but one thing for him to do
anu ina. was TO grant the defendant a new
uiai which he accordingly did
Mr. Truitt. of counsel for the defenaa,,
then asked that the defendant he ad,nif,a.;
10 oaii asking that the amount be fix,.d Ar
the smallest sum possible
District Attorney Birney. howev.r Oh
lected to the defendant being admitted to
Dali The prisoner. explained Mr.. Rilney.
was originally charged with murder. ana
ne contended that although there had been
verdict of maEslaughter the setting astde
OF that verdict. through the granting OF a
new trial. had the effect Of causing the de-
PENDANT to still stand charged with murder.
an onense not bailable. In taking such q
position, said Mr.. Birney. he had done SO
after a full examination of the authorities
which sustained his contention
The Question of HAIL.
Mr.. Truftt contended that where there
had been a verdict of manslaughter there
could be no subsequent trial for a greater
crime. Judge Cole decided that the oues-
ton was one of considerable importance
and informed' counsel that he would hear
arguments on IT next Saturday morning