The Scranton tribune. [volume] (Scranton, Pa.) 1891-1910, 1895-07-06
DETECTIVE AGLI HEDGES.
Attorneys for Rosa Say Ie Admits Ilo
Did Not Tell All Of the Confession when
On the Stand-Matters lie Withheld.

On the Stand-Matters Tie Withheld.
Argument for a new trial for MUIR
derer Leonardo Rosa was heard yester-
day before the three judges. Rosa. 1t
will be remembered. shot and killed
Vito Laurisso ON the night of Feb. ~,
at Willow and Mortimer. street, Dun
more. The evidence against him was
mostly of a circumstantial nature, but
Notwithstanding this. the jury on Sun
day, April a, brought In verdict of
murder In the first degree.
The principal witness against the
convicted man was Detective Frank
with the accused murderer and after
II time succeeded In gaining the conf
dence of his cell mate, who, he al
legged. disclosed to him his guilt and told
him where the revolver with which the
deed was committed could be found.
County Detective Leyshon found the
revolver In the place mentioned.
This was the gist OF Aglrs testimony
at the time of the trial. Now Attor-
neys j. j. Fl. Hamilton and John G. Nc
Askie. who have defended the convict
withheld a very important part Of the
confession. This part which he did not
disclose at the trial was to the effect
that Rosa, while he admitted killing
Laurisso, did so only after his victim
threatened to stab him with a scissors.
Mr.. Hamilton began his argument at
$50 o'clock yesterday and at the ad-
journment of court at 4.3O. had not fin
ished. He will resume in the morning
and will be followed by District Attor-
ney Jones, who will argue for the pros
ecution. During the hour which Mr..
Hamilton occupied he brought forth a
number OF reasons for a new trial. He
cOntended that the court erred in it's
rulings in refusing to allow certain
challenges for cause; that the verdict
was not warranted by the evidence;
that they have new and important evil
dence. namely what Detective Agli
says, to submit, and also that the con-
duct Of the district attorney was unfair
to the defendant. Rosa was in court
during the argument.
Judge Mcpherson, of Dauphin county,
was in the city and heard arguments
for new trial in the case of Joseph
Chiffon VS.. City of Carbondale, which
was tried before him in the April term
of court. Other cases argued Were: NJ.
A. Mccarthy vs.. Margaret Scanlon, rule
for Judgment; Edward Gumaer VS.. Par
den Barber, rule for new trial; Watson
& Zimmerman VS.. Green Ridge Lumber
company. rule for new trial; Spruks
,.1a
new trial; w. w. Winton vs.. N. Fitch,
executor, rule for new trial: board of
health Of Olyphant VS.. Olyphant bor-
ough council, demurrer; G. w. Bene.
dict vs. Continental Insurance COM
pany, garnishee, rule to open judg-
ment; c. l.. Burrows & Co., VS.. c. w.
Freeman, demurrer.
Submitted-Carrie Mailander vs.,
George Mallander, rule for decree in d.
divorce; August Halfman VS.. Mary
Halfman. rule for decree in divorce;
In re. adoption Of Ralph Letchworth,
rule for decree; Commonwealth vs..
Michael Matyiewlcz, rule to show cause
why forfeited recognizance should not
be remitted; Commonwealth VS.. Mary
Mahalko. rule to show cause why for
feiture Of bail should not be remitted.
In the case of the commonwealth vs.
Luigi Marino, rule to show cause why
the verdict should not be set aside and
a new trial granted, was made abso-
lutte, and in the case Of the assignment
of the Walter Printing company for
rule to discharge assignee a decree was
granted.