The Norfolk Virginian. [volume] (Norfolk, Va.) 186?-189?, 1895-11-01
POLICE BOARD MEETS
Charges Of Drunkenness Against Sergeant
Robinson Investigated by the Board.
he is DECLARED TO Be NOT GuIL1Y.
officer Knapp Fails to Sustain tho
Ch"rsc' Although He Had Sum.
moned Several officers ms VIII.
nesscs- The Sergeant Given u Good
Record-Not a Citizen of Norfolk.

The Board OF Police Commissioners
met yesterday afternoon ut the usual
hour. Mayor Petit was absent and
commissioner Verdier presided. The
HFst business taken up by the board
was the hearing of the charges of
drunkenness preferred by OGlcer
Knapp against Sergeant Robinson,
which was partially investigated at the
last meeting of the board and con-
tinued.
Officer Knapp was called and testified
that on the night of October 9th the
Sergeant visited him OH his beat twice,
and on the occasion OF the Sergeant's
second visit he Qinapp) noticed that
the former had been drinking. Officer
Knapp said: Sergeant, thought you
qua not drink" to which the Sergeant
replied with laugh. Mr. Knapp
thought that 1t was his duty to report
! the Sergeant. which he did
onlcer walker testified that he saw
Sergeant Robinson one night about
TOUR months ago. on which occasion he
thought the sergeant had been drink
ing. Officer Walker would not Swca r
however that the Sergeant had been
drinking; he only thought so. He did
not know positively that the Sergeant
ever drank liquor.
Detective Eastwood and Officer
Sykes knew nothing OF the Sergeant's
condition on the night of October
9th. neither had they ever known the
Sergeant to take a drink of intoxi-
eating liquor.
Mr.. DoZicr. Waterman at the city
market. testified that he had never seen
Sergeant Robinson under the influence
OF liquor. He did remember of hav-
Ing said to officer Knapp that the
Sergeant seemed rather lively on one
occasion. He had never said that the
Sergeant had been drink ing, as he had
no reason TO believe that such was
the case.
All of the above witnesses were sum-
moned at the request OF officer Knapp
ana were regarded as his witnesses.
witnesses for the defense were then
Saiied. captain Ladd testified TINT he
mas known Sergeant Robinson
lor long time. was constantly on
uutv together and had never known or
heard OF the Sergeant taking n T,iri u
re considered that officer a 'tee-totai.
er' and was surprised when no heard
the charge against him. y
Iatrolnan Reid and Captain Cutb-
riell testified substantially the samn a.
CuP,alh Ladd, as did also Court Onlcer
inn 70 , ~ sergeant Taylor. an tend
charge. vi the
SIIseant Robinson then offered In
cNiuencc the Stntion-ho,S. ,.soai
Wnich shows the points of duty assirn
u VII each date to the respective Of
i,., ., ".'u proved by the record that
ne ne was assigned to duty In a different
ulstrlct on the night of October et,
anu that, therefore. the testimony nf
onieer Knapp that he saw him twice
Oh me night i'll question was untrrn
RMS closed the case. and in n faw no
inshts the Board returned the follow
ing; The charges of drunkenness
against Sergeant Robinson preferred hy
officer Knapp have not been sustained
aha me Sergeant Is honorably acuuit-
ted. and the charges dismissed
Mr. w. n. Bowden WINS then oy
ined as to his fitness for appointment
on the force as patrolman In tbe
course OF the examination il was shown
that the applicant was not an clector
having never registered, he was not
therefore. appointed