Santa Fe daily New Mexican. [volume] (Santa Fe, N.M.) 1885-1897, 1896-01-28
JUICE LAUGHLIN DISSENTS
Exhaustive Minority Opinion In Re
Dlsbarment Proceedings Against
Catr0n and Spiess.
GROWING OUT OF CHAVEZ MURDER TRIAL
Evidence Upon Which Borregos Were
Convicted Must Be Disbelieved in
Order to Acquit the Respond
ents of the Charges.


time, amid the multiplicity of his ex-
acting duties as United States and terri
torial district judge in this district, to
prepare and file an able and exhaustive
dissenting opinion SIN re Thomas b.
Catron and Charles A. Spiess," charged
with unprofessional conduct in their do
fense of the persons(cenyicted of the aa-
sasslnation of ex-Sheriff Francisco
Chavez, on the night of May 20, 1892.
The opinion covers fifty-four typewriter
pages, and, much as the New MEXICAN
would like to print 1T in full, it muat per-
force content itself with the publication
of an abridgment thereof.
By way of preface to his statement of
the case, Judge Laughlin says that, if he
simply consulted his personal feelings
and inclinations in the premises, there
would be no dissenting opinion in this
important case, as it would be much
pleasanter for him to concur with his re-
spected associates on the bench than to
do otherwise, but that the duty he owes
to his conscience and to the public is
superior to all other considerations and
he can not escape from its obligations.
He then recites at length the salient
points of the evidence brought out at the
Chavez murder trial before Judge Ham
ilton and the circumstances surrounding
that notable trial; explains that the dis
barment proceedings against Messrs.
Catron and Spiess came originally be-
fore the supreme court in the form of
charges preferred by District Attorney
Crist, and describes in detail the trial Of
these charges by committee of the
court and the able defense of counsel for
the accused. The charges and specitica-
tions, as printed in these columns at the
time, are repeated.
Then the testimony Of Ike Novel;, Por-
firia Martinez de Strong, Max Knodt,
Rosalia Gonzales Baca and other i'm
portant witnesses for the prosecution in
the Chaves murder trial, that the re-
spondents sought Improperly to influence
their testimony at both the murder trial
and in the disbarment proceedings, is
recitsd in full, together with the evidence
of the respondent in contradiction there
Of.
Commenting on this testimony Judge
Laughlin says;
"These five or six witnesses testified each
to separate and disconnected facts, which,
it is alleged, occurred at different and dis
tinct times and places; no motive, reason
or conspiracy is either alleged or shown
as an inducement why they should have
so testified, either at the preliminary
hearing, or on the Anal trial, or at this in.
vestigation. They each separately testi-
fed to substantially the same state OF
facts on each particular occasion cover
ing period Of some eighteen months
1t Is not contended that one single cause
usually assigned as reason for the Civ.
ing of false testimony by witnesses was
shown or existed in this case. And it was
perfectly apparent to the court from OBJ
servation Of these witnesses, their con
duct upon the stand and their manner
while testifying, that they were wholly in
competent from want of education, nat
ural ability and experience to fabricat'
the facts so testified to by them, nor is i
shown or contended, that any malice Of
ill will on the part of any of them existed
toward the respondent, but, on the con
arary, it is shown that at least one O.
them, who testified to very damaging
facts, was a very warm personal and po
litical friend of respondent. Nor is it con
tended or shown that any illegal or i'm
proper Influences were brought to beal
on any OF them by the prosecution, or b,
anyone else as reason for their 80 test
flying; while, on the contrary, it is showr
that many efforts were made by and or
behalf of respondent and his friends tt
intimidate and suppress the testimony OF
at least some of them, and their testimony
stands uncontradicted by that of any dis
interested witnesses.
"Therefore, the presumption is tina
these witnesses testified to the truth, ant
to presume that they testified falsely
under such circumstances, seems to me ii
clear disregard of the most elementar!
rules of evidence established by reason
and experience for the guidance of court
and juries in the administration Of jus
| tice from time immemorial, and is cor
trary to the deduction Of the truth b.
the process of ascertaining one fact from
the existence of another. That is, in thi
case, respondent did obtain one AFFIDAVIT
and did attempt to obtain another for tn
purpose of suppressing or destroying tn
testimony of those Witnesses; and dit
render valuable assistance to Knodt; ant
did interview other witnesses, and tn
| Jury would be presumed to reason that
it being shown beyond reasonabl
doubt, that respondent did attempt Il
suppress or destroy the testimony of tw
or three of the witnesses, and did inter
view the others, that therefore, the test;
mony of such witnesses is true unles
controverted by other disinterested tes
timony, and nothing of that nature or
pears in this record. To hold that sue
testimony, under suoh circumstances,
unworthy of belief, simply because th
moral characters and standing for trut
and veracity of some of the witnesses ar,
i'm peachable, is to destroy the most frui,
full source of testimony for the detection
and suppression of crime, and to brea
away the barriers and open wide tn
gates of the criminal classes, and to suit
ject the lives, liberties and property Q
the weak and law.abiding, to the will Q
the strong and VICIOUS"
i Touching the statement in the opinio
that much testimony was offered to th
effect that the witnesses for the prOsecr
ton were unworthy of belief on accouu
of their bad regulations, Judge Laughli
says that, if he believed this evidence. b
4 would, If he had the power, instantly sig
his pame to an order granting the person
convicted of the murder Of Chavez me-
trial. He continued "If this testimon
against them in that case was found an
ficient, ia. the exclusion of all reasonabl
doubt, to convince jury of twelve goo
and lawful citizens of the guilt of th
accused, and the judge concurring in ths
view, why ia it not sufficient to sustai
these charges against Oatron and 6piese
for without their testimony the verdi,
certainly would not standf ***
"The committee offered in open cou
to connect respondent with the autho
ship OF an article in newspaper col