The herald., 1898-03-25
IN AllBI IS AIMED
GosHPH ROGERS ON TRIAL FoR A
ROBBERY
HOW HARDY LOST HIS MONEY
Description Of Buckskin Horse That
Indicates Color Blindness-Case
Not Concluded

A case that was very much mixed up
was tried yesterday before Judge Smith.
Joseph Rogers of Downey was accused of
having, in company with another man,
robbed an old gentleman named v. NJ.
Hardy of $12 on June 30th of last year. Mr..
Hardy said that on the evening of that
date he was sitting in his house, when a
rap came at the door. Two men entered
and said that the double-tree of their wag-
on was broken, and they asked him If he
could loan them one. Hardy said he could,
and preceded them out into the yard. He
was suddenly knocked down and relieved
of the money he had in his pockets. He
afterward claimed that Joseph Rogers, the
defendant, whom he has known for nine
years, was one of the parties who had
robbed him.
When Rogers was first arrested, long
time ago, for this alleged robbery he was
taken before a justice Of the peace, who
dismissed the charge against the prisoner
because the evidence was insufficient.
Rogers was rearrested and re-examined
before another magistrate, who held him
to answer, but the case was dismissed when
1t reached the superior court. Afterward
Rogers was once more arrested and held
to answer, and was finally tried yesterday
In Department one.
The evidence was unsatisfactory. One
witness, in describing the color of one Of
the horses upon which the alleged robbers
were supposed to be riding. said he was a
buckskin. Being requested to describe that
color. he said that buckskin was buckskin.
Some suggestive pressing on the part of
the several attorneys engaged in the case
showed the elasticity of mind and color
blindness of the witness, as he variously
gave the color of buckskin as brown, yell
low, pink, green and cream. None of the
Downey people called for the prosecution,
mostly acQuaintances of Rogers, recog-
nized him as one of the men who passed on
horseback on the road after the robbery
had been perpetrated. 1t Is true that it was
q little after dark.
Grover Ball. young man, saw Rogers
on the afternoon of the crime under a
bridge about three-Quarters Of mile from
Hardy's ranch.
W. T. Williams-How were you travel
ing?
Witness-west.
Mr.. williams-No, no! On horse or on
foot?
Witness-On a wheel.
Hams excused himself for having forgot
ten that way of locomotion, because 1t was
new. Witness said: "IIello, Joe" and
Rogers replied: "Hello, old man" and that
was all he knew about the case. Yet he
was severely cross-examined because It ap-
peared that he had stated at one of the
many preliminary examinations that Rog-
ers had first said: Hello, old man" and
that he had then greeted the defendant
with "Hello, Joe!' Counsel for the de-
fense also wanted to know who had bought
the bicycle he rode, he or his friends
Grover said his friends had bought it, and
this important point was settled by Mr..
Balls admitting that 1t had been pur.
chased by his friends. He was then al
lowed to withdraw.
The flrst witness for the defense swore
that at the time Hardy was relieved of hfs
money Rogers and himself were raising
Flagstaff at Fullerton, twelve miles away.
1t Is understood that the entire defense
rests upon an alibi The case will go to the
Jury today.