Daily inter mountain. [volume] (Butte, Mont.) 1881-1901, 1899-04-13
INDICTMENT
is QuASHeD
In the Case OF Roland MOlineuX
in New York.
JUDGE GIVES REASONS
Why He Made Such an Order--A
New Grand Jury Will Take Up
the Case in Near Future,
JUDGE GIVES REASONS

$1,000 ~AfAh = - "S -
setting aside the indictment of Roland
B.. MolineauX, charged with the murder
Of Mrs. katherine j. Adams, Judge Par
don e. Williams says in almost every
case evidence is given which any court
would exclude if present to pass upon
the competency thereof, but it would be
an unreasonable rule which should re-
quire the court to discharge every in
dictment where illegal evidence, was
gwen before the grand jury, and if the
legal evidence was such that, disregard
ing the improper evidence, an Indictment
would still lave been found, then the
court should permit the Indictment to
stand.
Taking up the question of the hand
writing, he SAYS that in this case the
most important matter is to ascertain
who wrote the address on the package
containing the poison. He holds that the
comparison of handwritings may be used
before a jury and is competent violence
the same as though it will be before a
court. The exhibits, which were prac-
tically conceded to be M~olineaux's hand
writing, including the specimens he
wrote for the district attorney, were
properly received and We're competent
evidence.
He then takes up the second series of
exhibits, the letters signed 'Cornish''
and Barnet They were certainly dis
puted handwritings, and no evidence was
! given as to them being the genuine writ
ing of the defendant except by compari-
son with the standard already received,
| the first series of the exhibits, the con-
| coded writing of MolineauX. Such proof
Of the second series having been made,
they We're received as exhibits by the
jury. Then both series were used b.. the
expert witnesses as standards, for COM
parison with the disputed addresses on
the poison package, and We're later re-
ceived.
1t is alleged that the CONVERSATIONS
the letters signed Cornish and Bar
net" We're improperly before the grand
jury. Judge Williams holds they could
not be used as standards for comparison
because they were themselves disputed
writings and only proved by comparison.
He also holds that they were not ON
petent for any other purpose than as
standards for comparison of handwriting
and that they were not material on any
other issue.
Judge Williams mentions that there
was no proof given that the Cornish
exhibits We're sent or received through
the mail. IF such evidence had been
given it might be held that they were
competent on the question of motive as
showing the relations between the de-
PENDANT and Cornish" that the defend
ant had assumed his name and forged
his name to letters and so forth, but
proof was not made for any such the
cries. The Barnet letters We're imma-
terial upon any such issue in the case.
! The deaths of Mrs. Adams and Barnet,
if murders, the judge holds were separate
and distinct crimes, and if both were
committed by the same person still the
proof of one crime could not be given
upon the trial of the other. These ex-
hibits could only be used as standards of
comparison of handwriting, and they
could not be made standards under the
statute by the kind of proof given.
In addition to this, the matter con-
| tanned in the exhibits was such as would
almost certainly influence the minds of
the jury against the defendant. If the
| exhibits were written by him, then the
jury would naturally believe he had
forged the names of Cornish and Barnet,
and as to the Barnet" letters they Were
filled with matter tending to show the
| defendant to be not only dishonest, but
of low, filthy instinct. Judge Williams
says that under all the circumstances he
cannot do otherwise han discharge the
defendant.
The people may present the case to the
next grand jury, being careful to use
only legal evidence, and then the deter
mination of the grand jury will be bind
ing on every one.
Assistant District Attorney James w.
Osborne, when i:lfOrmed of the grounds
given by Judge Williams for his decision,
said:
This decision is really in our favor.
Judge Williams directs us to resubmit
the case to the grand jury. This is viz
tually only a precaution that he holds
should be taken. We shall lose no time
in presenting the case again to the grand
jury. So far as the letters signed Cor
nish' and Barnet are concerned we
could have omitted from the evidence
just as we'll as not before. We allowed
them to go before the grand jury be-
cause we thought they should have the
benefit of all we knew at that time. We
can present a stronger case than ever
when we go before the grand jury again.
MolineauX will not be discharged. The
courts decision virtually directs us to
hold him until the grand jury acts again.
Until | confer with District ATTORNEY
Gardiner i canno say when the case will
be taken before the grand jury again.
| take Judge Williams decision to mean
that he wants US to guard at the start
against later defeat on technical points.
We shall have a stronger case than ever
when we go before the grand jury this