New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1900-02-14
THE MOLINEUX APPEAL.
MIR. WEEKS STILL CONFIDENT OF FINAL
VICTORY-PRISONER VISITED BY
HIS FATHER AND HIS WIFE

HIS FATHER AND HIS WIFE.
The first feeling of stunned surprise which ths
verdict OF the jury in the MOlineux trial gen.
orally caused is giving way to reflection
People who insist that the evidence presented by
the prosecution was not convincingly strong
as to preclude the possibility of reasonable doubt
were speculating yesterday what might have
been If such and such things had been done
Since it has become obvious that Molineux was
convicted upon the testimony mainly or the
handwriting experts, there is a disposition IN
many quarters to question the wisdom OF MI
Weeks in permitting this class OF evidence TO 60
to the jury uncontradcted. II Mr. Weeks had
won his effort to beIittIe the prosecutions case
by cOntending that it did not need refutation oy
calling witnesses for the defence would have
been hailed as a mastery stroke But as he
failed. he is looked upon by some in somewhat
the same light as they would regard a general
who In venturing upon an unusually daring at
tack upon the enemy met with defeat
In the comments that were heard yesterday a
we'll known criminal lawyer criticised Mr. Weeks
for not crOss-eXamining Cornish more severely
and at greater length than he did in order TO
impress upon the jury what he asserted in his
summing up to be a fact-that credence should
not be given to COrnish's evidence because OF
the contradictions and inconsistencies which 1t
contained 1t was said by some people, too, that
Mr.. Weeks might deem it advisable to withdraw
from the case. George Gordon Battle, however,
told a Tribune reporter yesterday afternoon that
there was no intention the part OF Mr.. Weeks
himself TO retire, nor did Molineuxs FANNY
desire that they should.
BUSY WITH THE APPEAL
Mr.. Battle said that he and Mr.. Weeks we're
busy preparing the appeal to the higher court.
1t is of course certain that the formal motion
for new trial which will be made to Recorder
Golf next Friday will be denied, but Mr. Battle
is convinced that the Court Of Appeals will re-
verse the verdict of the petit jury.
Il am confident" he said. that a new trial
will be granted. We ought to be successful on
the general ground of insuficiency OF evidence
So strongly do we believe that the evidence was
not sufficient for conviction that we would do
again. unde~ the same circumstances, what We
did, that is, rest on the evidence of the prose-
cution. OF course. on a trial we shall pre-
sent testimony. and know that it will be
sufficient for acQuittaI- AS TO specific grounds
for appeal, they are .nnumeTabIe. We took
many exceptions, and there is no doubt what
ever in my mind, that they will yield good
enough reasons for the granting OF new trial
There seems TO be pretty widespread impress
sion that the rulings of the Court in many in
stances were COnfOrmable with the law.
Then, too the facts will be laid before the Court
of Appeals.
Despite the fact that presented no evi-
dence we shall be permitted to present evidence
TO the Court of Appeals in case it comes under
the head of newly discovered evidence The
Court itself will judge whether any evidence
we might lay before them comes under that
head. We shall not be permitted to lay before
1t any testimony we could have produced at the
trial. for instance, testimony of Newark de-
tective corroborating Miss Miller to the
features of the man no purchased the silver
bottle holder. We knew Of that before the clos
ing of the case But Miss Miller's testimony
was all that was needed as to that point; she
was not contradicted."
Mr.. Weeks likewise, in a statement which
he gave out yesterday. expressed confidence
that he would not only secure new trial. but
would eventually secure the acquittaI OF his
client. The Court of Appeals Mr.. Weeks
went to say. will give the defence ten days
notice of the date selected for the argument OF
the appeal. and that date the lawyers for the
defence and the District Attorney will go TO
Albany, the first to fight for the reversal Of the
verdict. the second to argue against IT.
In the time Molineux will have been
sent to the prison at Sing Sing. If a new trial
is granted. and I have absolutely no doubt that
it will be. my client will be taken back TO the
Tombs and there await the verdict Of another
jury He will then have recovered his status OF
an innocent man. In the event of this new trial.
which is certain 1 can only say that his case
will be presented by the defence in such light
that the jury cannot again jeopardize my clients
life; that I will fight to the very end the read
mission OF evidence that is irrelevant and i'm
proper; that shall battle again for the charge
to the jury denied me by the Recorder during
the last trial.
Il am not prepared TO say that 1 shall put my
client on the stand in his own behalf I not
at liberty TO state that the defence Will call
any expert witnesses; that the presentation Of
the case will differ or be identical with the
methods Of the defence in the trial before Re-
corder Csof. These things will be determined by
circumstances in force when the time shall have
arrived.
Failing a new trial. which I do not believe Is
in the realm of probability there may be an ap-
peal from the decision of the Court of Appeals
TO any Supreme Court Justice for new trial on
the ground of newly discovered evidence. evi-
dence not presented at the first trial through no
fault or negligence on the part of counsel for the
defence.
The last resort in the State Of New-YorS Is
the Governor. in whom is vested the power to
grant a new trial for good and sufficient reasons
or TO commute the sentence of the convicted man
to life Imprisonment for a term of years
But the case of MoIineux Will not go 10
Justice of the Supreme Court or to Governor
Roosevelt The Court OF Appeals wilI believe
reverse the verdict of guilty and order new
trial And Roland B. Molineux will win before
a jury.
Mr.. Weeks added that the appeal for a new
trial would he made on the following grounds:
First-That the verdict OF guilty was not Justified
by the evidence. This evidence unjust. in
iQuitous and insufficient 10 convict
SNeGn6-Ihat admission testimony rel