The Seattle post-intelligencer. [volume] (Seattle, Wash. Terr. [Wash.]) 1888-1914, 1900-06-15
Alleged Bunko Man Released on
Motion Of City Attorney.
EVIDENCE NOT CONCLUSIVE.
None of His Supposed Victims Put
in an Appearance in the Court
De BruIer Closes the Trial in
Dramatic speech, in Which He
state, That Failure to Convict
Rests with Those swindled.

On motion OF City Attorney De Bruler.
yobp Tbompson. one of the FIVE alleged
bunko men arrested by the police Mon
day, was acquitted In Judge Cams court
Yesterday Mr. De Bruier prefaced ms
motion with an imprisoned speech in
which he roundly scored the alleged VIC
tins Of Thompson for failing to appear
at the trial as witnesses. The police, he
said had done their duty. and he was sat
isfied In his own mind that the defendant
was not exactly desirable sort OF citi-
gen but he argued. II was Impossible 70
convict a man on hearsay evidence Hls
speech brought the trial 70 a dramatic
ending.
When the case was called the prisoner
showed no signs OF uneasness. and sew
eral times smiled when his attorney. :. 7.
Williams and De Pruler. exchanged pleas
antries. Five members Of the police force
testified against Thompson. In general
their evidence was to the effect that he
was steerer for the bunko fraternity.
His business. they said. was to hang
around the postoffice and similar places.
on the watch for unsophistcated persons
whom he introduced TO the hunks" He
had been arrested number of times. they
said, for swindltug people In this way, but
his victims always failed 10 show up in
court. and he was never convicted.
Detective CudIhee said tia: Thompson's
general reputation was bad
Define what you mean by general rep
uiation," said Attorney Williams. and
then lutimated that the policies opinion Of
Thompson was biased.
The detective stoutly denied this. and
said his opinion was based on the state
ments OF Thompson's victims. of busi-
ness men and other people around town.
No witnesses were put ON the stand for
the defense. probably because the evidence
OF the prosecution was indirect. Attor-
pey Williams closed the case for the Co.
PENDANT. He said II was impossible TO
find his client guilty. as II had not been
proved that he had ever swindled any
ore. Where were the victims? he asked
When were the crimes committed and
where?
Attorney De Bruler then arose, and be-
gan HIS speech in "A manner no way in
dicativs Of the dramatic finale.
Il am no, candidate for any office"
ha said.
We'll. none OF the rest OF US are" re-
marked Judge Cam. pleasantly
This man has been up here several
times before continued MIR. DE Brmer
and | think"
= object q your Introducing testimony"
well, can't you wait minute and
hear the rest Of the sentence You won't
object SO mueh then retOrted the CITY
prosecutor
He then went On to say that none Of
The evidence against Thompson was az
rect enough, being largely hearsay.
The police he numbered have dona
all that Aes within their power In this
case. For myself. I am satisfied as 10
thompson character, Brat We can't com
Wet "A man without evidence. I, this court
falls 10 bring these buuko men to -
count. whose fnult Is az They taxa a
man : money from him ne goes O., i,,.
newspaper reporters and gives them a long
tale 81 his troubles. l1t We mus, bave
conclusive evidence.