Ottumwa semi-weekly courier. [volume] (Ottumwa, Iowa) 1899-1903, 1901-02-21
Was Sprung in District Court
Today.
INDICTM ENTSMAY BEBAD
Alleged That Part of the Grand Jury
Which Returned Indictments at This
Term of Court Was Improperly
Drawn-Who and What 1t Affects.

A big sensation was sprung in dis
trict court today, when County Attor-
ney d. H. Emery, at the opening of
court, before commencing the prosecu-
tion OF Enoch Gee, ct AL, for stealing
hogs near Dudley, told the court that
a doubt had arisen in his mind regard
ing the validity of the Indictment
against the prisoners on trial., and
asked time to look the matter up.
Judge Roberts adjourned court until
1:S0 p. m. and laid the Gee case aside
until tomorrow morning.
Last evening Peg Shea, Charles Pas
nau and James Beatty thru their at
torneys, filed motions to set aside the
indictments against them for conduct
ing gambling houses and for maintain
ing nuisances, and the cause of the
whole matter is that Samuel Kitter-
man, one of the grand jurors, is said
to have been illegally drawn.
Mr.. Kitterman is resident of the
second precinct of Richland township
and last December his name was
drawn, along with six others, to act on
the grand jury. According to the law
the election boards of the several pre-
cincts prepare list of names of the
men who are eligible to serve on the
grand jury and another list of those
able to serve on the petit jury. These
lists are sent to the county auditor
along with the other election returns
and each name is written on slip.
These slips are later put into box,
from which the requisite number are
drawn by the county clerk and auditor.
Mr.. Kitterman's name was one of
those drawn for the grand jury last
December, and accordingly he served
on the grand jury which returned the
several indictments against the above
named alleged gamblers and saloon
keepers, as well as several others
whose cases have already been tried.
| Now it comes to light that the name
| of Mr.. Kitterman was not returned
for grand juror by the election board
| in Richland township after the last
ELECTION, but that it was returned in
1899. Therefore Mr. Kitterman had no
right to serve on the grand jury, or in
lother words. the drawing was done
Illegally.
| 1t may be that Judge Roberts will
consider this fact ground for the set
ting aside of the indictments that
have been made by this grand jury,
and in that case the jury will have to
| be discharged and another drawn; the
indictments will have to be made over
again, and all the work already done
in the matter may go for nothing.
/ Where Difficulty is.
An investigation, made today at the
/ L ~, I,n@f H. -
the error was presumably clerical
error in the clerks office. When the
names are being prepared to be put in
to the box from which the seven grand
/ jurors names are drawn, each name
| is written on a slip of paper and is
numbered, SO that il there are two
men with names the same, one from
ore township and one from another
the Identification will be easy. In the
case at hand, the name of S. Witten
meyer, also of Richland township, was
1 the one which should have been drawn
i from the box instead of that of S
Kitterman, but it is thought that Mr.
/ Kitterman's name with Mr.. Witten
meyers number, was written on the
/ slip, and when the name was drawn
out of the box the number was unheed
ed, as Mr.. Kitterman was perfectl.
eligible to be a grand juror except thai
his name was not handed in by the
election board. This seems to be the
more plausible explanation of the mat
ter, a,tho some entertain the theor!
that the slip having on it Mr.. Kitter
mans name was overlooked and lef
in the box after the grand jurors were
drawn in 1899, when Mr.. Kitterman'.
name was handed in by the board.
The question now Is whether or moi
the indictments against the men who
have already plead can or cannot be
lset aside. With a view to deciding
this question, County Attorney Emery
on the one side, and the attorneys fol
the men indicted on the other side
[Continued on Page A.