The Washington herald. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1906-1939, 1906-11-12
JUDGE Will DROP THE FIGHT
Kimball Accepts Decision in Nolle
Pressing of Cases.
Declares, However, He Has Found
Several Instances Where Rule Does
Injury to Innocent Persons.

Judge I G. KimbaH, OF the Police
Court, while accepting the decision of
Commissioner Macfarland regarding the
ton counsel and mis- assistants as final.
is disposed 10 believe that the Commits
sioners are mistaken In their assump-
/ ton that he was incorrectly Informed
regarding two cases which he recently
brought to their attention
The decision Of the Commissioners. Of
course. settles the matter as far as ] am
concerned. said Judge KimbaIl 1.-THE
assumption Of the Commissioners. how
ever, that I was misinformed with re-
gard to the two eases which. in my opin-
ion. were without warrant OF law,
brought before me for trial IS an errone-
Gus one.
THE cases were brought to my per-
sonal attention within a week Of the
date on which I wrote 10 the Commits
soners. In one Of these instances a
warrant was issued, and By some mis-
take fl was served on man Of the same
name who was hailed into court TO
answer 10 the charge When the case
was called the prosecuting policeman in
formed me that the man at the bar was
not the one for whom the warrant had
been issued.
This fact. he said. he had explained
to the assistant prosecuting attorney. Mr.
Pugh. I asked Mr.. Pugh for an explana-
ton, and he replied that under the Com
missiOners' order he was required 20
present the case for trial The defendant.
Of course, was Immediately discharged.
but at the same time had been compelled
TO appear in court 90 answer 20 a charge
Of which he was wholly guiltIess.
The other case was that OF woman
over seventy years OF age who was
brought into court charged with a minor
infraction Of the building regulations.
The evidence developed that she was not
the owner Of the property in question. and
Ia no way concerned with the manage
ment Of it. Nevertheless she had been
compelled 10 appear in the Police Court
and remain until her case was called.
In my opinion. the assistant prosecut-
ing attorney would not be usurping the
power delegated 20 the judge by enter
ing a EOlle PROSE- IN these cases. Ones
similar to these are constantly occurring.
and as a judge who IS called upon to
administer the laws 10 the best Of his
ability, I would feel myself derelict in
my duty If I did not call these matters
10 the attention of the Commissioners.
In my letter I was careful 10 say that
their order an enforced caused needless
humiliation 10 citizens who were being
hailed into court on minor charges, which,
upon investigation by the corporation
counsel and his assistants. might be nolle
pressed.
A broader Interpretation OF the order
by these officials might tend 10 relieve the
situation. The question Of adding to or
detracting from my own duties did not
occur to me, as l am willing and glad 10
try every case justly presented TO me. In
the two cases have mentioned. however.
there certainly seems to me ground for
thinking they should have been nOlle
pressed
In Commissioner Netherlands recon-
mendation on Judge KimbalIs request he
said the Commissioners were disposed TO
assume that he was incorrectly informed
as 10 the facts in the cases, since 1t was
plain that neither Of them, under the
letter and spirit of the law, should have
been taken into court.