Tonopah daily bonanza. [volume] (Tonopah, Nev.) 1906-1929, 1907-09-20
LEGAL LIGHTS
At LOGGERHEADS
ATTORNEY DENNIS DIsAGREEs
WITH JUDGE BREEN m
DwYER CASE.

1 - NAN aNfNA"ni W tue 0ulIttuC OOuTi
OF the verdict in HIS court in the case
of Patsy Dwyer, charged with muir.
dering Conductor Williams. Both hs
and District Attorney A. ]. Macs
. tretti of Lander county object to
statements made by Justice Norcross
in regard to the lines OF the prose
cution, and Judge Breen is very Sc
we're in his structures, according to
the Austin Reveille. Dryer deliber-
ately killed Conductor Williams, and
at the same time wounded man
named Dyer who was with him.
The defense of Dwyer was that he
had shot the wrong man. The re-
trial is granted on the motion for a
change OF venue, which was denied
by the lower court. When the order
was issued in Judge Breen's court,
for the change of venue, according
to the paper quoted, District Attor-
ney Maestretti, who conducted the
prosecution, arose and said:
IF it please the court, at this time,
! wish to rise to the question of priv
ilege in relation to statement made
in the disposition of this case, where
in 1T was reversed in the Supreme
Court, and that is this: In its de-
cision the Supreme Court has stated
in substance that the theory of the
prosecution in this case was that
Dwyer killed Williams through
mistake while looking for al man
named O'Brien, with whom the de-
PENDANT had had trouble during the
day over prostitute.
Il wish to state at this time that
that is absolutely not the fact. furth-
er, that there is nothing in the rec
ords from the first page to the last
which suggests or would warrant the
Supreme Court in making such a
statement in its decision, and where
anything is shown on that record
upon which the Supreme Court rem
ders such decision is beyond my
understanding.
Judge Breen then made the follow
ing remarks:
Il highly commend you, Mr.. Dis
trict Attorney, for the steps you have
taken to put yourself right with the
public in a matter SO closely con-
nected with your onerous official du-
ties. The statement in the decision
of the Supreme Court which you have
contradicted, also know to be utter
~ without foundation. You were
| alone in the case for the State and
| say you did not conduct its prose-
| cution upon the theory of mistake,
nor is there anything in the record
to so indicate.
The Supreme Court, being the tri-
bunal under our judicial system to
which has been given, so to say, the
last word, that tribunal it seems to
me, should be exceptionally careful
to make no statement having ten
dency to unjustly reflect upon or mis-
/ state the position of any officer,
! party or witness connected with the
trial of case.
So far as it appears to me BY the
| stenographic record on file, the state
ment in the opinion as written by
Judge Norcross, to which objection
has been made, like some other asser-
lions in the same abnormally strange
document, is neither fair to you as
/ prosecuting officer, nor to this court;
and whether or not 1t was made for
/ the purpose of bolstering up a deci-
sion, which, to my mind, is neither
founded on law nor supported by
fact, and is palpable reversal of the
MILAN case, which for forty years
has been the law of this State, on the
question of change of venue, it was
highly reprehensible for it's author,
or authors, to have made it. | used
the word reprehensible, let me say
as notification eprehensible' -
4 II the court knew what it was doing,
'pitiable,' ii it did not.
THE clerk will spread the re-
marks of District Attorney Maestretti
with the remarks by the court in the
minutes OF this days session"
i Former Judge Dennis, who was
!. Pchief counsellor the defense, said
last night in reply to the structures
of Judge Breen and the prosecuting
officer:
i IF the theory of the prosecution
was not that the killing of Williams
and the wounding of Dyer was by
mistake, and that it was the inten-
ton of the defendant to kill O'Brien.
with whom he had had an alteration
in the early afternoon of that day
over a prostitute, in the saloon of
one, Cooper, do not know why they
proved all the facts of that alterca-
ton, or why they proved the defend