The Pacific commercial advertiser. [volume] (Honolulu, Hawaiian Islands) 1885-1921, 1908-06-10
VERDICT GIVEN
FOR LEE LET
The Jury Declares He Is Not
Guilty of Giving a
Bride.

Lee Let, who has been on tria' for
six days, charged with having bribed
Chief of Detectives Taylor to allow a
gambling hui protection, was declared
mot guilty yesterday afternoon by
jury of his peers, who deliberated
four minutes after they had heard all
the evidence and the arguments. On
the first ballot they stood ten to two
for acquittal.
In charging the jury, Judge Robinson
instructed them if they decided that
Lee Let had given Taylor the money
received to influence him in working
the prosecution of such gamblers as
might be arrested, so as to bring about
their acquittal or the imposing of
small fines, they should acquit the de-
PENDANT. This had probably consider
able to do in bringing out the verdict
rendered, as it was one of the points
dwelt strongest on by the attorney for
the defendant, Frank Thompson.
The case went to the jury at half
past two, after the attorneys had
summed up their cases. Deputy Attor-
ney General Larnach made good
presentation of his case, drawing at
tention to the patent absurdity of a
man with the business training of Lee
Let loaning money to a comparative
stranger without security or receipt,
as Lee Let had sworn was the case.
He reminded the jurors that it had
been over a year since the money had
been given, during which time the
minor details of the affair might be
very naturally forgotten by the wit
nesses, accounting for the minor differ
ences between the testimony presented.
Larnach asked the jurors if they be-
lieved that Taylor would have manu-
featured a case against Lee Let and
left out testimony that would have
made it so much stronger. He remind
ed them that in this trial there was
no one to be judged but Lee Let. 1t
was not a case of himself against
Thompson, of Taylor against Lee Let
or of the Advertiser against anyone. 1t
was the Territory against Lee Let.
In presenting his side of the case the
attorney for Lee Let pointed out in
constituencies in Taylor's testimony as
compared with that of Ayres. He re-
ferred to the three witnesses for the
prosecution, Ayres, Taylor and Mathe-
son, as one holy trinity and to Iau-
kea, w. A. Kinney and Walter G.
Smith, as another holy trinity, stat
ing that in this case there was politics
and Advertiserism.
Everybody in the Territory knows
that it was the Advertiser that defeat
ed A. NJ. Brown and elected Iaukea
the Sheriff of Oahu" he said, waving
a copy of the Advertiser, which he re-
ferred to generally throughout his adj
dress as 1.-The" paper.
Thompson referred at length to the
amount of the bride offered, $1400
week He had computations to show
that this was as much as would be
received by investing all the funds on
deposit in Bishop & Co.'S bank in gov
eminent threes; he compared it to the
salary of the President of the United
States and figured what percentage of
the receipts of the Territory it repre-
scented.
To the instructions of the court.
Thompson took exception specifically
and as a whole.
The verdict within few minutes as
announced by VIM. A. Hall, the fore
man, came as a surprise, not that the
guilt of the defendant was expected to