The San Francisco call., 1908-03-18
Biggy, on Oath, Tears TO Shreds
Willy Ruefs Tissue Of Lies
Former Elisor Brands False in Every
Detail Grafter's Conspiracy Wall

he would rise again; denies that>he ever told
her, or anybody else that the plea of guilty
that said defendant would enter would shortly
or unconditionaly, at all. be withdrawn
in a short time. or at all, or that all, eor any
be brought, would be dismissed by the prose-
cution, or the judges. upon the trial OF some
fendant Ruef would soon or at all, be taken
out bail, would have full liberty.
Referring to the affidavit of Dr. Nieto herein,
he came to where the defendant, Ruef, con-
fined to take the letter to. see his mother, af-
fant admits that he accompanied Ruef and DR..
Nieto, but denies that he said he was doing so
in order to avoid the censure of Judge Dunno.
The sole reason that affant accompanied said
Ruef and Nieto because 1t was his duty to
do SO.
Referring to the affidavit of F. A. Reiss:
guilty, at any other time, said Burns said ID
affant, "Ruef is now one of US and he will
eventually go free or anything Of like character
or substance.
HEARD OF NO IMMUNITY
Affant AYERS that he never at any time heard
the said Burns, or anybody else, promise the de-
fendant Ruef, absolute immunity, immunity
promise of any kind in regard to Indictment No.
305, or any other Indictment, and never heard
any conversation of any kind in relation thereto
between said Burns, or anybody else, and the
Affant never at any time discussed with the
said Burns, anybody else representing the
prosecution the state. any promises agree
mcnts made to or with said Ruef, or proposed
10 De MADE 10 or Win llnl, ana was never re-
Quested by any of said persons to make any
promises assurances of any kind whatsoever
to the said Ruef. and afnant never did make any
promises or assurances of any kind TO the said
Ruef, except that he did state TO the said Ruef
that he believed that any agreements which the
prosecution might make with him would be kept,
and this came about on account of the fact that
the said Ruef stated to affant that the prosecu-
ton was endeavoring to get him to make con-
fession In all of the graft matters. whereupon
affant did state to said Ruef, as aforesaid. that
he. sfhant. believed that it was the proper and
terests of justice and Ruef's own interests as
well as that of his family dictated such course
OF action Affant also told Ruef to have CON
hdence in the district attorney. make a clear
breast of everything and throw himself on the
mercy of the COURT
Affant never at any time, until the same was
published in the newspapers in the month of
January, 1908, knew the contents of the con-
tract agreement made between Ruef and the
nor Of its effect Afhant was told by the de-
ffendant Ruef, after his plea of guilty in case
NO 3O5 that he had made an agreement with
the district attorney. but did not advise affant
Of its contents or character and never at any
ed complete immunity. Af6ant thereupon con-
graduated Ruef and told him TO be right and
honorable with the prosecution.
RUFF FREE TO CONFER
During the entire period of time that the de-
fendant Ruef, was in the custody of affant as
such elsor said Ruef always at reasonable
hours, had full opportunity TO privately com
munieate; n sdyise and confer, with the members
y
George Keane, and all of bis other attorneys,
and also from the time they first called upon
him Drs. Nieto and Kaplap. and averments to
the contrary in the afhdavits filed by and on
behalf of the defendant, Ruef, herein abso-
lutely untrue.
Afhant denies that he ever directed or told
the guard, Mccarthy, to discharge Bertha Weigle
after the Schmitz trial, at any other time. or
not to tell her about il, TO pick quarrel
with her or find fault with her. AS a matter
of fact, she was discharged by F. A Reiss. the
landlord, his motion and account OF
some personal difficulties be had with her.
On two different occasions while the defendant
Ruef, WAS in my custody such esor I sc-
companied him to the home of Assistant Dis
trict Attorney Heney in Green street. In this
city and county. The first of these occasions
was. to the best Of my recollection, May l.
1901 Ruef and 1 accompanied by Will
liam j. Burns, and no one else, and / saw no
one else at Mr.. Heneys house except Mr.. Heney.
The next occasion the following night.
when Ruef and were accompanied by Mr.. Burns
and DIR. Kaplan. and one else, which night
saw no one else at Mr.. Heney's except Mr.
Heney and District Attorney Langdon.
". J. BIGGY.
Subscribed and sworn to before me this -.
day Of March, A. d. 1905.
Notary public in and for the city and county Of
San Francisco, state of California.