Coeur d'Alene evening press. (Coeur d'Alene, Idaho) 1907-1929, 1908-09-03
GAMBLING CASE
is DISMISSED
Witness SWears That He Lied to
The Prosecuting Attorney.

The case OF the state of Idaho
against N. f. Bradley, proprietor OF
the saloon known as "Brad's Place"
was dismissed this morning In the
court of Judge Blixt, on motion of
Prosecuting Attorney c. II. Potts,
because OF the lack of evidence to
convict.
Bradley was charged with the
crime of gambling, and the witness
depended on by the prosecution for
conviction in the case was f. r.
Stone, Stone while eating dinner in
a restaurant with number of friends
in the city had narrated his gamb-
ling experience in Bradley's saloon.
Seated at the same table was Prose
cutting Attorney Potts. and after hear
ing his story and questioning him
with regard to 1t he decided to file
complaint against Bradley Stone.
in his conversation at the table. had
told the company that the town was
| lonesome place--that he was In
search of amusement to while away
the time, and had gone into Brads
place and found poker game. He
boasted at the time of having pur-
chased dollars worth of chips
sat down at the table and at the
end Of the game cashed in chips to
the amount of $3.50. but his story
on the witness stand this morning
was different, Stone was the only
witness placed on the stand and ex-
amined by the prosecution. He ad-
mitted to the prosecuting attorney
that he had had a conversation with
him like that above narrated, but
swore positively this morning that
there was no truth to his story. He
said he had not participated in any
gambling game at Bradleys saloon.
possessed no knowledge of any gamb-
ling being conducted at the place, and
stated in substance that his CONVEX
sation was, in the slang of the day.
hot air, peddled for the benefit of
his friends. lie positively swore
that he had not gambled at all
that his narration of his gambling
experience at the restaurant table
was false, and that he was telling the
truth when he stated on the witness
stand that he had not participated
In any gambling game. nor possessed
any knowledge of any game being
conducted In the Bradley saloon. His
testimony came as surprise to the
prosecuting attorney, and came as
surprise TO every one else familiar
with the case, and when Il was con
eluded there remained but one thing
for the prosecuting attorney to do
and that was to dismiss the case.
The prosecuting attorney when
seen with relation to the case said
When the Bradley case was called
for trail this morning the witness
upon whose voluntary statements the
prosecution was instituted. was
placed on the stand. and denied un-
der oath, all of the previous state
ments made by him. He had formerly
stated that he had gone into the sa-
loon of the defendant; found a game
of stud poker in progress; that he
had bet 81 and won $3.50. The
law makes It the duty of the prose-
euting attorney to file complaint when
he has reasonable cause to believe
that gambling has been conducted In
any house. The statement OF q
man that he had bet on a game Of
stud poker. giving particulars of
time, place. the character of the
game the amount of money he had
bet, and the amount he won, created
a reasonable cause to believe the law
had been violated and made the
complaint imperative under the law.
Speaking OF his policy on the sub
ject of gambling in general and out
lining what his conduct In violations
OF the anti-gambling law would be.
the prosecuting attorney said
Whenever ] receive information that
will give me cause to believe that
gambling is being conducted in any
place / expect to file a complaint. and
do so regardless of what the ac-
tion OF the witness may be after
wards The difficulty experienced
by every prosecutor In enforcing the
anti-gambling law is the securing OF
evidence Of gambling in any par