The Ogden standard. [volume] (Ogden City, Utah) 1902-1910, 1909-09-14
SENSATION IN THE
NICK VACOS CASE
udpe Gives the Slayer John Conto Opportunity to With
draw His Plea With Warning That There Heavy Sen
tence Hanging Him, If He Does Not-Agree-
ment of Lawyers is Upset

there IS an absolute conflict OF facts I
here, as they have appeared to the J
states attorney and TO the attorney |
for the defendant III | am 10 accept /
the statements which have been made
by counsel for the defense as abso-
lutely true then any punishment that
] would impose under this plea, the
limit being from ten years 10 life,
would be an injustice to him. because.
II those statements are true. then he
Is either guitless. or he is guilty of
lesser crime than that to which he
pleaded guilty. or he should be SEN
fenced to some other institution than
the state prison. IT. on the contrary.
I accent the statements which have
been made bv counsel for the state,
then the penalty should be greater
than that which am permitted to I'M
pose under this plea and under our
statute, because, If their statements
are to be accepted In toto, then, oil
course. he Is guilty of greater crime
than murder in the second degree.
so, casting aside, as | feel | must
all that has been said on both sides
upon this matter, | am left with the
bald charge here and the bald plea to
It. which Is that the defendant is
guilty OF maliclously taking the life OF
another human being. though without
premedltation Viewing the matter
In that light. gentlemen. and casting
aside all these other things. | do not
feel that can conscientiously sit here
| In my judicial capacity and accept the
recommendations which have been
made by the states attorney. ] do not
| feel that the bald. malicious killing OF
/ human being would justify me In
/ sentencing a man TO imprisonment Tor
such a period as twenty-five years. II
seems to me that that Is not an ade-
ouate punishment 1t seems 10 me
that. If these facts which have been
stated on either side are 10 influence
A., the Court. they must come to the
Court In a different way than they
have come this morning.
II will say that | have arrived at
this conclusion with some diifldence
that II Is my, habit usually to accept
the recommendations of the district
attorney. and especially in this case
with more diffidence, because two dis
trict attorneys both Of well recogniz.
ed ability. have made this recommen-
| 0atlOn, DuI uD lOA lONl the' '''N'
utmost respect 10 their opinions that
I can conscientIouSy do that which
they desire, because, II what they say
/ is right, then I should feel that a
heavier penalty ought to be Imposed
and I am sure that they would join
r with ME In thinking that If the state
ments which we're made By counsel loi
7 the defense were true. then not any
5 where near so great a penalty as tna
t should be imposed. Now ] VIII say T.
5 counsel for the defense and to th'
l defendant that | am perfectly Willing
> that he should withdraw his plea. In
= asmuch as the court takes this view
i Of the matter. and that he VIII no
, be required TO do that at once ou
0 may take such time as he desires t
!, deliberate upon the matter further, |
e he so desires"
D The case was then continued unit
I October 25th.