The Washington times., 1910-09-21


tney are by the relatives and others Vi
tally interested. coupled with the discOv-
cry OF the new witness found BY The
Times, may be enough TO swing Cor
one hewitt from his present stand
against a further investigation Of the
death Of Young Harris
Stands o. Police Report.
At the present time the Coroner IS
presenting the spectacle OF an Official
OF the District Government standing
Hatlootedly IN the way OF an honest and
earnest effort on the part of relatives
and friends TO save the name Of a young
man from disgrace.
In support OF this stand the Coroner
is apparently depending alone on the
report submitted 10 him by the police
detectives.
Whether he viii change his position
with the discovery Of this important
witness remains 10 be seen The friends
ans relatives Of the dead man who have
been demanding the inquest are hoping
that the Coroner viii be moved By the
appearance Of this new factor in the
case
They have known Of the existence Of
tbs valuable witness for some time, and
e was for this reason that they he
seiged The Coroner with demands fOr
~ inquest
Willing To Testify.
The witness refuses TO make public
what ne knows unless ne IS summoned
before a COroner's jury
He is perfectly willing. 81 the proDc-
time and under The proper circum-|
stances, to come forward and make al
honest declaration OF ms movements Of
the night, but his personal interests are
such that ne feels that ne cannot je0p-
sToize his future existence unless forced
70 DO so by a summons which viii place
MIN under oath and allow him to make
MS statement.
This witness had told the friends Of
the dead man that he cannot afford To
come forward unsolicited, and these men
appreclarng MS position feel that the
Coroner VIII now take action
That the reports of Weldon and Bur
Gngame do little other than 10 allow
The two detectives 10 make their own
deductions to support the theory OF SUI
ClCe can De seen from study OF TIE
documents now on file in the office Of
The chief OF the detective bureau
The honest statement can only De
made that there are enough conflicting /
statements IN the REPORTS TO readily al I
low the Coroner 10 order an inquest I
that VIII permit the introduction Of I
other evidence and testimony designed 4
20 s5atler the contentious of the Police /
Department
Were the Detectives Lax?
It must also be stated at this time
that the investigation made by The
Times reporters can onIy show that the 1
detectives were either lax in their work I
or they did not care 10 run down any
thing that might lead TO any conclusion I
other than that Of suicide
In a number of places In the reports /
Witnesses examined BY the two detec-
IIVeS are reported as making brief state
ments that IN but few particulars CO.
lnclde with the statements made BY I
these same witnesses when examined 4
BY The Times reporters
The case OF the suicide OF the uncle
OF Moral L Harris more than two I
years a5o may be quoted as an excel /
lent example Of how the detectives used /
statements made TO them 10 suit their
own line Of reasoning.
In TIE case OF the suicide Of Robert /
Bailey the detectives only touch on this
fact IN a way that would allow an !
honest impression that the faint IF IN
sanity ran through the Harris fau-r-
Bailey being a relative of \orEaI Harris 4
The Times reporters found no Difficulty
IN learning from the brother of Nor
val Harris that Mr. Bailey blew of his 4
head with q shot gun only when he had 4
during tie handling or small fortune i
left 10 the Harris children. and when
discovery OF his wrong doing was no
longer possible TO conceal
An Extravagant Statement.
In the matter Of the Identification OF
the gun the two detectives boldly state
that number Of lessons positively
identi6ed" the gun rs the one that
belonged to NorvaI Harris. and Vet no 4
stress IS laid on the statement Of F. G.. /
SteinmeitZ. who empnauCaIIy rolg th-
detectives when he saw the gun al
police headquarters that il was not
\orvaI r Harris sun"
In handling the statements made by
SteIume11Z the detectives report that
this witness failed TO identify il as
the one that Harris had shown him.
but did not deny that it could have
This is embodied in the report de-
spite the fact that Steinmeitz declared
before he had seen the pistol at police
HEADQUARTERS that Harris had shown I
2 mark on the trigger guard OF the
gun that he had noted the existence
@ul Iot t9t llat uIt on ,-ie mara ana
that he could ldentlIy the gun If he
should see IT, SteIDmetz FIRST saw the Z
gun AT Headquarters when I'm the pres
cnce OF d citizen witness and he then
declared that 1T was not NorvaI T !
Harris gun
What the Coroner Missed.
The statements OF another Of the
witnesses quoted by the two detec-
tives in an attempt TO prove that the
2un belonged TO Harris speak for
themselves, and show most cOncIu-
siveIy that the report Of the police is
II no way SatIS1aCLDT-- Sd far as being
d final disposition of the case is con
cCTneI-
on page 8 Of the copy Of the report
Of the detectives. g. . RockweIT-s in
tervieW with the police is related
The following is quoted from the re
port
&C. - Rockwell states
Harris showed MIN q revolver. and
he knew he was i'm the habit of
carrying the same"
on parc is Of the copy Of the report
the detectives recording another in
terView with Mr. Rockwell. say
Nj Rockwell states that he
, knew Harris carried a gun but
that he never saw it
And Ar Rockwell is listed as one
important witness Of the police
In the entire list OF witnesSe inter
viewed bE the police Clarence CoIvin.
an uncle OF Harris Is apparently the
only one who according TO the police
did positively identify the gun and [
; CT 10 Z he Times reporters 0Ir- COIVin
said thai ne had seen the gun at the
that he had said i was the
Sua- but that DE was not positive ex-
cept In that its general appearance
vas llHr that the -Uu that Harris had. I
% .rsa 10 or .--a