The Miller press. [volume] (Miller, S.D.) 190?-current, 1912-08-22
ACQUITTED
MAN ACCUSED OF HRIslNe Mona.
MARA JUROR Is ACQUITTED OF
CHARGES AGAINST HIM.
DEMONSTRATION GIVEN
jury Quickly Returns Verdict Exoner.
ating Attorney in Dynamitina
Case.-Out Thirty-Fou
Minutes.

Los Angeles, California. - Clar-
ence s. Darrow, the noted Chicago
lawyer, was found not guilty on the
charge of bribing a juror in the Nc
Namara case. The jury was out Just
thirty-four minutes. Only one ballot
was taken by the jury.
Although warned against any dem
o~nstration by the bailiffs, there was a
spontaneous outburst of applause when
Foreman NJ. K. Williams, in respons
to the courts query, stated that the
Jury had found a verdict of mot
guilty"
There was a rush to the side of OAR
row. which was stopped by the bailiffs,
but it was renewed a few moments
later after Judge Hutton thanked and
discharged the jury.
Then ensued a remarkable scene.
barrow approached the jurors still in
the box to thank them and two Of
them, Jurors Golding and Dunbar,
threw their arms about him and patted
his back. Other jurors reached for
ward and clasped hands with the at
torney.
The scene gradually resolved itself
into a reception for Darrow and the
jurors, and friends of the erstwhile de-
PENDANT crowded up to congratulate
and shake hands with the jurors.
barrow was plainly nervous when
he entered the court room to try to
face the greatest crisis OF his life.
Judge Hutton mounted the bench and
the roll of the jury was called. The
court Immediately began reading the
charge. He said in part:
Gentlemen of the jury, the evidence
Is all in and the arguments are over.
| now give these instructions"
He urged the twelve men not to be
swayed by personal opinions expressed
by the attorneys for both sides, unless
such opinions were supported by the
evidence.
The court added:
IF you find the defendant bribed
or aided others to bribe or to corruptly
influence a juror, you must find him
guilty. You canno convict on the tes-
timony of an accomplice unless such
testimony is corroborated by outside
evidence.
Il charge you that the evidence pre-
sented in this case does not warrant
conviction on the first count in this
indictment. II you find that, through
an agent, the defendant approached
George Lockwood and gave linn $500
for the purpose of influencing his de-
cision in the Mcnamara case, it will
be your duty to find him guilty"
Los Angeles, California. - An air
OF uncertainty surrounds the DISPOSE
ton of the second indictment against
Clarence s. barrow, Notwithstanding
the announcement of District Attor-
ney Fredericks that the Chicago law
yer would be tried again.
The second indictment alleges that
Mr.. barrow bribed Robert F. Balm,
the first juror sworn to try the Nc
Namara case.
District Attorney Fredericks reiter-
ated his intention to bring barrow to
trial on the Balm indictment but he
declined to say what date he would
recommend for the trial when oppos-
ing counsel appeared before Judge
Hutton.
1t was announced that Judge Hut
ton would be asked to set the date at
once, but the district attorney said
there might be some delay as he had
not definitely determined what request
to make. 1t also was probable, he
said, that the defendant might have
some request.
The impression prevails that be-
cause of the length and cos Of the
trial just ended and the rapidity vita
which the jury reached its verdict
there will be no further trial of OAR
row.