The Telegraph-courier. [volume] (Kenosha, Wis.) 1888-1946, 1913-04-10
COURT DENIES ALL MOTIONS
Holds That While Evidence in Case did
Not Support Charge of Murder it did
Support Finding of Manslaughter in
Second Degree as Found by Jury.

Dominick Polimeni, tried in the cir
cult court on charges of numbering his
cousin, Tony Polimeni, and convicted
on a charge of manslaughter in the
second degree, was sentenced to terra
of five years i'll the state prison at
Waupun by Judge Belden in the cir
cult court this morning Before inn
posing sentence Judge Belden denied
motions for new trial and in arrest
of judgment which had been made by
Attorney r. V. Baker who defended
Foilmeni in the trial. The court held
tGat the affidavits brought to show that
certain evidence had not been present
ed to the court in the case failed to
show any facts which were not known
at the time of the trial and which
might have been produced at that time.
The court held that there had been
no error in the trial of the case and
that for this reason there was no cause
why new trial should be had.
Under the law the penalty was from
four to seven years. Polimeni appear
ed hefore the court but declined to
make any statement III regard to the
crime or as to why sentence should not
&c imposed upon him. In sentencing
Poiimeni the court said in part
'FThis case did not appeal to the
jury nor does it to the court as either
murder or justifable homecide. There
is no eviden8 Y tfDst pfea'siit;lss
design to kill which is a necessary am
essential element of the crime Of MUIR
der. Nor, in the opinion of the juiy
and of the court, while there may have
beer reason for the defendant to APP
prchend design on the part of the
deceased to commit felony or to do
some other great personal injury upon
him, the defendant, was there reason
able cause for believing there was i'm.
minent danger Of such design being
accomplished. 1t was known to the de-
PENDANT that the deceased had threat
ened to kill him. This, together with
all the other circumstances in evi-
dence, made the defendant apprehend
that the deceased designed doing Linn
some great personal injury. The evil
dsnce satisfies one that such design
on the part Of the deceased existed
and that the defendant S apprehen
sion thereof was natural and yet the
mind is not satisfied that the circum-
stances were such as to justify the
defendant in killing the deceased. The
defendant was apprehensive, nervous,
expecting some hostile demonstration
against him at any moment and he
was ready to act OH the instant; the
jury found there was no reasonable
excuse for believing there was imminent
danger of the apprehended design be-
ing accomplished, and the court will
not disturb this conclusion. Possibly
w "ONiu oNl'POit a FCIulCk
of murder in the second degree and
1t would have supported verdict Of
justifable homicide had such verdict
been returned by the jury.
The court is of the opinion that no
error occurred in the trial, that man
slaughter in the second degree was
properly submitted to the jury; that
the jury has properly viewed the evil
dence and law and that no injustice
has been done the defendant in the
trial or by, the verdict.
Whether it might have any legiti-
mate bearing or not, it would not seem
unreasonable to infer that the Jury
was also of the opinion that the de.
PENDANT might have avoided the con.
fict
The court is of the opinion that the
conclusion of the trial is very reason
able, supported by the evidence and
not unjust to the defendant,