Honolulu star-bulletin. [volume] (Honolulu [Oahu, Hawaii]) 1912-2010, 1913-11-25
CONSPIRACY
AGAIN ENTERS J.
KELLETT CASE

l.
Conspiracy, the red-flag word In the
hearing Of the charges against former
Detective John r. Kellett before the
civil service commission, was heard
again this morning soon after the
hearing was resumed with Kong Eung
Do. the Korean prisoner on the stand
70 finish his testimony.
From $50 until noon the commits
sion was I'm session, the greater part
Of the time with the Korean occupying
the witness chair, but the verbal en-.
counter between e. G. Peters, the at
torney for KeIlett, and Deputy Attor-
Iney-general Smith, representing the
sheriff In the hearing. which occurred
at the suggestion Of conspiracy from
Peters, was about the only incident to
break the monotony Of the morning
session.
But with Detective John Woo on the
stand this afternoon to corroborate
| the testimony Of his countryman,
Kong, promise to give that the ses-
sion will not lack interest. Woo took
the stand q few minutes before IL
O'Clock, and on direct examination he
lcorroborated what Kong had said con-
corning the beatings Kong alleges he
received from Kellett with remark
able exactitude. notwithstanding that
some Of the events testified to occur
red as far back as four years.
Kong. the last Of the four men who
have charged Kellett with brutality,
has finished his testimony. On cross
examination thi9 morning he expert.
Ieneed q difficult time. So many times
was It made to appear that his state
ments made on direct examination
were ct radical variance with those
made during cross-examinatior that
Peters rose once during the hearing
and declared that the witness was
mot testifying fruthfuily.
The only witness TO corrobcrate
Kong Il the detective, Woo, who Isl
|credited with working up the brutality
charges against KelIett: and who act
ed as the Interpreters when Kong was
brought before Smith to give an &C.
count Of the alleged beatings.
II was while Kong was on the Wit
mess stand, and when ii was brought
|out that Woo had acted as interpre-
| ter, that the encounter between Pee
ters and Smith took place. Intima-
lions Of q conspiracy, an arrangement
between witnesses to make their tes-
| timony agree in essential parts, were
made before Peters closed his part OF
the argument
Kong Takes Stand.
Not long after Kong Eung DO took
the stand, the argument between
Peters and Smith began, with the
word CONSPIRACY as the pivotal point.
II Nas led up to with these ques-
lions mt to the Korean by Peters
G. How b Il that on direct exam.
nation you tell one story and on
cross-examination you tell another?'
A. say the same both times.
@. Are you going to tell the same
story as Mr.. Woof
Smith objected to this question.
which marked the opening Of their
encounter, an encounter that finally
ended when the commission over.
ruled the objection. :
You are not trying to prove con-
spiracy now, are your asked Chair.
man Wirtz Of Peters.
There Is this about 1t, replied the
lawyer. rising 10 answer the commits
sion and defend his question. seThe
commission wants to bear in mind
that conspiracy cannot Dc proved BY
overt acts But II you ind that two
witnesses have been constantly talk
ing together or II you find that one
Witness Is talking with the interpre-
ter Of another, II Is material for the
commission To- knoW-not to prove
conspiracy, but to show that they are
getting together to fix up their tes-
timony. Now the testimony Of this
witness Is that on eight occasions he
has been beaten. When he tells his
story on direct examination 1t differs
radically from. the story he now tells
on cross-exauaination. In other words,
It shifts about so that the two differ
ent stories he tells cannot be recon
ciled. Now Detective Woo Is the man
he has talked 10. AS far as this man
Woo is concerned, his position is OBJ
yious he Is the principal witness in
the Robinson case, in the Joseph case
and now he is the sole corroborating
witness! =
After the Facts. - =
We are anxious to get at the facts;
and we are perfectly frank to say
that the facts as testified by this man
are not correct It is g remarkable
state Of affairs II BY any possibility
what this man says Is true remark
able In the face Of the statement