The Detroit times. [volume] (Detroit, Mich.) 1903-1920, 1914-10-27
,DEFENSE Fills REQUESTS
FOR SPECIFIC CHARGE TO
JURORS in Gilman CASE

paper men," said frazer. The de
Tense did not have enough copies ia
accommodate the prosecutor aftei
handing copies. to two OF the news
papers. and the Judge kindly loaned
the prosecutor his own copy.
Thu requests to charge, will be read
by the Judge before he prepares his
charge to the jury and after deliver
ing ais charge he will pass on those
requests to which he considers the
defendants Ii. legally entitled.
The defense asks the court to IL
struct the Jury that II must be proven
beyond a reasonable doubt; that Gin
man accepted the $1,000 bride In sub
Istantially the place. time and manna'
charged. and with wrongful intent be-
] fore the jurors may find him guilty.
THUS, II he accepted II only after
strong inducements 30 to do had been
made to him by Burns and believing
that he was legally justified In so do
ing and was not accepting bride or
violating the law. then he Is not guilty
OF the crime alleged" Is one Of the
charges prepared by the defense.
Charge No. 10 reads: 1.-THE liabil-
ity OF men tn fall into crime il, unfor-
tunately. great. No state, therefore,
can safely adopt a policy by which
crime Is TO be propagated artiicially.
The defendant who Is entrapped must
/ himself have previously intended the
offense into which he is trapped. and
the offense intended Is one to be COM
mitted by himself, either alone or
with others Where detective lures
an innocent person into committing
an alleged crime. the object being not
+, the detection Of criminal but the
Turing of such person into committing
crime, such proceeding is not a re-
atty, but merely a tragical farce, IN
which the detective masquerading as
a criminal captivates the unsophisti-
Gated defendant, and then with mock
heroics denounces him."
| In another chapter a distinction 10
made between the detective and the
! "decoy." 1t says In part: ''The de-
tective discloses, as may often be by
the agency Of the criminals them
selves. who are led to disclose them
selves unguardedly. q crime already
concocted; the decoy suggests the
crime and is herein its originator
The defense would have the Judge
call the attention of the jurors to the
fact that both Walter j. Burns (Bren-
nam and william j. Burns were hired
witnesses. Attention Is also called to
the weight that evidence of good char
acter bears on the question of guilt or
innocence.
At another point the defendants
charge says: unless you find that
an agreement was made by and be-
tween the defendant and Brennan for
the vote OF the defendant on the so
called Wabash petitions on or before
the 10th day Of July, 1912, when such
petitions were finally voted on by the
common council OF the city Of
Detroit. then your verdict will be
not gpilty,'s Further. The giving
of the 81 ,ooo to the defendant, Thomas
K. Gilman, by Burns. alias Brennan,
on July rs. 1912. would not In itself
sustain conviction I'm this case. You
must further find that an agreement
for some amount OF money was made
between said parties prior to July is,
1912 =. :" Also" -. Unless you ind
from the evidence In this case that
such an agreement was made between
said Brennan and said Gilman on the
18th day Of July, 1912, as set forth In
the information in this case. your YER
dict will be not guilty"
Regarding the unsupported testi-
mony of Brennan bearing on the
agreement to accept the bride. the de-
PENDANTS request states: under the
law OF this state the man who offers
a bride is equally guilty with the man
who accepts II. Walter j. Burns or
Brennan has gone upon the stand in
this case and admitted that he offered
money to the defendant In this case
for his vote on these Wabash petit
tons Mr.. Brennan or Burns would,
therefore, be an accomplice under the
law OF this state and Pinstruct you
that you cannot convict the defendant
on the charge set forth In he infor-
nation In this case upon the uncorrob-
Grated testimony OF an accomplice.
I. In determining the amount or
weight Of credibility that shall be CIV
en- to Walter J. Burns or Brennan in
this case, you have a right to take
into consideration the amount of
money he has received from the coun-
ty of Wayne and all the other facts
81 AOiotioh W thC ihOhCy thAt NC iO-
ceived for his services In this case"
Attention Is also called to the al.
legged admissions made by Gilman in
office No. 40S Ford building. It IL for
the jury to decide II these admissions
were made voluntarily or Involuntary.
II the jury IL of the mind that the
statements were forced" or fright.
ened" out OF the defendant Gilman,
then they must be totally disregard
! ed. The Judge has already stated that
he will carefully instruct the jury on
this point.
The defense cites AZ precedents In
its request for charges.
Monday morning and afternoon was
spent comparing the notes of Stenog-
rapher Frank Mcnamara with those
prepared by Court Stenographer Gle
! Eel under. the direction of the court