The Twin Falls times. [volume] (Twin Falls, Idaho) 1905-1916, 1914-03-13
BARNEY O'Nf|L
DENIED PARDON
State Board Takes Unanimous
Action in Denying Petition
BANKER GUILTY OF CRIME SAYS
BOARD In DECISION.
Plea of "Technical Offense. Ex-
ploded; Had Every Advantage IN
Trials.

Barney O'Neil must be content to
remain while longer behind the
walls of the state penitentiary. His
petition for pardon was rejected We'd
nesday afternoon by the unanimous
vote of Governor Haines, Attorney
General Peterson, and Secretary of
State Clifford. In announcing it's de-
cision after two days deliberation the
members OF the board of pardons call
ed attention to the fact that O'Neil had
had the benefit of some of the best le-
gal talent in this state and in British
Columbia; in Idaho he was tried be-
fore jury of his peers in county
other than the one in which his Of
fenses were committed; and later the
whole case was reviewed by the SUI
preme court.
In this statement it is denied that
O'Neils offense was technical. On the
contrary it was a direct violation of
the lawrthe making of selfish and
unlawfuf use of money in the bank
that should have been regarded as a
trust fund
The reasons for the boards action
are SO clearly set forth that the state
ment is given herewith in full:
1T has been our desire and con-
sclentious endeavor to weigh and con-
slider every argument made on either
side of the pending application, and
all circumstances and conditions sur
rounding the same, with the desire in
view of doing absolute justice as near
.ly as possible, not only to this appli-
cant and his many petitioning friends,
but also to the public at large, and to
the county of Shoshone, where the Of
Tense was committed.
1--WE have carefully gone over all of
the evidence in the case submitted at
the trial, the petitions filed, and have
listened with open minds to the able
presentations of the case both on be-
half of the petitioner and the repre-
sentatives of Shoshone county, who
appeared before the board.
1--WE are impressed with the view
that the law should not be enforced in
a spirit of revenge, and we are sat-
isfied that when punishment has been
consistent with the offense commit
ted, with due regard for the dignity
of the law, the safeguarding of the
public against the commission of sim
liar crimes in the future, the warning
that should be given to all who may be
tempted to commit like offenses, and
the fullest possible reformation of
the criminal, that leniency should be
extended.
"This petitioner received all the
benefits and advantages that could
possibly be had to one accused of
crime. He received the defense of one
of the states best lawyers at his trial,
and was skillfully and ably defended
in British Columbia, where he fought
extradition to this country.
His case has been passed upon by
the supreme court of this state, where
he received the able assistanc of the
lawyer who tried his case. He was
tried in county other than the coun-
ty where the offense was committed,
before a fair and impartial jury, and
before an able and upright trial court.
These agencies of the law undoubted-
ly performed their sworn functions
with an eye to the vindication of the
law and the utmost possible leniency
toward the accused
'The crime for which the petitioner
is serving sentence, is not, as is popu-
larly believed technical one The
offense involves violation of the
banking laws of the state which laws
were enacted primarily for the benefit
OF the public, composed of all classes
and In all conditions of financial re-
sponsibility, the idea being to prevent
the selfish misuse of these trust funds,
because deposit in a bank Is trust
fund The testimony in this case shows
wantOn disregard for this trust, a
turning of these trust funds into self
1sh channels, and these facts have
been found to be true by an unbiased
jury under the direction of one of the
states most learned and conscientious
judges. We do not feel that in JUS
tice to the public, and depositors in
state banks of this state, this board
should at this time set aside the SOL
emn finding of the court and jury who
heard the evidence and were doubtless
as true to their sworn duties as we
could possibly be.
The petitioner, serving minimum
sentence OF two years. has been in con-
finement at the penitentiary for five
months, and although great considera-
tion has been given to the hundreds
sof excellent citizens who have petit
toned this board to pardon him, and
the influence of these petitions upon
us cannot be denied, we nevertheless,
feel that in justice to the public at
large, and to the petitioner himself, we
should not at this time vote for a mar