The Bennington evening banner. (Bennington, Vt.) 19??-1961, 1914-07-29
RUTLAND COUNTY sLEUTHs
Attorney Generals Statement {
Crime Detection Expenses

| following statement FeldllNe W ueleC-
tive expenses in Rutland county:
In Rutland County from December
LIST, 1912 to May 1st, 1914, the Wood
Mo-gan Detective agency received for
services s84S and for expenses $685.
Ga making a total of fourteen hundred
forty-two dollars and sixty-four cents.
During the same time under the head
OF detective service, there was paid
to "home gown" detectives approx
mately nineteen hundred dollars.
1t should be borne in mind that ex-
penses in the nature of those includ-
ed in this last item were prior to
1911, paid through other channels
and did not appear under the head OF
detective service.
Among the important cases investi-
gated in Rutland County are the fol
lowing:
State VS.. Charles A. Hancock
This respondent was indicted for
obtaining money under false pre-
lenses. He had fled the jurisdic zion
but was finally located in Atlantic
City, New Jersey. by Wood-Morgan
detective and brought to Rutland
county fa' trial. He was released on
bail in the sum of eighteen hundred
dollars. This bail has been forfeited.
AS result of this prosecution TWEEN
ty-five hundred dollars of the money
which this respondent had obtained
by fraud was paid back to the parties
defrauded. The surety furnished by
the respondent in the sum of eighteen
hundred dollars is perfectly good and
unless the respondent IS produced for
trial. that sum will be paid TO the
State.
State We. Jennie Russell
This was a prosecution for bigamy
Tho respondent was convicted and
sentenced for term OF not less than
three years nor more than four years
in the state prison and is now sery-
ing sentence.
State VS. Whitland
This was prosecution TO. secur ng
property under false pretenses. The
respondent fled to the state of New
York where he was apprehended and
re urned TO Rutland county fO' trail.
The respondent pleaded guilty and
served his sentence In the House of
Correction.
In Re BurgIaries, City OF Rutland.
In the fall OF 1912 several burglar
les We g committed in the city OF ltut
land and the local officers were un-
able to &c. any clue to the perpetra-
tors OF these crimes. These burglar
les were finally solved by the arrest
of one Hoope.' and one Po.rrier ut
Burlington Both OF these respon.
dents pleaded guilty to the crime of
burglary in Chittenden county. Hoop
err died while waiting sentence. Poir-
rier is now serving sentence in the
house of cor 'ection.
State vs.. Thomas Harvey
This was a prosecution for assault
with intent TO commi. rape. The re
spondent was tried by jury and found
guilty al the September term, 1912.
Rutland county court Pending ex
eeptions taken at the q ial the re
spondent was released on bail in the
sum OF one thousand dollars. This
bail has been forfeited. The surety
is perfectly good and unless the re-
spondent is produced. the state VIII
receive the sum Of one thousand dol
lars.
In Re Horse Stealing
In jury 1913, no Sc belonging 10
Or. y. J. Delehanty OF Rutland, which
had been left htched on the street
was stolen. The theft was traced in
the state of New York where the
stolen properly was recovered. but
the thief has not been apprchended.
State VS.. Dr',col
This was n prosecution ter o. ille-
gal sale OF intoxicating liquor at a
fair held in South Wallngford in
1912. The respondent was resident
of the state of New York and fed TO
that Jurisdiction. He was apprehead-
ed and rctI. ned to Rutland county
for trial by one OF the deputy sherins
of that county who received n small
sum for services under the head OF
detective service" The respondent
pleaded guilty and paid flnc OF
three hand ed dollars and costs.
State VS.. Koch.
This was prosecution for murder
The respondent was tried at the Sep
tember term 1913 Rutland County
court and acquitted Practically all
the expense inclsred in this case un-
der the head Of detective service was
paid to local parties for securing evil
dence used in the case.
state VS. Ballard.
This was a prosecution for man
slaughter No out side detective ser
vice was employed and all items OF
expense paid under the head Of de-
tective So vice in this case we're paid
TO local parties. The r. pondent
pleaded guilty and is now serving sen