Rock Island Argus. (Rock Island, Ill.) 1893-1920, 1914-07-08
STATEONCE MORE
ORDERED To Give
SPECIFIC DATES
Judge e. c. Graves Finds Sec
ond Bill of Particulars
Too Indefinite.
DIFFICULT TO FIX TIME
sueeisl Prosecutor Wood Admits 1t
Hard job TO Get Exact Dates Of
Alleged Overt Acts.

Attorney s r. KenwOrthy for the
defense in he Bruner-Magill case this
r,eruinE in the circuit court expressed
IN no uncertain terms his dissatisfac-
t;on with the second bill of particulars
fled by Prosecutor George W. Wood
on yesterdays ruling OF the cOur:. Cit
ing the statements in the bill through
the Is counts. Attorney Kenworthy ar
eued 10 the court that there was still
an Indebtedness as TO dates. etc. rel
alive 10 overt acts alleged TO have en-
Tered into the charges of conspiracy
AGAINST Nagill and Bruner. Judge
Graves ordered Attorney Wood to re-
mort az 1880 with certain changes he
recommended before he took action on
another motion by Kenworthy for an
additional bill Of particulars
We move the state be ruled 10 re-
turn a more definite bill OF particu-
lars" orally stated Attorney Ken
worthy. giving all the specific dates
az each of the alleged overt acts COM
rnitted BY the respective defendants;
and names OF persons from whom
money or rewards was demanded or
received. in each instance where the
same is not included in the states bill
Of particulars
Jurors Tired.
Progress Of the trial, to the dissat
isfaction of the - ana "a able boo
led An srican citizens languishing IL
the witness roc 0 PATIENTLY waiting for
an examination as 10 their qualifica-
lions as jurymen in this case. is being
noticeably delayed by the clash of op
posing attorneys as TO what does and
what does not constitute a complete
bill of particulars
Attorney Kenworthy. as a prelude to
the Offering OF a motion for the sec
ond time for a more satisfactory bill
of particulars. on which the defense
hopes % build its case, thoroughly an
alyzed the bill as offered He went
through it count by count. setting up
here and there the Indebtedness of
dates or a lack. of statement as to the
alleged transfer OF bride money. the
defense wanting TO know exactly from
whom Sheriff Bruner, as il was cnarg.
ed. was paid.
Who Paid Bruner?
in the first count" argued Ken
worthy. lit is set up in this bill that
Martin Nolan was held in custody by
the defendant. Sheriff Bruner, on or
about Aug. II, 1912. and that said de-
fendant received 500 for NOlan's re-
lease II appears to us that the es-
sence of this charge as 10 whether or
not the act was criminal depends on
the point. from whom did Bruner re
ceive the money! The bill states ne
received it. but not that Nolan paid
IL"
The defense argued on deficiencies
in each Of the Is counts returned IN
the indictment and reviewed in the
states bill OF particulars. Asked for
an explanation by the court, Attorney
Wood said.
This bill OF particulars is as com
plete as We can reasonably make it
To cite exact dates is an impossibillty.
Witnesses find IT difficult to establish
circumstances and the recital of facts
down 10 a specific day or hour. This
bill. so far as We can see. recites com |
pletely all the overt acts charged in !
furtherance of me alleged conspiracy.
II should not be necessary to draw |
conclusions from these acts in bill /
OF this nature. The question for the /
state TO answer seems to be what was /
done not why was T. done
Judge Graves called for the original /
copy OF the latest bill OF particulars !
and scanned IL thoroughly, asking 4
questions On points as he went along.
b. The court took particular cognizsnce
OF two of the alleged deficiencies in
he bill and requested Attorney Wood
to see If he couldn't make more spe-
cihc the statements in the first count
cited in the Nolan case as TO who actu-
ally is alleged TO have paid the 500
to Bruner. and in the 18th count, where