The Telegraph-courier. [volume] (Kenosha, Wis.) 1888-1946, 1915-04-22

Kenosha people will read with inter
est Che dissenting opinion Of Judge
Barnes in the case of the State VS..
Koscak received here today. He makes
q critical analysis Of the case as
follows:
Barnes, J. Dissenting: The conduct
of the private detectives who figure in
this case was reprehensible in the
highest degree, and I would have been
rs well satisfied if the jury could have
conscientiously seen it's way clear to
return verdict Of acquittal The in
slant case is not unique in this respect,
however The court permitted judg-
ment of conviction to stand in the
Novkovic case GAO Wis. 665) on con-
fused evidence, on the theory that the
trial court and jury might have under
stood the oral testimony although we
could not figure out what it meant
when reduced to writing. My own
idea was that Quinn was not guilty of
an assault with intent to commit rape
(153 Wis. 573), and that McLain was
not guilty Of rape (159 Wis. 204; 149
! N. w. 77D. Tt was, and is difficult for
me to believe that frail woman weigh
ing ITO pounds could choke to death a
man weighing las pounds who was
only 80 years of age and accustomed
to hard labor. (Musso v. State, decid-
ed March 2, 1850 In each Of the three
cases last mentioned, judgments of
convictions were permitted to stand,
because there was some evidence to
support the verdict returned. The de-
cisions of the court in these cases were
] think correct. AS trier of fact, a
Jury is the judge of the credibility and
weight of evidence, and the integrity
of our jury system can best be pre-
served by following the rules observed
by the court in recent years in dispos-
ing OF appeals in both civil and
criminal cases. Where a jury is the
trier of fact, the responsibility for the
correctness Of the conclusion reached
should rest with it. 1t is only where
there is an absence of credible evil
dence to support conclusion reached
that court should interfere.
1t has never been the rule that
where two persons were engaged in the
commission of crime, consent gave
immunity from prosecution, although
no person aside from the immediate
principals suffered special injury. Two
persons voluntarily engaging in fist
fight or duel can be prosecuted. So
fcan those who commit the crime Of
fornication, adultery or abortion, as
well as other crimes which might be
mentioned.
Furthermore, the fact that the party
against whom crime is contemplated
suggests, aids, encourages or abets the
commission of the offense or sets a
trap for the accused, is not defense
where the accused has done every act
essential to the completion of the of
tense. This is decided in Topolewski
v. State, $50 Wis. 244, and the deci-
sion is in harmony with many other
authorities on the point. / Bish Grim
l.. 18th Ed. par. 262; l McClain Grim
L. par. lis; People v. Lephardt, 1O5
Mich. 80; Davis v. State, 158 S. w. 2Ss
and cases cited; People v. Book, l25
N. X. S. 301; Thompson v. State, 81
Am. Dec. 364 and note 500.
1T is far from certain that the de-
PENDANT in this case is the victim of a
frame up or even subject for
very much sympathy His letter of
July 9th was admittedly his own COM
position, written without suggestion or
advice from anyone. The woman who
translated it into English for him eau
toned him against sending it, The
jury might well conclude and probably
did conclude that the defendants ex-
PLANTATION of his purpose in writing it
was absurd In the highest degree If
the concluding paragraph did not mean
that the writer would destroy the prop
erty of the Jeffrey Company or murder
MIR. Jeffrey unless his demands were
conceded to, it did not mean anything.
1t was not put forth in haste or anger,
but with calmness and deliberation.
Defendant may not have intended to
carry out the sinister threat made, and
then again he may. The paragraph
referred to reads as follows:
Now, Mr.. Jeffery, 1 will wait
three days for your answer. At
ter that viii not wait any longer,
then you see what poor man can
do in short time. Then am going
to play with all that plays with me
now. You will lose your millions
just as ] lost my ribs. Hoping to
get satisfactory answer, l will re-
main yours truly"
It is probable that dynamite out
RACES may at times be the result of
" frame-ups" but surely not always.
The only defense available, however, to
one who is caught red-handed in the
act, is that he is the innocent victim