The Telegraph-courier. [volume] (Kenosha, Wis.) 1888-1946, 1915-10-21

NAoNheti 5AllS5 CNOA s. 'AO0Ne"AAj
Judge Belden said:
~ am quite in accord with the =
view expressed by the justices Of y
the supreme court that private de- :
tectives were altogether too active =
in this case and that their conduct y
was reprehensible. If purpose of y
the supreme court in remanding the
case for another trial was condem- y
nation Of such activity by private
detectives then such action is
wholesome and commendatory. y
eff it were conceded that the =
conviction was proper or that the
defendant would be properly con y
victed upon another trial, still / y
think the purpose and end of the
state in such prosecution, by way
~ of punishment to the defendant =
and as a salutary warning to all
inclined to commit criminal acts,
has been substantially met.
." No good purpose would be serv-
ed by placing him on trial again
for this offense even though con-
assigned by the district attorney y
for not proceeding further against =
the defendant are satisfactory to y
the court, his motion is granted
and the defendant discharged"
George Koscak, defendant in the
famous Kenosha "dynamite case"
which had gained more notoriety than
any other criminal case ever tried in
. the circuit court of Kenosha county,
walked out of the court room free
man this morning. On the motion of
District Attorney A. L. Drury, the case
was dismissed by the court and the de-
PENDANT discharged. In making this mo-
tjon the district attorney filed with the
court o lengthy statement of his rea-
sons FOR such action. Norman L. Bak-
err attorney for the defendant, also
addressed the court and related the
story OF much evidence which had been
uncovered since the original trial of
the case.
In dismissing the case, Judge Belden
declared that even should there have
been a second trial and a, conviction
secured he was very doubtful if any
further punishment would have been
inflicted on the defendant. He assert
ed that he believed that every demand
that the state might have made even
in case that guilt was established
had been met.
zoscak was in court with his wife
and when the formal order for his dis
charge was handed down he appeared
to be greatly pleased. In asking for
the formal dismissal of the case, Dis
tlict Attorney Drury said:
The officers of the state had no
information or knowledge of the con-
templated violation by the defendant
Of Section 439Sa of the Statutes prior
to the evening of the day when he
was arrested.
After investigating the facts I came
to the conclusion that whether the con-
duct of the detectives was proper or
reprehensible or whether the defendant
was guilty or innocent of the alleged
crime, was a responsibility which rest
ell with a jury chosen for that purpose.
/ am informed that this has been
the first prosecution in this state for
an alleged violation of this section of
the statute. Many new questions of
law were involved and these questions
were proper matters for determination
BY the court.
There are two features of the statute:
l. The buying, ETC., with the intent
of having the dynamite used for the
unlawful purposes mentioned in the
statute.
2. The buying, etc, knowing that
Others intended to use it for such I'M
lawful purposes.
The defendant had done every es-
sential act necessary for conviction
Of the first feature of the statute and
unless he was acting under duress, the
only question for the jury was his in
tent. If he did not buy and transport
the dynamite under duress what did he
buy and transport it for? 1t is mani
fest that there is but one conclusion to
be drawn, unless person is exceed
ingly eredulous. He bought and trans
ported the dynamite with the inten-
ton and expectation that it was to be
used by the detectives to blow up
DcCous house.
The jury BY their verdict decided
that lie was not acting under duress
ana in effect that he was not a passive
participant in the alleged crime. JUS,
lice Barnes III his dissenting opinion
disposes of this point in the case in a
single sentence as follows: Really a
Jury would have to be pretty credulous
to take much stock in the defendant 4
claim that he acted under duress while
he was plotting murder and doing his