The Telegraph-courier. [volume] (Kenosha, Wis.) 1888-1946, 1915-04-01

II =
Tense to the accused for his criminal
acts and his criminal intent, if any, or
his knowledge of criminal intent, if
any, either apparent or real on the part
of the others In another portion of
the charge the court said, lit is no de-
Tense that the persons asso-
ciated with defendant in the alleged
criminal plan, had not In fact the in
tention of using the dynamite. for airy
of the unlawful purposes and
that defendant was guilty if they
found he had the settled belief
amounting to knowledge that another
or others intended using it for either
or any Of the unlawful purposes mem
toned. These instructions were in
corporated in different parts of the
charge and are so interviewer with the
definition Of the first offense specified
in the statute that they cannot be
separated and manifestly the jury could
not do so in their deliberation on the
case. From this it results that the
case was enormously submitted to the
"
to know of what offense the jury found
the defendant guilty. As heretofore
stated the evidence may warrant find
ing that defendant bought and trans
! pored dynamite with the intent of hay-
| ing it used for the forbidden purpose,
but we cannot say that the jury did
agree upon this proposition for the rea-
son that this question is nowhere sub
mitted to them without including in it
as an element thereof the ofense of
I knowing that others intended to use
it for such unlawful purposes. Tt is
impossible to exticate the jury's YER
| dict from this confusion in the case
and hence it is impossible to know
whether or not the jury agreed on the
| guilt Of the offense which the evidence
may justify should the jury believe
him guilty thereof beyond a reasonable
doubt. AS the record stands a serious
error in instructing the jury pervades
the whole case which clearly tended to
| jeopardize the defendants rights on
the trial of this grave offense.
1t is urged on behalf of the defen-
J dant that the court erred in refusing
to instruct the jury as requested re-
specting the influence on defendant of
| the detectives conduct in their efforts
to entice, lure and intimidate him into
commission Of the alleged offense and
in refusing the instructions that tie
! defendant is not guilty IF he bought
the dynamite and had it in his posses
sion not because Of a desire and intent
| that it be so used, but because he was
induced by threats and intimidation to
buy, transport and possess it,
We have studied the record with care
the practices and course Of conduct of
the detectives and those who employed
them. Of course if the acts and con
duct of the detectives transgressed the
limits of the law then the result there
of must be borne by them and those
persons who employed them if they had
knowledge Of what they did, In law
if detectives act as agents of others
than their acts are attributable to
those who employ them in determining
whether an alleged violating of the
law was in fact originated, instigated
and perpetrated by such detectives in
conjunction with the party accused.
So here if the facts and circumstances
warrant the finding that the detectives
were the active parties in originating
and carrying out the preparation of
the offense and the defendant was only
a passive participant in these acts,
through the excitement and intimida-
ton of the detectives, then DeCou and
Jeffrey are bound thereby as the acts
of their agents in the matter to the
same extent as if they had personally
taken the part of the detectives. 1T is
apparent from the record that the de-
tectives in this case employed repre-
hensible means and practices to in
duct This is shown by such conduct
as the alleged purpose of shooting the
defendant, if he could be induced to
enter DeCou' s premises with intent to
injure him; by exhibiting to him re-
volvers to intimidate him; in securing
the services of the person Boitano as a
desperate to brighten and intimidate
him and Poppic's invasion Of the de-
PENDANT IS home under the color and
pretense of a fellow injured laborer for
the purpose of playing the part of a
man who had been seriously wronged
and thereby induce defendant to trust
and confde in him for the purpose of
arousing in defendant the feeling of
revenge. We repeat here what was set
out in Topolewski v. The State, $50
Wis. 244:
A contemplated crime may never be
developed into consummated act. To
stimulate unlawful intentions for the
purpose and with the motive of bring
ing them to maturity so the consequence
crime may be punished, is dangerous
practice. 1T is safer law and sounder
morals to hold, where one arranges to
have crime committed against his
property or himself, and knows that an
attempt is to be made to encourage