The Celina Democrat. (Celina, O. [Ohio]) 1895-1921, 1915-06-04
MISSTATMENTS
OF Defendants In KriegeI Case
Ample Reason for ReOPenIng
Matter, Says Judge.

decision OF Judge Layton in the case
of State Of Ohio VS. Lee Ayers at the
rehearing had last Saturday morning
as furnished by Court stenographer
Fennig for publication:
Judge F. c. Layton in giving the
decision in the case The State of Ohio
VS.. Lee Ayers, referred to the affair
as an unfortunate and unprecedeBt-
ed one. so far as his experience as
Court had extended, during the past
or years.
After his attention had been cal
led to what was claimed to be a mis-
understanding or a mis-statement. Of
certain facts, the question naturally
came to his mind, What could the
Court do?" He said that during his
limited time for review Of the case
and for securing additional informa-
tion as to his province in the matter.
he was of the opinion that when a
Court had been misinformed, and
had acted under that misinformation
in the way of passing sentence, that
nc NOuiuf III lAN odhAN AbA III Vi CbhA -
and before any part of the former
sentence had been served, that the |
Court could add to, or take from the |
sentence any part as he desired
To substantiate his belief, he cited |
numerous cases and rulings, among |
which were Circuit Court reports, |
New Series, page110, the case of Bel |
ifore Santo VS.. the State of Ohio, |
reading in part as follows:
Where a court, in passing
sentence for a felony, or mis-
demeanor has acted under a
misapprehension of the facts
necessary and proper to be
known in fixing the amount of
the penalty, ii may, in the eX-
ercise of judicial discretion, and
in furtherance of justice, at the
same term, and before the orig
inal sentence has gone into op-
Grafton, or any action has been
had upon 1t, revise, and increase
or diminish such sentence with
In the limits authorized by law"
The Court went on to say
Now as to the misinforma-
tion: | am constrained to say
that this defendant abused,
shamefully abused, the conf
QeQce Oh Ile court WHEN ne WAS
here on the goth of May. 1t
has always been the practice of
this Court, in spite of public
sentiment and what newspapers
may say, where the defendants
had never been arrested before,
where it was their first offense,
where their reputation was sub
stantially good; where they had
come into court willingly upon
being arrested and had entered
a plea of guilty; and where it
appeared to the court they were
repentant for and ready to make
reparation for their deeds; l
say it has been the practice of
this court to use leniency."
The Court stated that he had not
fully understood the proposition of
the giving of the money to the moth
er, or the adopted mother of the girl,
but that:
"Since the evidence had been
given, he was of a firm opinion
that the money was given not so
much as a reparatiOn for the
heinOus crime they had COM
mitted, but primarily for the
purpose of obstructing justice.
In other words as a bribe to get
the adopted mother to take the {
little child away so that the tes-
timony of the girl might not be
used against the defendants in
the event of a trial.
Now as to their ages: The de-
fendant here in Court, Lee Ayers,
now admits his age to be "a, and the
Court feels that the defendant, Arch
Wagner, who has for the time being
absconded himself, foolish fellow
and may venture to say that he will
yet see the folly of his act and return, 3
AS | said, the evidence, produced, the {
birth record, and the marriage record
convince me that he is over 80 years }
DID,"
"These defendants were sit :
ting right beside their able
counsel and heard him make
the statement that they were
2S and 20 respectively, to this !
court, and if they were not
wanting to practice deception on
the court why did they not cor /
rect 1t at that time? 1t is my /
opinion that they knew the law c
as to the reformatory sentence
and that they fixed their ages
when the attorney read them the l
law in his office, and l doubt If 7
counsel, himself, knew their age
and they were therefore deceiv- I
ing him Also"
In conclusion the court issued an 6
order that if any part of the costs of =
the former prosecution had been paid +
under the former sentence, the clerk +
should return same forthwith to the
defendant.
That leaving the defendant stand ! !
ing as he did prior to the former SEN :
tence, on his plea of guilty, the court L
gave the following sentence: !
The final judgment of the
Court shall be, you shall be CON
fined in the Ohio Penitentiary +
for an indeterminate period at b
hard labor, no part thereof to be n
solitary confinement, and that b
you pay the costs Of the prose- i
cutiOn."
Arch Wagner, who had been out
Of town since the first of last week A
and was supposed to have skipped d
out because of court procedure was e
brought back home last Monday :