Richmond planet. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1883-1938, 1917-09-08
LANCASTER DENIES THAT
HE REPRESENTED ROY


w. l.. Lancaster, OF FarmviIIn
who appeared rs counsel for the elder
Barrett. issued tho following signed
statement. denying that he had repre-
sentcd the boy. or had advised him
privately or publicly:
To The Editor OF The Tincs-Dispatch:
Sir:-EX-Judgc A. d. Watkins civ
eS his version of the Barrett cases
whether ut the request of Judge Humid
Icy or not. who aares
~. ID Watkins. my friend (and. 7
am glad to say. distant relationD is
under an cgrcGieus mistake. II he had
read What | wrote, L. @. that | refused
TO plea or advise Aubrey Barrett what
pea to enter, saying would not as
sumo the responsibility, | know he
would not deny the same unless. in
MS goodness Of heart or his Weakness
OF mind he would allow truth to
SlumDer Tor the sake Of pleasing n
lri"nd or protecting himself. Asa
says when Albert Barrett, failing to
compromise. attempted to rscapc. Mr..
Roach laid hold on him, and in hold
ing him they both fell to the ground. ;
ana III the same breath he SAYS: "Tcs-
timony was that the older Barrett
called Tor his son to come and take
Roach elf. The younger Jarrett took
up large stick and struck Roach on
the back OF the head. Roach was
stunned, and partially fell to the
ground
Now, III Roach was on the ground
IN the first instance, could he DO fell
ed to the ground, either by stick or
large stick?
If cN-Judgc Watkins is so fair, why
did he not say that the testimony was
that Roach pursued Albert $50 Yards,
ALBERT Tell over brush pile, and was
down. being chokcd. when Aubrey
barrett struck the fatal blow with
the chestnut stick, by request or
command Of his father?
! have stated that the words ut.
tributcd to Albert. II have finished
him. were not uood. Should I have
failed to hear this. | cannot fail to
, know, and no truthful man In the
courtroom at Charlotte who could
near but knows. that withdrew from
Aubrcy's case. did not advise or plead
Tor him, and he had no counsel, either
IN myself or another. and that I did
not waive the jury for him.
Judge Watkins says that 7 intimat
ca TO him that I would plead guilty
lor the hoy, or had advised the bow
to plead guilty. This statement can
be accounted for only as follows:
When the petit jury WAS in its room
! considering its verdict in the Albert
Barrett case. I asked Judge Watkins
In the presence of Mr.. Light and Tom
watkins. considering the boys age
: could he not, upon tho plea OF guilt,
, DC confined in the penitentiary OF
! sent to the public roads or even TO the
, retormatory, Thoroupon Judge Wat.
, kins suggested that I talk to Judge
fiundley and | went to him while up
on the bench and asked him IF the
BOY Aubrey pleaded guilty could he
not under law, considering the boys
age, send him to the reformatory or
put him upon the public roads. TIC
thls question Judge Hundlcy made nc
satisfactory answer. I then asked hin,
II. upon the plea Of guilty, he could
not Tx some punishment less than
the death penalty. He replied: 81
VIII make no promises" or IT will
make you no PROMISES
l repeat that I neither advised the
boy. privately nor publicly. what plea
, to enter
Take the statement Of Judge A ID
watkins in full and add nothing OF
mine or any one else thereto, that
roach restrained and held Albert will,
. out warrant, ana I vouch for IL
That no lawyer will say that the
, homicide was murder, let alone a
horrible murder" IN tho first degree
The mob was promised speedy trial
, IT they woulf give up their prisoners
ana l also prenhme they wore prom:s
cd a conviction and the death penal
~ attached thereto. Thus far the
! promise has been lulfuille.
Respectfully,
(SigneD w. l.. LANCASTER
Farmvillc. Va, August %. 1917.