Daily Kennebec journal. [microfilm reel] (Augusta, Me.) 1870-1975, 1917-08-25
PROBABLE CAUSE
George Moody Held IA
Grand Jury in Arson
Case

George Moody of Pittston was h.YE
in $1,000 bonds which was furn:sh,sE
for his appearance before the era,
Jury on the charge of burning y.
buildings of Albert Mason. East P,r,,
ton, on the evening OF August - I.
was represented by Hon. George "
Heselton and County Attorney " I'll
Fisher appeared for the State.
Mason was the first witness. r,I
claimed ownership Of the prope-tr
through a series Of not yet torec,,,
ed mortgages and by permission an
possession. Apparently the bQ.5.
ings were old ones. not very valuasA
unoccupied and used for the stc,aa
of hay. Mr.. Mazon told of hari.,
trouble with Moody some time ar,
and of the latter's threat against hin
Arthur Carter. who lives in the y.
cinity of the burned buildings tod FL
seeing Moody on the evening Of m,
22nd near the buildings and that Moo
dy was intoxicated. He noticed t,|
fire after Moody had passed. Saw Ii,
later down at SCOTS store and he W;
! in a better condition.
George Marson, another neiehtc.
told of seeing a man 60 past but Wa,
unable to recognize him. Miss Neu.
Moody. at whose fathers home Georss
Moody lived, told of the trouble b..
tween Moody and Mason but heard IA
threats. Said that George Moody h,t
been drinking on, that day and Tia.
+ he left the house between six and sev.
en- O'Clock, returning about 10.
Eugene Morang stated that he live,
about 400 yards away from the burn.
ed house. He noticed the fire shor,+r
after o'clock. On his way to the f,s
he met an intoxicated man. whom !.
, identified as George Moody, though he
did not know him before nor at The
time.
At this point Mr. Heselton asked for
the discharge of the respondent on The
ground that there was an inherent de-
feet in Moody's title, and also on tNa,
of lack of evidence. Attorney Fishe,
| contended that sufficient title had been
shown, that the respondent was II.
toxicated on that night and that he
| had been identified as the man comm.
away from the direction of the buiId.
ings after the fire was discovered. I,
this he was sustained by Judge Atkr;
and the trial preceded.
The defence called the resnonaer,
George Moody, who acknowledged that
he had been drinking and that he left
home about I o'clock and went 10
SCOTS store. He remembered falling
down and seeing a man working i,
Mr.. Dow's garden that adjoined III,
cemetery. He told of his previou;
trouble with Mason and in response I,
question by Attorney Fisher as I,
why he did not go to the fire, said thai
ne had been ordered by Mason to keey
away from his property and intendet
10 do so. lnsistent questions By
County Attorney Fisher brought ou
the fact that his condition was the re-
suit of too much hard cider. whic.
he claimed he secured from WI
Moody He acknowledged that he ha;
served time for assault and also fo
drunkenness.
George s. Dow was apparently III
man on whom the counsel for the de
Tense relied upon for valuable test
mony. He testified that he was work
ing in his garden on the night II
question from shortly after ocloci
until dark. He saw no one pass AM
was on his way home, having passe,
SCOTS store when he was told Of TIL
fire. AS he passed the store he sav
George Moody in it. Attorney Fishe
on his cross examination brought ou
the fact that Mr. Dow's wife an
George Moody were cousins
In the closing arguments Mr.. Hesel
ton stated that he did not believe tha
the county attorney would ever brinl
such a case before the grand Jury Of
such evidence. Mr. Fisher expresse
no opinion, simply saying that the evi
dence was In and that the matter To-
In the hands of the Judge. He, how
ever. recalled the fact that the re
spondent himself admitted having me
Mr.. and Mrs. Morang on their way +
the fire. when the defense eudeavore
to prove that he was In Scott's store
In holding Moody, Judge Atkins sal
he should consider himself dere.ict !.
his duty IL he did not do so