Perth Amboy evening news., 1920-11-16
OFFICER FACES
NEW CHARGE
New Angle in UnderhiII Case
as Referred to Board of A.
dermen Last Night.
FIRST CHARGE FAILS
Was Drunk, is Complaint,
Which Will be Acted on by
Committee of the Whole.

Charges against Patrolman Lester
j. Underhill were received by the
Board of Aldermen last night from
Chief of Police Patrick j. Burke but
they were not the same charges that
had originally been made by the
chief on Monday, Nov. s. The origi-
nal charges asserted that the patrol
man had. ION the night of Nov. 6.
between the hours of and 10 O'Clock
been guilty of misconduct unbecom-
ing an officer when he entered the
warehouse of Max Shapiro at 455
warehouse of Max Shapiro, 455 New
al citizens and with a loaded revolv-
er, demanded money" No mention
was made in these charges of his be-
ing intoxicated although he had been
brought to the police station on the
afternoon of Nov. Z suspected with
being intoxicated while on duty at
which time he was examined by City
+ Physician, George w. Fithian. The
doctor would not say that the man
gas drunk.
~ In the charges received by the
board last night no mention of the
alleged hold-up in the warehouse is
made but in its place is a charge that
Underhill was, under the influence
of liquor" on Nov. 6 and mot in con-
dition to do police duty If required"
The original charges made no men,
tion of the officer having been drunk
on this day.
The change in the charges against
Underhill was made. necessary be-
cause of the unwillingness of cer-
tain witnesses. who were in the
Shapiro warehouse on Saturday
night, November 6, to make written
statements covering the circum-
stances. One of the witnesses is
quoted by Chief Burke as saying
that "he would go to jail before he
would squeal" on the accused pa
trolman.
The charges of holding up these
"citizens"-as they are spoken of in
the original charges-were original
ly made by Chief Burke against
Underhill when four or five of the
men in the group that claimed to
have been stuck up" by the patrol
man, who, incidentally, was then off
duty, came to him and promised to
serve as witnesses against the Off
Ger, according to Chief Burke.
The men were brought before
Chief Burke and Mayor Frank Dor
sey, the mayor asserts. on Sunday
night, November z. and then prom
ised to make their written affidavits
their testimony against Underhill
would be contained. They were then
allowed to go.
During the time from Sunday
night, Nov. z, to Monday morning,
these men, Mayor Dorsey states,
were far from being idle. They went
to the warehouse. the mayor claims,
and removed all of the liquor which
had been stored in the place. When.
on Monday morning the police went
to the storehouse to investigate, no
liquor was to be found stored there.
The men who had promised to
make the affidavits, Mayor Dorsey
says. came TO the city hall on Mon
agreed but they then told differ
ent story and refused to put their
signatures to any statements.
AS a result of the men getting the
liquor out of the warehouse, the To-
cal authorities were unable to force
them to testify. Following Chief
Burke's failure to have the men
sign the statements they had made
orally. his original charge against
Underhiil. which he had turned over
to Mayor Dorsey. was returned TO
him. the mayor pointing out that
without witnesses the charge could
HOl NC proven. AS result dnOtNef
charge was drawn up by Chief
Burke which accused the officer on
ly of being under the influence of
liquor on Saturday. Nov. 6, the day of
the hold-up.
The charge against Underhill
} which will be considered by the al
dermen at an adjourned meeting to
be held next Monday night is worded
by Chief Burke as follows:
s"I hereby prefer charges against
Patrolman Lester ]. Underhill for
misconduct in that on the 9Th day CT
November, 1920. he was under the
influence of liquor and not in con-
dition to do police duty, If required"
This charge was turned over by
Chief Burke to Mayor Dorsey, who
then referred to the aldermen,
After hearing the charge read last
night it was unanimously decided
! 10 refer 1t to the committee of the
whole for consideration. This IN it.
self is an unusual procedure mas
, much as such matters are generally
referred to the police committee
who act. and then report back to the
entire board.