Indiana daily times. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1914-1922, 1920-06-29

being allowed TO accompany MS slcA
wife to the hotel
Prosecutor Claris Adams contended
that intent was not concerned in this
case.
Judge Berryhin listened to long argu-
ments by counsel and then sustained the
objection of Mr.. Adams. 49,, .-.-
Adams contended that when there was
any relaxation of confinement, that con
stituted an escape under the law because
the evidence showed that Hampton's alb
sence from the Jail was for indulgence
granted him by Douglas.
MRS. HAMPTON
TAKES STAND.
Mrs. Hampton took the witness stand
and testified that she called on her hus-
band while he was a prisoner at the Jail
and that Douglas allowed her husband to
accompany her in a taxi to local hotel
She testified that she had a headache
and needed attention"
Sheriff Robert Miller also awaiting
trial on an indictment charging alleged
failure TO give proper food to prisoners,
testified that Douglas was merely a
night jailer or night watcher and was
not sworn in as a deputy sheriff.
Miller stated that the duties of Doug
las was to receive prisoners at night
after the regular deputies had gone home.
Attorney Ira Holmes contended that
Douglas was merely a private employe Of
the sheriff.
The state contended that it made no
difference whether Douglas was sworn in
or not he was functioning for the sheriff
at nights.
ASKS DISMISSAL
OF DOUGLAS.
At the close of the states evidence, At
tOrney Holmes moved for the dismissal OF
the suit against Douglas because the
state had failed to prove that Douglas
was a deputy sheriff as charged in the
Indictment and failed to show that
Hampton as a federal prisoner was law
fully confined TO the custody Of the
sheriff.
When Sheriff Miller was on the stand
he admitted that he never had a con-
tract with United States Marshal Storen
for keeping federal prisoners.
Attorney Holmes contended that there
was no Indiana law requiring the sheriff
70 receiy- federal prisoners. Holmes
maintained that Douglas had violated no
state law ia allowing Hampton to leave
the Jail.
There will be no dispute by the de-
Tense that Douglas did allow Hampton to
take his wife to a hotel" said Holmes.
We will show that Hampton hrst tes-
titled IN that federal court during the Jail
inquiry that he did not leave the Jail and
that Douglas told him to go back to the
federal court and tell the truth and that
Hampton did go back and correct his
testimony"
Holmes contended that Douglas did not
violate any state laws, and II there was
any law violated some one might have
violated a federal statute in permitting
q federal prisoner to escape"
Adams contended that 10 was the custom
for the sheriff to accept federal pris
oners and the minute this was done
Il was the duty Of the sheriff to see
that the process OF the federal court
was carried out because It was in har-
mony with the state laws Of justice.
DISMISSAL MOTION
UNDER AMUSEMENT.
Holmes maintained that Douglas was
not under oath and so violated no state
law.
Judge Berryhill, shortly before noon
took the motion to dismiss under ad-
visement until 2 o'clock this afternoon.
The court admitted that II was a grave
question to the court whether man who
was not sworn was legally a deputy
sheriff and also a question whether
Hampton was In lawful custody.
II will be remembered that Hampton
could not be found at Evansville when
Douglas was to be tried on a charge Of
permitting gambling at the jail.
The state dismissed the alleged gam
ling Indictment against Douglas.
Today Special Investigator Claude
Morley announced that he had filed an
affidavit against Douglas, charging him
with knowingly permitting gambling At
the jail.
The state, according to attaches Of
the prosecutors office, will ask that
Hampton be put under bond to assure
his appearance as a witness against
Douglas IN the gambling charge.