Decorah public opinion., 1922-12-20
KNEESKERN FREED
If HE SECUSs~e
$4,000 b.
Habeas Corpus Proceedings Held at
Waukon Last Week Before
Judge DeLand Gives Him
Freedom on Bail, When
Security is
Put Up.
BONDS HAVE NOT
BEEN GIVEN YET

totiii IN jail mere, and his Bonds
H Fixed at $4,000 for Each of
the Two Counts He Was
Indicted On.
B. F. Kneeskern will be granted
his liberty ON bonds, providing $4O,-
900 security is put up, on the two
counts he is indicted on, $4,000 on
each count. This new turn in this
famous murder case came about last
week at Waukon when Kneeskern's
attorneys brought a writ of habeas
corpus before Judge DeLand, of
Storm Lake, special judge who had
been holding court in Allamakee
county, having been secured to assist
in getting cases cleared from the
docket in this district, as ts>. work
was too heavy for the two judges
to handle.
: County Atty. j. A. Nelson and
Atty. Smith, of Dubuque, of the law
firm of Hurd, Linehan, Smith and
O'Connor, of Dubuque, appeared for
the state to resist the habeas corpus
proceedings. Atty. W.. S. Hart did
most of the arguing for Kneeskern.
The proceedings took the better part
of several days starting last We'd
nesday and were concluded Saturday.
County Clerk S. j. Moore took all
the records in the case over to Wau-
kon and it took four men to handle
the stuff. There were six guns, q
box of old clothes and an immense
lot of records in the case. Several
witnesses were put on the stand,
Sheriff Ellingson, Pat Tierney, Chas.
Altfllisch, Harry Swenson and S. !
j. Moore, the latter introducing the
records, etc. in the case.
judge Springer had previously re-
5cgyo 20 aInlIs nIlessseIn 90 . -ssssl'..s -.
But supreme court ruling appears
that permits bail, and in this case
the Judge ruled on that decision.
Kneeskern was taken to Waukon
by Sheriff Ellingson and was return
ed to Decorah Saturday and placed
in Jail, to await the getting of his
bonds. At this writing they have
not been furnished. Below Will be
found Judge DeLand's opinion in
the case.
Finding and Order Of Court
Gentlemen, i have already indicat-
ed my view as to the law which
ought to govern the court in the
decision of the question here pre-
scented. This is matter entitled to
great consideration. 1t involves one
Of the sacred privileges of Amer-
can citizenship that is guaranteed by
the constitution both of the United
States and of the state of Iowa.
do no deem the situation such that
this case can be determined in any
technical question Of law, but it is
a question of fact. 1t is a question
of the application Of the facts here
brought out to the rule of law which
has been established by oSr supreme
court.
Now in this case of Ford VS.. Dill
lev, the court laid down this rule
which they say should govern In
the determination of the question
here presented and which we have
to decide and it is the rule which we
must use in weighing and measuring
the testimonc which has been in
troduced in this case, here the court
saws that ''bail should be granted If
upon the evidence as a whole, weigh
ed with judicial, dispassionate and
guarded judgment, there is an abld-
ing belief that the state has failed
to show that the accused is the
guilty agent in the commission OF
the CAPITAL ofFense, of which ne VIII
probably be convicted if the law is
ploperly administered" And then
Judge Salinger puts the same pro-
position in a little different langu-
age, but that is the basis, Clat Is
the rule which our court has estab-
lished and recognizes, the TACT tina:
the requirements here laid down
must be met by the state, the burden
being upon the state.
In view of the fact that there
must be another trial of this case
which as we all know must be 10
some extent at least trial based
upon the facts proved by the evld-
ence introduced here, it you'd be
Improper, | think, for this court at
this time to comment upon the facts
that have been established or upon
which evidence has been Inrrouces !
here, andit is not my purpose or
intent to de so for this reason.
However, in what / may do want
It understood that in arriving at my
conclusion I have not been influenced
by what appears in the record here
as to the conclusions arrived at by
other courts or. Judges w119, have had
occasion to pass upon the various /
questions presented here. l doubt
less consider some of the Hacts that
they considered, but, am saying
that l am not governed or influenced
by the conclusions which have been
arrived at. aA
| wish it also understood that
in my conclusions | am rat consider
ing or giving any weight 70 state
ments contained in the Atfitlavits
to motions and Introduced heFe In
evidence, which are merely exlsarte !
statements and to some extefx at