Perth Amboy evening news. [volume] (Perth Amboy, N.J.) 1903-1959, 1922-07-20
Gave State Evidence
Is Claim, Should Get
Freedom, Brief States

tors office would file brief until
after the law is looked up.
Judge DAILY refusing to discuss the
statement of DIR. Charles 1. Silk.
president OF the Perth Amboy Board
of Health, as he had not received
official communication from DIR. Silk
and only knew what he read in the
papers. The statement as given to
the press by DIR. Silk was in answer
to statement issued by Judge DAILY
in open court on July IA, in which
he declared that the Board of
Health for their own protection,
should give proof to the people why
they had discharged the laboratory
technician.
There are several points brought
out in the brief filed by Attorney
Brown, the most important of these
being, however, that Weiner is ex-
empt from punishnae ent. This point
reads as follows:
I'm the case before the court
Peter Wener made "A lengthy state
ment to the prosecutor of the pleas
concerning others, md by visits made
by him with county detectives, and
in other ways, did aid the authori-
ties of the county of Middlesex in
the arrest and prosecution of Others
| III tue u-t Ol uyIditlllt
or black cotton with intent to in
iure property and person,
"As a result of the aid given to the
authorities, two or more have been
| arrested; one of whom has admitted,
it is reliably reported, harifiss- ma ssfss=
| factured the bomb in question:
What admissions the second person
made are not known to this defend
ant. The statement also implicated
four or five others with aiding and
participating in the act which this
defendant committed, and as a re-
suit of which this case is before the
court. The prosecution of the pleas
of the county of Middlesex accepted
the statement of the defendant i'm
plicating others, and accepted his
aid in accompanying the detectives
in order to help the prosecution
against the others, and the defendant
did in other ways give information
and aid to the authorities and there
fore is entitled to immunity in ac-
cordance with section 221-A of the
Grimes Act" G. C. S. p. 1910.
The law in question is quoted as
follows:
whoever shall hereafter give any
information to anyone in authority
concerning others or shall in any
OlHbT way Glu lllt ttulhOi .tiCo III shfS
arrest and prosecution of the par
ties implicated in any murder or any
injury or damage to person or prop
erty that may result from the use OF
dynamite or any other explosives, by
any person or persons, with intent 10
kill or injure shall be exempt from
any prosecution or punishment; pro-
vided, the person giving the infor-
nation is not the only one taking
part in the commission of the
crime"
The brief then reads: Under
this section the legislature evidently
intended that where so serious q
crime had been committed ana
more than one person was lmpf-
Gated therein, and where one of the
persons so implicated gave informs
ton to the authorities in any way
in order to aid them in the arrest
and prosecution of the others impli-
Gated. the informer was to be re-
warded by being exempt from pros
ecutioL or punishment
According to Assistant Prosecutor
Toolan. the two men mentioned ny
MIR. Brown in his brief are John
Shanko and John Eerhner.