The Maui news. [volume] (Wailuku, Maui, H.I.) 1900-current, 1922-11-21
LOCAL ATTORNEY INDICATED
in TRIAL FOR EINBEZZLEblENIT
Court Scores Efforts To Con-
vict Vincent; Directed Ver-
dict Brought In Sensational
Climax

CharacteriZing the embezZlement
charge brought against Attorney Enos
Vincent as bearing the ear mark of
something aside from the desire to do
abstract Justice" and denouncing the
motives which resulted in his trial,
Judge Case yesterday ordered a di
rected verdict of not guilty.
In making the order the court de-
clared that no statement as to the
identity of the person who was be
hind all this" would be made.
Some time ago." the judge said in
his instructions to the jury, I'VE had
case in which some person ran away
with the idea that embezzlement had
been committed, where, as a matter
OF fact it should have been a civil pro
ceeding for the collection of money.
No Legal Excuse
THE case now before the court
does not even posses the dignity of
criminal prosecution, or that which
savors of civil suit. If this was a
case OF embeZzlement then there
would not be sufficient attorneys left
on the islands to meet the demands
of the public.
The court cannot but feel that
there is something back of all this
aside from a desire to do abstract JUS
tice-and | am hoping that so long as
l remain judge of this circuit it may
never happen again"
Outcome Sensational
The sensational denouement came
after Judge A. G. NJ. Robertson of
Honolulu, counsel for Vincent, had
moved for a directed verdict of not
guilty on the showing of the case,
and had offered caustic comment on
the person behind the scene"
The case was based on the allega-
tion that Vincent retained 500 from
an initial sum of $3.50 turned over to
him by the Haiku Fruit & Packing
Company, in the interests of Koike,
pineapple grower, with which to set
tie previous litigation between the lat
ter and John Pereira, a laborer.
According to the prosecution, Vim
cent paid Eugene Murphy, at
torney for Pereira, $3.50 and that
the sum was supplemented by SIS
turned over to Murphy by Koike's
daughter.
Vincent's Stand
Vincent maintained that he settled
at the smallest possible figure, keep
ing the remainder of the original sum
for his fee as per the arrangement
with Koike, through his representa-
tive, the fruit company.
AS first witness, Koike admitted
that he did not know the defendant
and had never complained either to
him or TO the county attorney, of hav-
ing lost money on the transaction.
Attorney Wong of the Haiku organ
ization testified relative to the mort
gaging of Koikes lands to satisfy
Pereira's judgment and outlined in
full the business aspects of the case.
Murphy, appearing as third witness,
testified that he had at first refused
Vincent's offer of a $3.50 settlement,
but that later, on receiving SIS from
Koike's daughter, had accepted. The
daughter, taking the witness stand.
asserted she had turned over the SIS
without the knowledge of her father.
AT the conclusion of her testimony.
Judge Robertson moved that a direct
ed verdict be returned Frank Crock
eft, acting deputy attorney general,
announced his intention of arguing
the motion and the jury was excused.
one OF the points brought out by
Crockett embodied the question of the
right of the jury to deliberate in order
that they might bring a larceny, or
other verdict This view of the law
was not taken by the court and the
jury was recalled and handed a YER
dlct OF not guilty for their signatures.
1t was consistently pointed out by
the defense throughout the case, and
III which the court cOncurred that the
crime of embezzlement indicated. ac-
cording to the law, a breach of faith.
NO such breach was apparent in any
stage OF the hearing, in the opinion
of the court.