Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1922-04-13
LIEUT.. VAN W|NKLE
| APPEALS VERDICT
Of POLICE BOARD
Asks Commissioners to Mod
ify Trial Finding Criti-
| cizing Her.
WANTS TO ARGUE CASE
| BESIDES FILING BRIEF
Attorney in Request Outlines Eight
Reasons for Attacking
Verdict.

Lieut.. Nina C. Van Wrinkle. head OF
the woman's bureau Of the police de-
partment, today appealed to the Com
missioners to modify the findings of
the trial board. which found her in.
nocent of having disobeyed orders.
but at the same time criticized. her
conception Of police discipline.
Through her attorney, Roger j.
Whiteford. she requested permission
not only to file a written brief. but to
be permitted to make oral argument
before the board Of Commissioners in
answer to the criticism Of the trial
board.
Text OF Her Request.
The request for a hearing filed by
Attorney Whiteford reads as follows:
''As' attorney for Lieut.. Nina c. Van
Winkle. who appeared before the police
trial board on April z. 1929, and was
paragraph IT Of section II Of the po-
lice manual. and was found not guilty
Of the charge and the specifications, !
hereby note an appeal to the Commits
sioners Of the District Of Columbia from
80 much of the finding of the trial board
as may be found in the last two SEN
tences Of paragraph thereof. wherein
the board denies to the order OF Febru-
ary rs. 1922. the full Interpretation
which Its language 3ustifies and also
wherein the board endeavors to draw
from the testimony the conclusion that
Lieut.. Van Wrinkle has not a proper
conception Of the cardinal principles OF
discipline which must prevail in the
police department.
OutlIne. Einht Reasons.
THE reasons upon which the Com
missioners are requested to- strike
out from the findings of the trial
board the foregoing conclusions are
as follows:
Il. That the findings are contrary
to the testimony presented before
the board.
"2. That the findings are not rele-
want to the charge and specifications.
"3. That the findings are incon-
sistent with the verdict OF not guilty
rendered by the board.
-. That the finding as to matters
Of discipline Is contrary to the tes-
dent of the police department as
given before the. board u u s e.S.s,.
"s. That the finding OF the board
with reference to compliance with the
order Of a superior is contrary to the
established practices Of the police
ucpdA Atheut oho " thS pAihSiPAcS VI
military law.
"s The alleged findings of fact
are contrary to the orders of the
CT emmissioners of the District of Co
lumbia promulgated for the control
Of the house of detention.
~. The trial board Is without juris-
diction with reference to matters re-
lating to the conduct by Lieut. Nina
C. Van Wrinkle Of the house OF deten-
ticn.
.'s. The alleged finding Of the trial
board as to the proper conception of
discipline which must prevail in the
police department Is a wholly gratu-
itous statement on the part of the
board, unwarranted in law. not justi-
fed in fact. inconsistent with the ver-
dict Of not guilty"
Future Of Bureau Involved.
In a letter accompanying the appeal
Attorney Whiteford sets forth his rea-
sons for asking permission to make an
oral appeal as follows:
II. The findings of the board in
volve the future Of the house of de-
tention and the women's bureau, both
in their relation to the police depart
ment, the Commissioners of the Dis
trict Of Columbia and the public.
"2. The matters to be discussed in
this appeal involve such a wide range
that It will be difficult to encompass
them In written brief Of modest pro-
portions.
the work being done by Lieut.. Van
Winkle requires that the Commission
ers have all the information upon this
subject that 1t Is possible for them
fo obtain"