Daily Kennebec journal. [microfilm reel] (Augusta, Me.) 1870-1975, 1922-05-09
DECREE BARS
PELLET|ER FROM
Law PRACTICE
Conspired with Coax
ley to Extort Money
from Clients
Judge Carroll Scores Former
District Attorney for Not
Offering Defense-Pelletier
Claimed Was Forejudged in
Removal Trial

Boston, May 8.-Joseph c. Pelletier,
who was recently removed as dis
trict attorney of Suffolk county by
the full bench OF the supreme court,
was ordered disbarred from further
practice Of law today in a decree
handed down by Supreme Court Jus
tice James B. Carroll. In the brief
trial two weeks ago, Pelletier offered
no evidence in his own defense, but
said that he was forejudged on the
testimony of his removal trial a
transcript of which was offered
against him.
Judge Carroll in his decision. refer
ring to Pelletier's failure to offer tes-
when he should have spoken, and
considering the serious nature of the
charges filed against him and the evil
dence sustaining them, his desire to
defend his own integrity should have
prompted him to aid the court in
every possible way to protect it.
Charges against the former Suffolk
county prosecutor We're sustained in
four Of the six cases which figured
in the removal trial and which were
specified in the original petition for
disbarment.
The court found that Pelletier was
guilty of having conspircd with Dam
iel II. Coakley to eXtort money from
clients of the latter by threats of
criminal prosecution and of protect
ing them and allowing them to esca pc
prosecution after such money had
been paid. The court also found that
Pelletier was one of the conspirators
in the case in which he, with Coakley.
former District Attorney William /.
Corcoran and others were charged
with having attempted to extort
money from Mr.. and Mrs. Curtis w.
Emery and Mrs. Emery's mother,
Mrs. Jennie s. Chase.
An order for the disba rment of
Coakley had been returned by the
court.
After reviewing the cases involved
in his decision, Judge Carol said;
''In the evidence of the transac-
tons under considera ton nothing
can be found which indicates the ex-
ercise of a proper discretion or any
effort to save the first offender from
prison sentence. The evidence can
not be construed into a desire to pro-
tect regulations or keep the COM
munity clean. Rather the opposite
was achieved by the respondent; and
the conspiracies were formed for mer-
cenary ends and for personal gain.
1T was also suggested by the re-
spondent that some of the witnesses
We're not entitled to belief At the
hearing before me no proof of this
suggestion was offered by the re-
spondent; no attempt was made tc
| impeach the credibility of any wit
| ness: and numerous witnesses who
/ testified in the original case appeared
| to be of unblemished character
II can find no vindication for these
acts. The evidence before me offers
no explanation of justification. 1t is
| clear. undisputed. convincing. The
| decision of the full court in the petit
| ton for the respondents removal
! from the Office of district attorney is
a part of the evidence and is uncon-
| troverted. I must find that these
| charges are sustained. No other con-
clusion is open to me, nor is any
other conclusion reasonable on these
! facts"