Decorah public opinion. (Decorah, Winneshiek County [Iowa]) 1895-1928, 1922-11-29
'B. F. KNEESKERN GRANTED
new TRIAL BY JUDGE TAYLOR
Opinion Handed Down Last Night at O'clock
Before the Largest Crowd Ever Assem-
bled at the Court House. s,ssa.s
ATTORNEYS FOR KNEESKERN
TO ASK FOR CHANGE OF VENUE
Kneesiern Received the Opinion i'm the Same
StOlid Manner he has Acted since Charged
With the Crime, Evincing No Feeling
ATTORNEYS FOR KNEESKERN
TO ASK FOR CHANGE Oh

are before Us showing that II
would be impossible to see the
door from where he stood, and
these photographs were filed in
this court on September Is,
1922. Yesterday, and after the
arguments had been made in
this case, atfidaviGS were fled
showing an experiment made
hast Saturday in which men
stood at the place where Elmer
Van Brocklin pointed out to
them that he stood when he saw
kneeskern, and affiants state
that from there they could see
Elmer stoop over near the door
of the cabin. 1t is apparent from
these atfdavits that Elmer did
not point out to these aifiants
the same place as he gave in his
testimony in this court. The
correctness Of these affaavits
depends entirely upon the place
that Elmer pointed out 20 ulegn,
and when you compare the affi-
davit of Sam Waters as TO this
incident with his plat which was
offered in evidence at the TIME
Of the trial, showing the loca-
tion of the foot bridge, the dia-
crepancy in the location is APP
parent.
The defendant has filed affi-
davits showing that this place
which Elmer pointed out is i27
feet south of where his testi-
ony on the trial shows that he
e,Ood, and that from this new
location one cannot see n per
son in the door Of the cabin.
The testimony of Elmer Van
Bnocklln as to seeing Frank
kneesken standing in the door
OF the cabin and STOPPING over
te the floor is probably the most
i4npa t.sss discriminating circum-
stance testified to upon the trial,
and brings the defendant the
nearest to the scene Of the mur-
ders. The dead body Of Char
lie Van Brocklin was found Just
inside the door covered with a
blanket. When we realize that
in order for that testimony to
be true that it was necessary for
Elmer to see through the wall of
a building, We are at once i'm
pressed with the necessity Of
ARRIVING at u just and careful
decision in this case.
The testimony given to the
effect that he never shot off a
shotgun was something about
which the ordinary man could
not be mistaken. In the every
day affairs of business We do not
put full reliance upon man
who contradicts himself.
Elmer Van Brocklin had trou-
bic with Charlie and Irene the
morning of the murders, and
one witness testified as TO
the effect that Elmer would kill
both Of them.
You will readily see that ev-
cry reason advanced to support
a motion for 4 new trial should
be carefully considered.
Several affidavitS have been
filed showing newly discovered
evidence, and it is reasonable to
assume therefrom that If a new
trial We're granted. a different
result might be expected.
The attorneys who defended
Elmer Van BrockIin on his pre-
liminary hearing assisted in the
prosecution of this case. This
resulted in a disadvantage to
the defendant, which could not
be reasonably expected ut the
commencement of the trial i'm
this court. Statement and in
situations as 10 the motives Of
Frank kneeskern rs-re made
which went farther than the
testimony will justify.
A proper construction of the
testimony as TO locations and
distances WAS of very material
Importance. There was sufri-
cient testimony in the evidencc
as TO these matters. The jurors
requested rulers while delibarat-
ing upon their verdict and these
WV Z - lAAsNilFsA W 1NtLl lfN IIlN
bailitfs, and were used by the
Jurors. | cannot censure the
Jurors for this as the testimony
aS 10 distances was not intro
duced in a clear manner. and the
bailitfs thought they were doing
only what was right; but the
defendant is given an absolute
right under the law to have his
case decided solely upon the
testimony as offered in court.
Measurements might have been
made in the wrong location, or
an improper result might have
been arrived at by making znea-
surements on the plats. As a
matter Of law, prejudice 70 de
fendant is presumed from such
use of the rulers and an
error was thereby committed
| am of the opinion that the