The Mankato free press. [volume] (Mankato, Blue Earth County, Minn.) 1879-1924, 1922-07-28
FRIEND CASE ADJoURNs
Hearing On Charge of Misconduct
On Part of Iurnr

On Part of Juror
Austin, July 24.-The hearing on
the petition of Hardy Friend. who
was convicted by a Mower county
court of a crime against an Albert
Lea girl, was again adjourned Sat
urday. The attorneys onbothsidesp
urday. The attorneys on both sides
were willing that the case should go
over the argument until Judge
Meighen should return from his va
cation. He is to attend the national
bar association in California. He fix
ed August &c as the date of the ad-
journed hearing.
Hardy Friend, the defendant who
is out on $1,000 bonds, was present
with his attorneys, H. H. Dunn of
Albert Lea and F. G. Sasse of this
city. County Attorney Peterson OF
Albert Lea appeared for the state.
Alleee Misconduct of Juror
The defendant is asking for a
new trial on several points, among
them being one which is submitted
in the form of affidavits, alleging
misconduct on the part of w. A.
Boyd of LIE Roy, who was a member
of the jury that tried Friend.
There are two affidavits, one by
William Kellner of 103 North
Franklin street. and P. F. Huntley
of Taopi.
Mr.. Kellner sets out in his affida-
Wit that the day the state rested its
case, he, Kellner, and Rice were
discussing the case on the steps of
the court house in the presence of
several persons, and that Boyd came
up and said that the defendant was
guilty, IN his Judgment, beyond a
doubt and that he should be convict
ed and punished. Rice said: You
had bettet wait until you hear our
side and you may change your
mind" Boyd replied: Probably !
might but l do not think So" Boyd
then argued with Rice.
The affidavit of Kellner's sets
forth that at the time of the talk
with Boyd neither of the atlantis
knew that Boyd was a member OF
the jury. They did not learn this
fact until a stranger told them. The
affidavit of Kellner closes with the
statement that Boyd discussed said
case with said Rice and became
quite angry because Rice did not
agree with him."
P. F. Huntley of Taopi says that
he heard the conversation and the
discussion as related in Kellners
affidavit.
1t is said that there will be other
affidavits filed by the defense, set
ting forth similar statements.
Then another thing that the de-
Tense wants time to go over is a
charge that the court made to the
jury when it reported that there the
chances were against an agreement.
The attorneys for the defense claim
it was what the court told the jury
that brought about the verdict Of
guilty. This charge was taken in
shorthand by the court reporter but
she failed to transcribe it before 60
ing on her vacation, it being an ov-
ersight on her part. Her notes are
to be sent to her in California and
she will send back a transcript.
There was question of the court
stenographer mintentionally putting
"cuss" word in the mouth of the
defendant Friend when he was ON
the witness stand in his own de-
tense. The transcript says that
Friend testified That in his CONVEX
sation with the girl he said: Hell,
/ might do that" Now the attor-
news for the defendant do not be-
live that he said that. They think
he testified: well, might do
that" The court stenographer is to
be asked to look over her notes and
see if she Inadvertently put an Ell"
where she should have put wv"