The Telegraph-courier. [volume] (Kenosha, Wis.) 1888-1946, 1923-03-29
CHIAPPETTI TO
GET NEW TRIAL
Judge Sets Aside Verdict of
Guilty OF Assault to
Do Harm.
JURY NOT CRITICIZED
Iaquinta May Be Brought Back
to Kenosha Again
as a Witness.

| Frank Chiappetti, found guilty by
jury of assault with intent to do great
bodily harm upon Frank Iaquinta De-
cember 8, 1922, will be given new
trial under decision of the circuit
judge filed this morning. This will
bring re-opening of the case arising
out of feud which resulted In four
shooting affairs in Kenoshs. since Sep
TENDER, 1921.
| In setting aside the verdict of the
jury in the case, and granting the mo-
ton of the defense for a new trial,
Judge Belden made it clear that he
did not in any way criticize the jury
or question their integrity. The only
question for the jury to decide was
whether Frank Chiappetti in shooting
Iaquinta was or was not acting in
self-defense. The judge in his decision.
granting new trial stated that he is
not sure that the jury appreciated the
rules of elf-defense and the rights
of the defendant under those rules,
possibly for the reason that the court
did not sufficiently emphasize features
of that right.
| Iaquinta to be Brought Back.
If the state proceeds to prosecution
under new trial, which is necessary
under the present status of the case,
Frank Iaquinta will have to be
brought back from Waupun once
more in order to testify as com
planning witness for the state Ia
quinta left Kenosha apparently in
good spirits, satisfied with the ver-
dict of the jury which found Chapel
tt guilty in the same degree as had
another jury in his own case found
him, Iaquinta, guilty in January, for
assaulting Chiappetti.
The securing of verdict against
Chiappetti was due in part to the Wig
orous prosecution of Morris Barnett
representing the state as district at
torney, and assisted in the trial of
the case by Edward Ruetz.
Iaquinta's criminal record, howev-
er, as brought out on trial, opposed
to the better record of Chiappetti, an
American citizen, was doubtless found
an extenuating circumstance for Chi
appetti by the court.
Judge Belden holds that Chiappetti
had fair trial and does not express
any opinion upon the case, except to
| say that the conclusion announced by
the verdict does not satisfy his con-
science and judgment as the proper
conclusion beyond all reasonable
doubt.
The court ruling granting the mo-
tion of Attorney A. L. Drury and R.
V!oBaker to set aside the verdict reads
Il" part as follows:
a9t'The defendant is entitled to the
Judgment Of the court as we'll as to
the verdict of the jury as to wether
he has been proven guilty beyond all
reasonable doubt and to whether his
claim Of self-defense has been justi-
fably effaced. The shooting by the
defendant. is admitted. Perhaps the
intent with which it was done might
be conceded. At any rate, there would
be no denial that the defendant in
tended the consequences of his act.
The purpose Of the shooting, as the
defendant claims, was to defend him
self from what appeared to him to be
imminent danger. If the defendant
had at the time reaso enable ground to
apprehend design on the part of
Iaquinta to take his life or to do him
great bodily harm, and reasonable
cause, as conditions then appeared to
him, for believing there was imminent
danger Of such design being accom-
plished he was justified in acting up
on appearances and defending him
self, even to the extent Of taking a
life, although the danger be not real
but only apparent.
Il think the defendant had fair,
impartial trial and have no reason to
question the integrity of the jury in
considering the case and returning
this verdict. I do doubt, however,
whether the jury fully appreciated the
rule Of self-defense and the rights of
the defendant therein. That may
have been because the court did not
emphasize features of that right, al
though I think the instructions given
would stand the test. If were
satisfied that the proper conclu-
sion on the evidence had been
reached I would not disturb the YER
dict.
Il express no opinion concerning
the affair other than to say that the
entire evidence, considered in the
light Of the rules of law applicable
thereto, does not satisfy my judgment
and conscience that the conclusion
announced by this verdict is beyond
all reasonable doubt the proper con-
clusion. Therefore, the defendants
motion in arrest Of judgment is de-
MED and the motion for a new trial
granted. The new trial will be had