The Telegraph-courier. [volume] (Kenosha, Wis.) 1888-1946, 1923-03-29


said the witness, referring to Gertrude
Brick, "and she continued to stay
with the Beckmans that spring until
around Decoration Day, though could
MT exactly state what day>it was she
left"
Counsel for the defense asked the
witness if she bore any dislike towards
the Beclman family and she answered
emphatically, "No, sir"
Father Didn't Know Year.
John Brick, go First avenue, father
Of Gertrude, testified that Gertrude
was II years old on December %, but
when asked what year she was born in,
said that he did not know.
"Ycu have several children?" asked
Attorney stepheh son, cross-examining
for the defense.
"Six," was the reply.
"You had two who died?"
eyes"
"What Were the names of the two
who died ~ asked Stephenson.
This was objected to by Mr.. Barnett
and objection sustained o
"Was one of the two boy?"
Objected to and sustained.
At the close of the testimony Attor-
ney Stephenson for the defense moved
to dismiss.
"The defense now moves that defend
ant be discharged and the case dis
missed" he said, con the following
grounds: First, that there is not suffi :
cient credible evidence to warrant the
submission of the case to jury; Sec
ond, that the testimony is in suen con-
dition that jury at its best could
merely speculate as to the guilt or in
nocence of the defendant; third, that
the age of the complaining witness has
not been proved beyond reasonable
doubt; fourth, the fact that crime
has been committed has not been prov
en- beyond reasonable doubt as to GER
I,tain material allegations. 1t is our
position thst the testimony of the state
is contradictory, uncertain ard incred-
ible, and that upon every material fact
essential to binding over, witnesses are
incredible. There is the question of
l. age anu IAiS Qu6oLlOH VI uabCas
Judge Sums Up.
''You concede that the age of the
defendant is over Is years, don't you"
Judge Slater asked the defense counsel.
Nr. Stephenson took exception to
, what he termed the statement of the
judge upon the defendants age and
asked that his objection be entered on
the record.
Judge Slater then summed up the
case, after saying he wished to hear no
argument from the state, in the follow
ing way:
"The defendant is here charged with
having in the month of April, 1929,
being then and there over the age of
| 18, made an assault upon a girl under
the age of 10. The charge is the same
as the one defendant was arrested upon
and had preliminary examination on
February 10th. It was my duty to
discharge him then and it would be my
| duty to discharge him now, if the tes-
timony were in the same shape as it
was then.
! "The testimony at that time showed
that it would have been impossible for
the otfense to have taken place in the
month of April, as upon the girls
statement she left the Becl1man place
on March Goth and did not again see
the defendant until the month of Aug
ust. The testimony is not in the same
shape now. There is some testimony
about age. A certificate is brought in
here which is evidently mistake The
certificate says the girl was born De-
cember 20, 1905, and was baptised De-
cember 81, 1908. / have known of pas
tors who baptised child at birth but
never heard of an attempt to baptize a
child two years before it was born.
"There was evidently mistake as is
shown in the later certificate from the
same priest in Chicago which shows
that the date Of birth was December %,
| 1905, and the date of baptism Deem
Der 81, 1905. I don't think there is
any question ON the point Of age and
these certificates were not necessary.
"The court finds that an offense has
been proven and that there is probable
cause for believing the defendant gull
ty He will be bound over to the next
term of the circuit court, bonds TO be
$1,000 as before"