San Antonio light. [volume] (San Antonio, Tex.) 1911-1993, 1923-08-31

AF TER 7 RIAL
FORCQNTEMPT 7.
Paul Kilday Absolved Of
Charge Brought by
Grand Jury
ATTORNEYS In TIL 7
Defense Counsel Charge
District Attorney With
"Cold Feet"
ATTORNEYS in TILT

Paul Kilday, young San Antonio
attorney. was adjudged not guilty Of
contempt of the Ninety-fourth district
court grand jury following hearing
before Judge W. W. McCrory Thurs
day afternoon. Complaint had been
filed against him by ID. j. Woodward
foreman of the grand jury, when XII
day declined to disclose the name of a
person who had charged that prison
ers in the Bexar county Jail had been
inundated into making statements
before the inquisitorial body.
Judge McCrory, in lengthy opia'
ion, held that an attorney cannot be
forced to divulge information impaired
to him by client or any information
coming to him as a result of his rep
resenting a defendant. He also held
that the inquiry instituted by the
grand jury into charges alleged 70
have been made by Kilday in open
court that prisoners had been in
undated was not proper judicial
vestigation for which the grand jury
had been organized.
Gold Feet" Is Charged.
The investigation by Judge Nc
Crory grew out of charges made by
Kilday in open court in the trial of a
case last week that witnesses had
been intimidated into making state
ments. The grand jury subsequently
called Kilday before it and, according
to the complaint filed with the court.
Kilday admitted having such infOrma'
ton. but declined to disclose the name
of his informant. His refusal to dis
close this name. the grand jury held
was in contempt of the grand jury and
of the court.
The courtroom was filled with at
torneys when the investigation began.
The first tilt came when Charles Mat
thews, representing Kilday. charged
that the district attorney had gotten
cold feet" after drawing up the com
plant for the grand jury and 'has
sent his assistant TO try the case.
Assistant District Attorney Fl. g..
Williams resented this charge. assert
ing that Assistant District Attorney
W. L. Mahaffey was scheduled to
handle it but was out of town, hence
his appearance in the case. Mr.. Mat
thews cited voluminous authorities 10
uphold his contention that the grant
jury had no right to investigate the
charges and no right to demand that
Kildny answer its questions. Carl W.
johnson, also representing KildaS,
submitted to the court that had Kil-
day made charges that the grand jur7
had committed a crime" that that
body would have no authority to in
vestigate its own acts"
None of Their Business.
II would have told them that it was
none of their business had they ques
toned me similarly" johnson said.
Judge McCrory. in rendering his de
cision said that the court had thought
that it knew the law applicable to
the case all along and that he had no.
changed his mind, adding. however
that he had been patient in listening
to the evidence. The complaint of thu
grand jury first. Judge McCrory he'd
! did not allege crime. Even had it in
undated witnesses, which the evi
dence in the case showed was not tn,
case. it had committed no crime al
intimidation by such body is not 1
crime under the statutes.
IF counsel in the case had evidence
of intimidation or believed that in
limitation had been practiced." Judg
| McCrory said, 1T was his duty Il
present it to the court"
Can't Compel an Answer.
He explained that he had ruled tn,
oral confession in the case in question
out. on the ground that it was mad
MISSILE. Had it been written an,
it was shown that it was obtained IN
der duress. would have ruled it OIL
| likewise" Judge McCrory said. Ether
is no question in the courts mind n
to the duty Of the counsel. Our gov
eminent is based on the constitutional
rights of an open trial. Counsel wa
simply doing his duty. whether tn
facts alleged were established or not.
Judge McCrory further held. in viey
of the rules that counsel is not per
mitted to disclose information oh
tanned while representing client
that Kilday could have refused TO an
swer any question put TO him by tn
grand jury in this respect. Even ha
the grand jury been investigating
crime, which was not the case, tn
judge held. Kilday would have bee
justified in refusing to divulge sue
information.