The Birmingham age-herald., 1924-09-14
PRESS ON CAvERLY DECISION

attracted so much public attention, oc- cupied such dramatic situations nor aroused such definite public opinion as to the verdict as the trial of Leopold and Loeb on the charges of Kidnapping and murder As Justice Caverly re- marked, the revelations of the allenlsts were a remarkable contribution to more accurate knowledge of the origin ana nature of criminal impulses. But, as the court also held, the mere identification and classification of these impulses Tn this particular case is no reason for mlnl- rnizino the punishment or reducing the severity of the sentence. Justice Cav erly clearly set forth the idea that was in the back of many peoples minds, namely. that similar exhibits might have been made in scores of cases prevlously examined and passed on to punishment. Therefore, the testimony of the experts, inasmuch as it did not establish the legal insanity of the defendants, could not properly enter into the judgment
 It seems that public opinion has dls- approved of the sentence, not because life imprisonment is not regarded as practically equivalent to execution put because of the increasing facility Witn which lifers are paroled or pardoneo' Thus the St. Louis Post-Dlspatch oo- serves: "There is little difference De- tween life imprisonment and executlon' if the imprisonment IS really TOT h1e: The trouble is that where parents or criminals are wealthy, a sentence to life imprisonment is not the end or the case, but the beginning of series or efforts to release them from prison. Probably a death sentence would nave been better for all concerned, including the bows. But there is no ground for serious criticism. Judge Caverly, we do not doubt, acted on his conscience and judgment in deciding in favor of life imprisonment, which is regarded by many people and some state legislatures as the most severe sentence that ought to be imposed on criminals" Undouot- edlv one of the chief reasons for courts is to stand between the accused ana an emotional public sentiment. The gen eral popular opinion as to the Leopold Loeb case is emotional and of the mo- ment: while the general public oplnlon as to abstract justice is found m our codes.
 The reason for the widespread popular feeling against these two youths was not inspired so much by the crime as by tnelr demeanor, in the view of the Washing ton Star, which says: Had there peeh any sign of remorse on the part ot these lads, any token of repentance, any mai cation of a realizing sense of the enor- >nnitv of their crime, public feeling Wulo not have been as harshly condemnatofy as it has been and now remains. But their bearing has been one of hardheart- ed indifference to the moral consldera- tions. While they were on trlal they were flippant. They enjoyed as mat ter for their humor the learned dis courses of the psychologists hired Tn their defense as these expensive experts told of their moral and mental shortcom- ings and faults. Perhaps that was sign of abnormality. To the people or normal minds it seemed to be rather sign of utter degeneracy.
 While conceding the good faith ot Justice Caverly, the Atlanta Constltu- tion believes that 'if ever execution was justified, either as an atonement Tor crime or as a deterrent example, It was in this instance. If the public thought that a life sentence meant life servlce, in this or any similar instance, there would be lessening of the demand for capital punishment. But unfortunately exnerience has taught that life sentence Is one Gnlng anu llIe SSA NASS N4tN'-' Expressing disappointment that the sen tence was not death, the New Orleans Times-Picayune continues: "f the theory that criminals are insane gains acceptance and translation into law, how shall the law-abiding bear the resultant burden of housing and caring for the cut-throats and cut-purses whose crimes against society will then automatically absolve them from punishment and in sure them lifelong responsibility all their living expenses paid by the state?"
 The Memphis Commercial-Appeal takes the unusual view that, if these boys were abnormal as represented, they were not really accountable for their crime. With out in any way condoning the crime or granting virtue to the defendants, the Memphis paper believes that "these two are the outscome of a mechanical and material culture. Inherently they were not strong. They were color blind as to right and wrong. They ought to spend the rest of their lives shut away from society of sana and normal people" But