Evening star., 1924-09-10
Text of Caverly Verdict
BY the Associated Press.

By the Associated Press.
CHICAGO, September 10.-The fun
text of Judge John +. Caverly's de-
cision in the Franks case follows:
! TN view of the profound and un-
usual interest that this case has
aroused, not only in this community,
but i'll the entire country and even
beyond its boundaries, the court feels
i5t his duty to state the reasons which
have led him to the determination
hc has reached 1t is not an uncom-
mon thing that the pleas of guilty
arc entered in criminal cases, but al
most without exception in the past,
such pleas have been the result of d
virtual agreement between the de-
fcndant and the States attorney,
whereby in consideration of the plea,
the States attorney consents to rec
ommend to the court a sentence
deemed appropriate by him, and in
the absence of special reasons to the
contrary, it is the practice of the
court to follow such recommended
tions.
Finds Situation Different.
In the present case. the situation is
a different one. A plea of guilty has
been entered by the defense without
a previous understanding with the
prosecution and without any knowl-
edge whatever on its part. More
over, the plea of guilty did not in
this particular case, as it usually
does, render the task of the prosecu-
ton easier by substituting admission
of guilt for a possibly difficult and
uncertain chain of proof.
Here the State was in possession,
not only OF the essential, substantial
of n
fesSions on the part of the defend
ants. The plea of guilty, therefore.
does not make a special case in favor
of the defendants.
Since both of the caSeS-nameIy,
that of murder and that of kldnap-
ing for ranSom-were of a character
which invested the court with dis
.cretion as to the extent of the pun
1shment, it became his duty under
the statute to examine witnesses as
10 the aggravation and mitigation of
the offense. This duty has been fully
met By consent of counsel for the
State and for the defendants. the
testimony in the murder case has
been accepted as equally applicable
to the case OF kidnapping for ransom.
In addition, a prima facie case was
made out for the kidnapping case as
well
Testimony Is Complete.
The testimony introduced, both by
the prosecution and the defense, has
been as detailed and elaborate as
though the case had been tried before
a jury. 1t has been given the widest
publicity, and the public Is so fully
familiar with all its phases that 1t
would serve no useful purpose to re-
state or analyze the evidence
By pleading guilty, the defendants
have admitted legal responsibility for
their acts. The testimony has salts
fed the court that the Gaze is not
one in which it would have been
possible to set up successfully the
defense Of insanity as insanity Is
defined and understood by the estab-
lshed law of this state for the pur-
pose of the administration of Grim
inal justice.
The court, however, feels impelled
to dwell briefly on the mass of data
produced as to the physical, mental
and moral condition of the two de-
PENDANTS. They have been shown
in essential respects to be abnormal;
had they been normal they would not
have committed the crime. 1t is be-
yond the province Of this COURT as
it is beyond the capacity of human
science in its present state of de-
velopmentS, to predicate ultimate re-
sponsibility for human acts.
Dtscards Insanity Theory.
At the same time, the court is
willing to recognize that the care
full analysis made of the life history
OF the defendants and of their pres
ent mental, emotional and ethical
condition, has been of extreme in
terest and is a valuable contribu-
ton to criminolosy. And yet the
court feels strongly that similar
"a
cused of crime would probably re-
veal similar or different abnormal
tiles. The value of such tests seems
TO lie in their applicability to crime
and criminals in general Since they
concern the broad questions of
human responsibility and legal pun
ishment, and are in noWiSe peculiar
to these individual defendants, they
may be deserving of legislative, but
not Of judicial consideration. For
this reason the court is satisfied that
his judgment in the present case cam
not be affected thereby.
The testimony in this case reveals
a crime of singular atrocity. 1t is,
in a sense, ineXplicable; but it is not
thereby rendered less inhuman or re-
pulsive. 1t was deliberately planned
and prepared for during a consider
able period of time. 1t was executed
with every feature of callousness and
cruelty.
Boys Body Not Abused.
And here the court will say, not
for the purpose of extenuating guilt,
but merely with the object of dis
pelling misapprehensoion that ap-
pears to have found lodgment in the
public mind, that he is convinced by
conclusive evidence that there was
no abuse offered to the body of the