New Britain herald., 1924-07-30
INSANITY EVIDENCE
 BARRED FROM TRIAL
leopuausd from First Fsssl

sAsR thr mEh heft ih Aalitothta Mhei
 The crime was committed,
 hi. Is eNsrrulsd," said Judge caysr
 s
 ''bui, Your Banar.n said the ststsi
 attorney 'if tKs court sentences thss,
 men te term in prison, satisfaetor,
 10 them and their attorneys, the stat.
 Is helpless, it esnhet appeal, l would
 like ,e read the Illinois law on ths
 subject"
 Mir Crave read from the statutes
 the enactment governing conduct oi
 murder trials in which insanity Is Of.
 fsrsd ss defense. He pointed ou, that the law provided that as soon as the question was raised "It shall be The duty Of the court" 10 empsnel q jury and let that body determine the | fact.
 Can language be more explicit 2" asked Mr. Grove.
 Have Se reached the point where a man can plead guilty to ayoid q trial by jury' Does the defense here desire a trial before one man when they have resistad a trial before twelve?"
 Prom the moment you hear eM- denee on insanity. thk becomes q mock trial"
 Judge Asks Authorities
 The judge asked for authorities and promptly rejected a reference to the case of Gene Geary. Chicago gunman. who was sent to the Chester hospital far th. erinnipal i.saaa .fta. l.. haa been sentenced to death. Judge Cayer- ly said this did not apply to the pres ent case because the Leopoid-Loeb proceedings had not reached tho stage of sentencing.
 Listen to me moment" said Judge Caverly. "If & defendant came into this court without counsel and pleaded guilty to . crime. the court would have the right to appoint alienists to inform him whether that defendant was competent to plead guilty. did in fact adopt that very course in a very recent case and it resulted in a sentence Of life imprisonment
 Tt is true that the counsel who might be appointed by the court to defend man would have no'right to waive that mans constitutional right and this holds true right now. have a right to know whether these boys were competent to plead guilty | through their counsel or on their own l volition.
 There are different degrees of in- sanity"
 Not in law" interrupted MT. Grove.
 "Oh yes there are" rejoined Judge the laws of Illinois recognize degrees of murder and so we must consider degrees of responsibility"
 But under the law a person either Is responsible or not responsible for his acts" insisted MT. Grove. "Mitiga- ton goes only to fact in a case.
 Here is cold blooded murder, without . defense in fact, and they try to escape the consequences by offer ing a plea of insanity"
 Plea of Insanity
 "Who said they are offering q plea of insanity?" said the judge. "I have a perfect right to so into tho state of defendants mind and learn what that had to do with the circumstances ,f the crime.
 T agree that this court cannot pass ,n . question of insanity, but unless that these men must be in- ( ane, at which point I must impanel ( . jury, can inquire into the mental ( of their acts" , we are not going into the insanity uestion at all' announced Walter V ,achrach for the defese. $ Mir. Grove, in arguing. asserted: s 1T insist when the court indicates e is with the defense the state has { right to argue. Has insanity justice j $ plea?" C The court answered Yes" but at s le same time Darrow and Bachrach tl efense counsel, joined in No"
 You folks have gone off on the a rong tangent" Judge Caverly ad- b ressed the state. They are not go- K g to introduce any testimony that s, ley are insane. The state is the only A ie saying anything about insanity. tt hey are not going to be permitted to Il 1t on an insanity defense. Go ahead Ith your authorities not as to in- cl nity, but as to mitigation because III state of mind. Go ahead as to the " inois supreme court" P One of the states attorneys at- In mpted to cite from Blackstone and Sc dge Caverly interrupted with From pl @ Illinois supreme court" and the pc unter was made: VI The Illinois supreme court Is In unded on Blackstone" co You cannot escape it." the stata Bi Id. ra Well, we'll try to-" replied Judge TO verly.
 If these is any question of mitiga- ST n because of insanity then it en operly becomes case for jury an ai," the state persisted. de Clarence s. Darro~, chief defense m' unset, interrupted with one of his iel ,l, infrequent remarks: sa, The statute provides the court may on en to anything on mitigation. The alt isature has given wide latitude WI ything as 10 mitigation because of wa ,dttion of mind is admissible" sr'
 "NforaI Mania" cal The state proceeded to cite authori- m on Moral mania" asserting that hei , evidence of partial or general mia is insanity Doctors have given anity many names, but in the law have only one and if there is H'' stion of sanity 1t is one peculiarly 6 jury" the state argued, and cited \ ther authorities. Jos