The Indianapolis times. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1922-1965, 1925-07-06
STEPHENSON TO
BE TRIED FIRST
Continued From Page y

sisting Prosecutor William II.
Remy, that "all this is just the
jOckeying and Juggling of the as
tute criminal lawyer to jeOpardize
the States case"
Defense Surprised
Inman said: eff we were misled,
as we have been, we want some time
to figure out what motions to file.
We are surprised at this reversal of
the courts decision. The State re-
fers to 'jockeying of the astute
criminal lawyer The State is the
one that has been guilty of jockey
ing for position"
Judge Hines then took up the de-
bate, and denied that he had re-
versed any decisions.
He said he felt he had been some
what imposed on by both State and
defense attorneys. He said: II
came here this morning ready for
the trial Of Earl Gentry. This is the
first time the State ever made q
motion to determine the order Of the
trial. 1t is the first time have had
q CldllSS " pass Oi H.
Out of the maze of teochnicalities
the judge finally decided that all
three of the defendants are asking
trial this term; that despite all
the motions and orations, the case
now has simmered down to the
motion Of the State to try Stephen
son first.
The judge sustained the position
Of the State that it has the right to
elect who should be tried first.
Gentry Forgotten
Gentrys trial was forgotten in
the rush of oratory. Gentry sat in
the courtroom. patiently awaiting
the outcome of the involved legal
arguments, and was taken back to
Jail at II a. M. although the de-
Tense attorneys demanded immediate
trial for him.
The defense objected to all the
rulings.
1t was expected that the defense
will present a motion that Gentry be
let to bail, in the near future.
In contrast to the bail hearing
several weeks ago, when the court
room was crowded. fewer than fifty
persons were present this morning.
Motion Filed
Motion to try Stephenson first fol-
lowed a formal statement read 10
the court by Prosecutor Remy.
The motion, which was signed by
Justin Roberts. Hamilton county
prosecutor. was based on three
grounds: ~ 1t would be prejudicial
to the States case to try either OF
the other defendants before Stephen
son. (2) 1t would materially handi-
cap the State in presenting its case,
to try Klinck or Gentry before
Stephenson. ~ Under the theory of
the State, Gentry and Klinck were
mere "hirelings" of Stephenson and
but did his bidding.
Arguments on this question fol-
lowed very closely along the lines OF
those of last week, the State insist
ing it had the right to fix the order
of the defendants, and the defense
claiming that it was a matter within
the discretion of the court. and that
under the records Gentry should be
tried today.
Holmes Answered
In answer to a question by Ira NJ.
Holmes Of the defense, as to wheth-
err the State had not said it was
ready to go to trial at any time on
any of the defendants. Remy said:
Eyes, we are ready to go to trial
now. We are ready to go to trial
now and will try them in one-two-
three order, but we insist on NAM
ing the order"
Remy's statement. in which he
said that all court presidents gave
the State the right to pick the order
in which defendants are to be tried,
contained strong language, to which
the defense took violent exception.
At the conclusion Of the state
ment. Inman was on his feet in
stantly, shouting at the top Of his
voice.
This certainly is the most
astounding proposition from a law.
yer who assumes to know the eli
mentary principles of law" he said.
He declared the Statement was solely
to influence public opinion through
the press.
Surrender to Mob
The State wants to try these men.
regardless of the evidence" he said.
This court must stand by its legal
ruling made by it, or surrender to
the mob"
At this point. Attorney Cox said:
"There are other attorneys here,
standing by Mr.. Remy. Why blame
it all on him?"
Inman retorted: But they do not
add much support to the prosecution.
Relying on the rule of this court,
we came here today to try Earl
Gentry. Are we to have no further
legal rights in this case? We make
a legal demand on behalf of Earl
Gentry, who has been in jail three
months and is now demanding i'm.
mediate trial, that If the State is not
ready to try him, that they nolle,
and discharge him."
Inman closed with a motion to
strike out Remy's statement as inn
material. irrelevant and absolutely
scandalous."
Remy's Argument
Remy argued that the defense is
trying to obtain, by "indirection and
legal jockeying, what the law does
not permit to be done directly"
eff this matter is in the discre-
ton of the court, then never before
has the court ridden over the prose
cutting attorney in selecting the or.
der of trial for defendants" he said.
IF the court does override him it