The Indianapolis times. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1922-1965, 1926-11-09
mrs. MEADE GAVE
BOXES TO JULIAN
Continued From Page y

Remy objected at once.
ut would be highly improper to
turn over grand Jury evidence TO
attorneys seeking to free ID. c.
Stephenson" the prosecutor con-
tended. II object TO showing this
matter TO Kiplinger and Holmes
or any one else"
Kiplinger retorted that he ap.
reared in the interest of Julian, and
that the witness was entitled to ad
vice in the matter. lie censored
Remy for his conduct of the grand
jury investigation and the heat of
again crept into the
1T would seem to me that our
client is. entitled to protection, when
Remy has appointed special prose
cutors in this investigation who pri'
represent persons i'm civil
actions involving evidence before the
grand jury. said Kiplinger. He ridi-
,uled Rem as an apostle of
Justice" mefora finally being sub
iued by the court.
Where did you learn that speech
the prosecutor in
quired sarcastically. What politi'
cian taught you that"
RebulIed by Judge
The pickering was terminated by
The judge. who termed such conduct
highly improper and ungentle'
manly"
81 am aware of the personal feel
ings of the attorneys in this matter,
the court declared. But this bust
ness must be conducted in an orderly
way. If the State objects to turn
ing over this evidence before the
Marion County grand jury l know
Of no Aaw that will permit me to oper
it 10 the eyes of the attorneys.
Il am sure that the reference &c
the deputy prosecutors is not fair &c
all of them at least
Holmes told the court that it was
not the desire of counsel to see the
evidence, but only questions which
the witness refused to answer. lie
declared that the witness was en-
titled to advice as he would be en-
titled to defense. if Sited for con
tempt In closing he declared that
he was willing that the court SHOULD
his client in the matter OF
his constitutional rights. He de
clared, however. that the witness
should be the judge as to whether
or not the question would lead &c
The judge disagreed with this
opinion and cited a Supreme Court
decision in which it is pointed cut
that the court is the judge in sdcl
cases. This opinion was written by
former Judge Fred c. Cause, who
was in the court as one of the
special assistant prosecutors.
Rules for Remy
- Citing how the witLe s attorneys
had been permitted to see the ques
tons on Monday. The judge termed
it improper and ruled that the
evidence be kept secret. From ther
on there were no more efforts made
by Julian's attorneys to block the
procedure. They remained silent ii
front Of the bar AS the judge ruled
on the various questions.
Before taking up the matter ques
ton by question Judge Wiltsie as
sured Julian that he would secure
justice in the court and that judg
ing from his testimony he Che wit
ness) did not appear to feel that ht
was "among friends Wiltsie at
tributed this attitude to the fac
that the State had required Julian tC
furnish bond for his appearance.
p The first question passed upon
was No. 34S. How long did you
have them the boxes iR your pos
session."
Pointing out that since Julian had
testified that he knew nothing of the
boxes contents he could not be in
eliminated by their disposal, Wiltsie
that the question be
No. $50 was the next question
ruled upon. 1t. was where did
you take the boxes Immediately
after you received them from Mrs.
Meade?" The judge ruled that if
the word Immediately" be stricken
out the witness must answer the
question.
"What is your best memory Of
the last time you saw them I'm
EvansviIle?" was question No. 359.
which the judge ordered to be
made more specific as to time and
for the witness TO answer.
Evansville was the city to which
Julian had taken the boxes sometime
after receiving them from Mrs
Meade, it was brought out by the
judge.
No. 365 involved the matter Of
in what place the boxes were dis
posed of, the judge declaring that
he could see no purpose to the
question, ruled that it need not be
answered. Remy pointed out that
the question could be explained,
but not in open court and then
stated that il waJ TO learn whether
he (Julian) had hid, destroyed or
disposed of them.
How Long Held?
How long did you have them ir
your custody" was No. 34S and the
judge ordered it answered.
No. 366 was. Are both boxes
there?" and the judge again ordered
it answered No. 1874 was the last
question upon which the judge ruled
Question 1874 was: "Were the
boxes there?"
The court ruled that this should
be answered, and at the close of
his decision said that all questions
which would tend to throw light
on the acquisition and disposal OF
the strong boxes should be an
swered by Julian.