New Britain herald., 1927-08-04

thoroughly honest men and that they
were reluctant to find those men
guilty but were forced to do so BY
the evidence. I can see no warrant
for the assertion that the jury trial
was unfair.
THE charge of the judge was sat
isfactory to the counsel for the ac-
cused and no exceptions were taken
to it. The supreme judicial court
for the commonwealth has consider
ed such of the more than $50 ex-
ceptions taken during the course Of
the trial as counsel for the accused
chose to argue and over rule them
ALL thus establishing that the pro-
ceedings were without legal flaw.
Il have read the record and ex-
amined many witnesses and the jury
men to see from layman's stand
point whether the trial was fairly
conducted. I was convinced that 1t
was.
Alleged New Evidence
1.-The next question is whether
newly discovered evidence was Of
sufficient merit to warrant a new
trial
After the verdict against those
men their counsel filed and argued
before Judge Thayer seven distinct
supplementary motions for a new
trial, six Of them on the ground Of
newly discovered evidence, all Of
which were denied. have examined
all of these motions and read the az
fldavits in support Of them to see
whether they presented any valid
reason for granting the accused men
a new trial. l am convinced that
they do not and am further con-
WINGED that the presiding judge gave
no evidence of bias in denying them
all and refusing a new trial.
THE supreme judicial court for
the commonwealth. which had be-
fore it appeals on four of the mo-
tons and had the opportunity to
read the same affidavits which were
submitted to Judge Thayer. declined
to sustain the contentious of counsel
for the accused. In my own investi-
cations on the question of guilt,
have given these motions and their
supporting affidavits and the wit
nesses every consideration.
Madeiros Confession
II give no weight to the Madeiros
confession. 1t Is popularity supposed
he confessed to committing this
crime. In his testimony to me he
could not recall the details or de-
scribe the neighborhood. He further
more stated that the government had
double crossed him and he proposes
to double cross the government. He
feels that the district attorneys Of
flee has treated him unfairly be-
cause his two confederates who
were associated with him in the
commission Of the murder for which
he was convicted were given life
sentences, whereas he was sentenced
to death. He confessed the crime for
which he was convicted. I am not
impressed with his claim to knowl-
edge of the South Braintree
murders.
Il has been a difficult task to
look back six years through other
peoples eyes. Many of the witnesses
told me their story in way felt
was more matter Of repe tition
than the product of their memory.
Some witnesses replied that during
the six years they had forgotten:
they could not remember; that it
was a dsagreeable experience and
that they had tried TO forget it. I
could not hope to put myself in the
position Of juryman and have the
advantage of seeing the witness on
the stand and listening to the evil
dence and judging the spoken word.
1.-THE motions for a new trial,
however, were all made from aft
davits and therefore they could be
reviewed under the same circum-
stances as prevailed when the Judge
heard them.
The Guilt Question
THE next question, and most
vital question of all, is that of the
guilt or innocence of the accused. In
this connection 1 reviewed the Bridge
water attempted holdup for which
Vanzetti had previously been tried
before another jury and found
guilty. In this trial Vanzetti did not
take the witness stand in his own
defense. He waived the privilege of
telling his own story to the jury, and
did not subject himself to cross ex-
animation.