Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1929-12-22
Police Boards Right, to Com
pei Testimony Is Raised
in Asking Summons.
PROSECUTION ATTEMPTS
TO ESTABLISH Cu4TEMPT
Foreman of Mcpherson Grand Jury
Resents Attack on Him Made
by Shea.

Power OF police trial board to force
witness to testify will be given its
first real test tomorrow when steps are
taken to compel Merritt o. Chance,
foreman of the July grand jury, to
complete his testimony before the spe-
cial board sitting charges of bungling
the Mcpherson case investigation
brought against Police Inspector Will
liam S. Shelby and Lieut.. Edward J.
Kelly.
Chance, who testified Friday, was re-
called for cross-examination yesterday,
but flatly refused to give further testi-
mony on the ground that the trial
board had taken testimony from the
United States attorneys ofice which he
considered had no bearing on the case.
Assistant United States Attorney Wal.
ter Shea, who followed Chance on the
witness stand Friday, described him
while foreman Of the grand jury as "a
mental miSf1t, drunk with temporary
power"
Action Is without Precedent.
The action contemplated is without
precedent.
A police trial board, as now con-
stituted, has no judicial power and can
not itself force a witness to testify. It
functions primarily as q board Of In
quiry and its authority Is restricted to
disciplinary measures. The board. how
ever, has the power to issue summons
and cite matters to the Police Court.
In cases where the summons Is ignored.
the court is notified and it determines
the course Of action.
According to Robert E. Lynch, as
Sistant corporation counsel, who, with
Walter L. Fowler, another assistant
corporation counsel, is prosecuting the
Shelby-Kelly case, the procedure
planned is to invite the attention Of the
Police Court to Chances refusal to
complete his testimony before the ex-
traordinary trial board, and suggest
that a summons be issued for him to
appear before that court Failure to
answer a summons would result In the
issuance Of an attachment. Irrespective
Of the procedure reqhired to bring
Chance into court, 1t Is proposed by the
rected to appear before the trial board
to resume his testimony. Should he
decline TO testify then, Lynch said, the
court, in its discretion, could hold him
in contempt.
Maj. Layson e. Atkins, chairman Of
the trial board, regards Chances tes-
ttnony as Of vital importance, since lie
was foreman of the grand jury which
excoriated Shelby and Kelly, and de-
clared last night that every legal wea-
pon available would be resorted to
in an effort to compel him to reappear
for croSS-examination.
Heavrin Case Different.
Mr.. and Mrs. Roy Heavrin, two other
prosecution witnesses, also defied the
trial board and refused to testify when
brought before 1t on an attachment is
sued by Police Court, but Maj. Atkins
said their testimony was not considered
Of sufficient Importance to warrant fur
ther action The trial board chairman
explained that the procedure followed
by the board in forcing these two wit
nesses to appear is different from that
contemplated in the case of Chance.
Mr.. and Mrs. Heavrin, Maj. Atkins
pointed out, failed to respond to sum-
mons of the board and the attachment
was issued for their appearance. In
declining to testify they were not In
contempt Of court, he said, since they
were not directed to testify. In the case
Of Chance, however, 1t is proposed to
ask the court to specifically direct that
he complete his testimony.
Maj. Atkins, Lynch and Fowler went
to Police Court yesterday afternoon fol-
lowing adjournment of the trial board
to have Chance cited before the court
tomorrow morning, but were too late.
as the court was not in session. Chance
aad previously indicated that he planned
to go away for the Christmas holidays.
The trial board will convene at 10
o'clock tomorrow morning, solely for
CONTINUED on Page 2, Column a.