New Britain herald., 1930-10-29

It after he had finished.
 Continuing Attorney Brooks stated
 that he felt that his client should
 not be kept longer from the right to earn a living. The court should not forget that an accused has some right to expect bare justice at the hands of prosecutor" was his
 parting shot in opposition of the motion for continuance.
 Woods Calls Brooks Unfair
 "That line of argument shows the
 unfairness of my friend Mr. Brooks, Your Honor' was Prosecutor Woods first broadside in rebuttal of Mir. Brooks argument. When this gentleman first appeared in this court on October 16 as counsel for the defense he asked Your Honor for a months continuance. pleading pressure of business as the reason.' A denial by Attorney Brooks that a month was requested to allow him 1 to prepare his defense brought the
 remark from Prosecutor Woods that l he would use the word month ad- visedly and felt sure that he was right in it's use. "He not only asked 1 for such q length of time, he even 1 pleaded with Your Honor for it. 1 That's the speedy trial he wanted
 his client to have" the prosecutor said.
 Again Attorney Brooks broke in and told the court that failure on the part of the state 10 marshal it's | evidence should not be used to the
 disadvantage of an accused man
 and such a stroke of good fortune should be allowed him.
 1 Attorney Brooks argued that at | least he was entitled to an inkling of the sort of evidence the surprise witness was to offer. q feel, Your i Honor, that my method of proce-
 dure this morning has caused the prosecutor to realize that he must i prove that my client was not an ! agent of the Southern Pacific Rail- i way and because of this fact he 1 finds his ease weakened without this
 witness. l should not suffer, nor my
 il'IlJ 'T'tl tSF l nave SlEtll Hoti . prosecutor something to think ! about"
 To this Prosecutor Woods laugh i ingly replied that nothing that At
 torney Brooks had said or done had i caused him even the slightest i thought.
 Judge Morris D. SaXe remarked ! that while there was some merit in ! the statements of the defense coun- 'tcl he felt that the prosecutor
 should be allowed to prepare his
 case in any way he might see fit and ! he did not believe it would work too great hardship upon the accused to have the case continued until i Nov. and entered his ruling thus. l Questions Legality of Complaint
 No evidence was offered by the
 state in the case as Attorney Brooks asked the permission of the court
 to present certain motions before
 his client was put to plea. The per mission was granted.
 | Opening his remarks, by aSsaiing 1 the legality of the complaint as set ! forth by the state. Attorney Brooks moved that the court eXpunge such { part of the information that set
 forth that his client had promised certain inducements for fraudulent i ly obtaining money from Contaras.
 He quoted many basic principles of
 law as contained in the law texts Of . Wharton and RiShoD to nroyn ih o f only actual past events or actions
 were indictabie under the statute dealing with fraudulently obtaining
 of money. In addition to this he re-
 ferred the court to instances where
 this part of the statutes was strictly
 adhered to by supreme courts Of
 other states in parallel cases.