Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1931-06-16
LETTER INTRODUCED
AS EVIDENCE AT
TRIAL, OF SHAPIRO
Witness Says Defendant
Sought Signature on Prom
Use of Price Reduction.
OVERTURES PRECEDED
GRAND JURY INQUIRY
Former Sales Manager andg Clerk
Testify to Large-Scale Opera
ton of Company.

Evidence tending to show that Jacob
b. Shapiro attempted to induce home
purchaser not to testify before grand
jury investigating his alleged fraudulent
real estate transactions was introduced
today in the District Supreme Court
trial of Shapiro, charged with using the
mails to defraud.
An unsigned letter, tagged exhibit 2
IN the testimony of Howard M. Carter,
who said he bought home at 400
Marietta place from Shapiro. was placed
in the records. Carter testified Shapiro
attempted to persuade him and Mrs.
Carter to sign the letter on the promise
that he would obtain substantial price
reduction on the house he had pur-
chased.
Turned Letter Over to Rover.
The witness said he carried the let
Ger TO an attorney. and upon the lat
ters advice he turned 1t over to United
= states Attorney Leo A. Rover. He as
serted that the overture was made to
him shortly before the grand jury start
ed its investigation last year in con-
nection with the alleged scheme of
Shapiro to induce purchasers OF real
estate to buy property encountered by
hidden trusts"
The contents of the letter, as read to
BIc jury ny ASS6IduJ OAlAbCu OboOCo
Attorney John w. FINELY, is as follows:
Mr.. Jacob B. Shapiro and
Shapiro Construction Co., Inc, 14l6
] street, Washington, D. C.
Dear Sir and Gentlemen:
I'VE wish to advise you that we
are satisfied that you did not, in any
way, intend to defraud us in the sale
of the premises 400 Marietta place .
us. and we further wish to say that
we have not been damaged in any way
nor have we sustained any loss in the
purchase Of this property from you.
The foreclosure by B. F. Saul Co.
on the property has really been bene-
fetal to us, for we have repurchased it
from them at lower price than I
had agreed to pay you for it.
With best wishes, We are, very truly
yours
Breaks Monotony Of Figures.
The injection of the letter broke a
INDIGENOUS spell of evidence dealing with
drab figures, contracts, deeds. trusts,
foreclosures and other real estate trans
actions which the Jury Of eight men
and four women have been listening to
for one week.
The prosecution also introduced
another letter received by Carter
through the mails from the defendant,
which tended to show his property was
encountered by only two trusts. The
witness said although he paid for a
certificate Of title at the time the house
transaction was closed he never re-
ceived it from the Shapiro Co., but
had been assured by letters and deeds
sent through the mails that his property
was only encountered by these two
trusts. However, months after he
occupied the house he was notified by
the Saul company that it held a trust
for $l,27l.99 on his property, the pay
mentS on which were overdue. This
alleged hidden trust became the second
trust and the original second trust be-
came the third Unable to make pay
ment. he said his property was fore
closed.
Sales Manager Testifies.
How the Shapiro Co. operated on
big scale here for several years was
testified to by Col. j. T. Schaeffer, for
lner sales manager, and Edwin Shelton,
former settlement clerk of the company.
The Government called Col. Schaeffer
as witness to ascertain whether or
not home purchasers were aware that
the So-called hidden trusts existed at
the time the transactions were closed.
He testified that in his opinion they
knew nothing about the trusts.
Shelton's testimony was similar to
c'he AOtMci odlco HldtdBcE >. nOWeVeI,
he testified that when he heard street
reports of the alleged hidden trusts he
called on the title company with which
his company did business and he said
officials Of this company confirmed the
reports. He said he asked Shapiro
about this and that the defendant
stated II am making arrangements to
pay the whole thing of. I don't want
money that am not entitled to, but
do want money have earned"
The defense admitted a ground trust
of 100000 on the properties sold, but
that the defendant in obtaining this
loan secured a provision that he could
release the title on any one of the "A
homes involved In this case whenever
he saw At.