The Waterbury Democrat., 1935-02-15

udAScIOuo pEeCCucHL IO dlIOW pcO~ pie to come into Hunterdon coun- ty and perjure themselves at will"
 Hauck is not the only person
 who thinks some of the defense witnesses told dubious stories.
 Hauptmann himself thinks so. He said so in an interview yesterday | when he characterized the array of
 persons who appeared in his behalf
 as some good, some bad"
 Among those witnesses was an ex-convict, bootlegger, man
 who had been committed to insti-
 tutions for the insane five times,
 and speakeasy proprietor. Judge Spoke of Them Justice Thomas w. Trenchard, in
 his charge to the jury, took cogniz- | ance of the character of the de-
 fense witnesses.
 Ut appears from the record" he | said, that some of these witnesses
 have criminal records, and you should take that fact into consider ation when you pass judgment on their credibility. It also seeks that contradictions appeared in the tes- timony of some witnesses, and you should take that fact into consider SILioll III uCLIl CICulpLltys Hauck was undismayed by the fact that these witnesses have scat tered to their homes in several states and that it would require considerable time and money to
 bring them back to Hunterdon County courthouse.
 Perjury" he said, "is an extra ditable offense, and we can go out and get these people no matter where they gre now. It will be 8 valuable precedent to establish in
 important criminal cases, whether | in New Jersey or some other state.' At several stages of the trial the states attorneys. in press state 1 ments, said they were Investigating the records of various defense witt nesses to determine whether there was basis for perjury charges. Hauptmann's lawyers complain ed bitterly that this was intimida- tion-that they would be unable to get any witnesses into court if the threat of perjury proceedings was over them before they even got in- to the witness chair.
 First Move to Save Him
 Trenton, N. J., Feb 15-U.P)- Bruno Richard Hauptmann's coun- sel, in their first move to save him
 from the electric chair, will apply
 to the New Jersey chancellory for
 writ of error, which, if granted,
 would carry the case directly to the state supreme court.
 Usually these applications are | denied. The recourse then is to take the appeal to the court of errors | and appeals by filing a writ of
 error (called a writ of right be-
 cause it is arbitrarily with the sec-
 retary of state, together with the chancellory denial of the applica- | tion.
 This writ of error automatcal- | ly stays execution as a copy is
 served upon the principal keeper
 of the state prison. The court of
 errors and appeals meets next May
 21 and usually cases involving cap
 ital offenses are given preference.
 The appeal then might be heard on
 the opening or succeeding day of | the new term. Two types of appeal may be talk I en. Defense counsel may appeal on
 a strict bill of exceptions and the I record (the voluminous record of | the trial from the very beginning
 to the very end) would be com pressed by agreement of counsel to | the testimony and statements to
 which the defense specifically ob- 1 jects as unfair to Hauptmann. Rejecting this course, the appeal
 could be taken on the general ground that the evidence did not | justify the verdict. The entire re- cord then would have to be print | ed and submitted with photographs | of the chief exhibits.
 State Would Pay The record consumes 1,500,0 900
 words and approximately 600 ex- | hibits were introduced. The cost of printing this bulk would be con-
 siderable, and beyond Hauptmann's S means, his counsel said. However, if Hauptmann declares himself a pauper the state will have to bear the expense.
 The court of errors and appeals
 is composed of the chancellor, the
 nine justices of the supreme court,
 and six judges appointed to the | court specifically. Supreme Court Justice Thomas Trenchard would be barred from hearing the Haupt-
 mann appeal because he was pre- siding judge at his trial.
 II lHiS cOuTL upiclu lHc Jury D verdict, the next resort would be to the court of pardons, composed of the governor, the chancellor,
 and the six judges of the court of errors and appeals. Five, including the governor, could commute the
 sentence to life Imprisonment. The governor has the. power to reprieve
 but for a period not exceeding 90 days.
 These recourses all failing. the
 final hope would be in the federal courts and thence to the United States supreme court. But for these
 to be effective, a federal issue, such as deprivation of constitutional
 rights would have to be alleged and sustained.
 FULL POLICE STAFF