The Indianapolis times. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1922-1965, 1935-11-30
CITY BROKERS
SENTENCED ON
FRAUD COUNTS
Terms Are Pronounced by
Federal Judge Robert
c. BaItzeII.
LONG ARGUMENT MADE
Two Heads of DefunCt Firm
May Appeal, Lawyers
Indicate.

'''NiON~NSs
Myron NJ. Hughel and Wal
ter P. Pfaff today were sem
fenced to Federal Prison for
their part in the million-dollar
collapse Of the security firm
Of Pfaff & Hughel, Inc.
Hughel was sentenced to five years
and fined $4,000 and Pfaf was sem
fenced to three years and fined
$4,000.
They were convicted by a Jury
Nov 20 on charges of using the
mails to defraud after a trial lasting
more than a week.
Sentence was pronounced by Fed
eral Judge Robert c. Baltzell after
he had denied motions for a new
trial and arrest of judgment.
Nolan May Answer
At 1855, w H. Parr, counsel for
Hughel, completed pleading his case.
District Attorney Val Nolan did
not reply to the arguments on the
arrest of judgment motion but an
swered the new trial arguments.
Mr.. Parr bitterly assailed state
ments made by Mr. Nolan during
the latter's summation Mr.. Parr
charged that Mr.. Nolan made ref
erences to another case which had
tendency to prejudice the jury
against his client.
Il hold it to be matter of grave
Importance, not to be passed over
| lightly-the fact that the District
Attorney went outside the record 10
bring in another case, that of a
woman who is serving time for en-
! bezzlement."
Quotes Higher Court
He quoted Mr.. Nolan as saying:
| 1T will be impossible for me to
explain her conviction and her Jail
sentence if these men are not found
guilty"
Judge Baltzell interrupted to quote
a higher court ruling to the effect
that in such cases unless objection
was raised at the time such remarks
were made an objection could not
be raised at a later date
He said he did not recall that at
the time Mr.. Nolan is alleged to
have made the remarks attributed
TO him by Mr.. Parr that any objec-
ton was made by the defense.
Many Rulings Cited
Mr.. Parr then argued further on
the defense contention that the gov
eminent had failed to prove intent
to defraud
He cited many rulings to show
that an ordinary business failure,
particularly during the depression,
| could not be construed as a oase
where criminal procedure could be
justified
Clair McTurnan, Hughels coun-
sci, made general attack on the
indictments in arguing the unsuc-
ceSsful motion for arrest of iudg-
ment. Mr.. Parr spoke briefly along
the same lines.
Argument Is Begun
After a brief recess, Mr.. Parr be-
gan argument on the new trial mo-
ton, but was interrupted by judge
Baltzell, who referred to newspaper
clippings that had been attached
to the new trial motion. Defense
contention had been that these ar
tlcles, taken from the three Indian
apolis newspapers, were "inflamma-
tory and prejudicial" to the defense
cause.
Judge Baltzell said the defense
failed to show that the jury had read
any of the articles complained of.
The judge then read from the rec
ord to show that at the end of each
trial day he had cautioned the jury
not to read anything about the case
and IN some instances had warned
them not to read any newspapers
at all"
Mr.. Parr, this avenue of approach
closed, then charged that the gov
eminent had failed in its attempt to
prove that there had been 'fntens
to defraud"
Fred Hines, NobleSville, followed
Mr.. Parr in the defense argument
for the new trial.
Lost Own Funds, Defense
The firm headed py the convict
men went into bankruptcy early /
April Immediately after Federal in
vestigation Of their operations
began.
Witnesses, ranging from laborers
TO millionaires, testified against
them.
Defense of the duo was based on
the fact that there was no intent
in any defrauding and that they at
tempted to present the best results
to customers. They claimed they
had put up their own funds in an
effort 80 save the firm.
Pfaff lives at 2601 N. Pennsyl-
vania-st and Hughel at 5348 dinner
av.
Collapse of the firm had been re-