The Waterbury Democrat., 1939-07-22

and Donate Pietraroria, are included in 32 separate paragraphs. In addi- ton, specific and individual requests are made in behalf of each Of the five.
 quotes from the requests for charge are as follows: They will be considered by Judge Inglis, who will charge the jury before they begin their deliberations, about August 16.
 "These defendants are under no obligation to take the witness stanS. They are severally presumed to be innocent until they are proven gull ty beyond a reasonable doubt, there fore. If, in their respective opinions or that of their counsel, the state has failed to present evidence to sustain the burden of proving their guilt beyond a reasonable doubt, tbcy are well within their rights to rest upon the states case and need not take the witness stand"
 Judge Inglis is asked to point out that the defendants knew Of the ale leQed fraud, and of the alleged fraudulent manner of issuance of city checks, as claimed by the state
 "The jury cannot guess or sur mise that any one of these defend- ants entered into the alleged agree nlent to cheat and defraud the city Such @ conclusion must be based on evidence and if there is no evidence from which the jury can reach the conclusion beyond a reasonable doubt that anyone of the defend. ants knew of or entered into said alleged corrupt agreement, their verdict must be not guilty as to such a one."
 Judge Inglis is asked to state tha! the jury must not guess" tha! there was a conspiracy to defraud the city from 1880 to 1888. He IS asked to point out that every pay ment made to contractors was 8 matter of public record, and that there is no evidence to connect the accused represented by Cassidy with the lack of city records. ..
 Tn the specific request in behalf of Healey, the judge is asked to ad. wise the jury of the lack Of evidence that Healey personally received any money from the city of Waterbury as checks were payable to the H w. Conner Go. The state has pre- sented no evidence to prove the Con- ner co. did not furnish trucks k the city, the request states.
 Judge Inglis is asked to tell tne fury that there Is no reason why they could not surmise that DonaN Pietroroia, although he owned nt trucks personally, could have hires trucks from another and sublet then to the city.
 Tn defense of santalucia, thu fudge Is requested to tell the Jur! that the fact he did not list hi trucks or pay taxes on them doe not mean he doesn't own trucks with reference to evidence concern ins payments by the city to santa lucia for "carting stone from Meri den," the judge is asked to pom out that there is no proof that tn stone was not carted, or not use' by the city in building streets.
 Judge Inglis is asked to advise tn fury that Corporation Counse O'Connor had accounted for hi petty cash fund, and that the stat has failed to prove that he kept n records of the fund. The endorse ment of a member of the financ board would be in the favor ( OConnor, the petition states.
 In defense of Olsen, the judge requested to charge the jury that h knew nothing about the disappear ance of city records, and the fac that tellers' sheets of the Waterbur Trust Go. were missing, constitute