Evening star., 1941-06-25
'CIumor of the Press

Police Court Judge Hobart New
man, in upholding plea of former
jeopardy in a drunken driving case
against Attorney M. Edward Buckley,
asserted that he would not be
''sWayed by the clamor of the press
nor by threats, open or covert"
There is nothing in the judges
memorandum opinion to indicate the
nature of the threats, open or
covert" or by whom they were made
Presumably, however, the "clamor of
the press" to which Judge Newman
seems to take exception consists of
news stories and editorial comment
on the Buckley prosecution. All of
these articles have been based on the
record which has been made in this
case, and that record speaks for it
self.
Mr.. Buckley was arrested last July
and charged with driving while
drunk after his automobile had col
lided with two other cars on Thir-
teenth street. Arraigned in Police
Court, he pleaded not guilty, de-
manded a jury trial and was released
under $500 bond pending assignment
of the case to jury court for trial.
But the trial was never reached. In
October an assistant corporation
counsel without talking to any of
the civilian witnesses or to the ar
resting police officers, nolle pressed
the drunken driving charge. He did
this without investigating the evi-
dence, he said, after the defendant
and his attorney" had told him the
complainants did not wish to prose-
cute and that damages had been
paid. The compliments denied this,
stating they did not know the charge
had been dropped until they read
about it in the newspapers. The
arresting officers also said they knew
nothing of the nolle PROSE- until after
it had been entered.
On this set of facts, Mr.. Buckley
went into Judge NeWman'S court and
pleaded guilty to a substitute charge
of driving on the wrong side of the
street, as he had agreed to do when
the more serious charge was dropped.
Judge Newman imposed a fine of $25,
the maximum penalty for driving on
the wrong side of the street being a
fine of $500, or ten days in Jail, or
both.
Later, after the facts had been
brought to public attention through
the press, the corporation counsel
overruled the action of his subordi-
nate, transferred him from Police
Court and ordered that Mr.. Buckley
be prosecuted on the original charge
To that, the defendant entered
plea of former jeopardy, contending
that since his guilty plea to the minor
charge had been accepted he could
not be tried for drunken driving.
Another Police Court judge, George
D. Nelson, overruled this plea and
directed the defendant to stand trial.
Mr.. Buckley again pleaded not guilty
and demanded a jury trial. Later,
he withdrew this demand and elected
to stand trial by the court, decision
which neceSSitated the transfer of
the case to Judge Newman. In the
latter'S court Mr.. Buckley renewed
his plea of former jeopardy, and
Judge Newman, declining to be bound
by Judge Nelson's ruling, upheld the
plea, with the result that the de-
fendant cannot be tried on the
drunken driving charge unless the
Court of Appeals intervenes.
1t was the unearthing of these
facts and their presentation to the
public that constituted the "clamor
of the press" mentioned with seeming
disapproval by Judge Newman. A
most conservative comment is to re-
peat that the facts speak for them
selves.