The Waterbury Democrat., 1945-12-19

Continued from Page T. is upheld emphatically by the high court. which praises the Waterbury Police Department for the pro priety and skill" with which zu- kauskaS was examined in his prison cell.
 Detention Causal Although acknowledging the "il- legality of zukauskas detention without 8 signed warrant, the high court ruled that the illegality twas of & most technical character" and had no causal connection with the procurement of the confession. Reference is made repeatedly by Justice Newell Jennings, who wrote the opinion, to the McNabb and Anderson cases, in which it was ruled that statemnts mad by an accused while illegally detained were not admissible.
 Justice Jennings in connection with those two amous U. s. Supreme Court decisions states "the sole cir constance of illegal detention does not necessarily invalidate a confess sion unless the illegal character of the detention has some casual connection with the procurement of the confession" That was not SO in the ZukauSkas case, he rules.
 Found Body in Grave
 Mrs. Plungis disappeared Nov. l, 1944, and zukauskas was taken in- to custody the next day. On Nov. 4 he made his confession and led police to Middlebury woods where her bullet-ridden, naked body was found in a shallow grave.
 Carmody, who has the special as- sistance of Attorney w. W. Gager in the defense, will have 10 days in which to file motion for re- argument. If such motion is filed then the appeal proceedings will not be considered terminated until 30 days after the Hartford court rules on such motion.
 If no further motion is made be- fore the Hartford court, then the State will have 30 days from today in which to present Zukauskas in the local Superior Court for setting of a new date for execution of the death penalty. The task will go to the judge presiding here. 90 Days Limit Given Section 1464e of the 1899 Suppe- ment of the General Statutes makes the provision for the minimum period of 30 days between the final appeal ruling and the date of exe- cution.
 An appeal to the Pardons Board would set the date of execution farther in the future. Originally, zukauskas had been scheduled to die April 20 of this year.
 An appeal to the nations highest court would be based on rulings made in the McNabb and Ander- son cases, and on the constitution al prohibition against requiring an accused to give evidence against himself.
 In summary of evidence, the State Supreme Court states that zukauskas took two revolvers from his home on the night of the slay- ing Intending to shoot and Kill the deceased"
 Had Intent to Kill
 After the first shooting in front of the Kukauskas home, the police man, accompanied by his wife, drove to the vicinity of the Bradley Avenue dump with the intent and for the purpose of shooting and killing the deceased" the opinion states.
 Zukauskas had claimed that what ever his intentions were at the time of the first shooting he had no in- tention to kill Mrs. Plungis when he drove to Bradley avenue.
 In this connection the Hartford court states, Even if the original intention of the defendant had been abandoned after the first shooting, a conclusion that the second shoot ing was wilful, deliberate and pre- meditated could not be held er- roneous as a matter of law in view of the condition of the victim. suf- fering from the serious injuries in- fiicted on her in the first shooting, and the lack of sufficient provoca- tion."
 Regarding the length of time necessary to premeditate murder. the Supreme Court state, Time is not important as long as there is time to form an intent. There is also a difference, in the length of time reasonably required, between killing arising from unforeseen eircumsthapca- -$1 -S s6 =;ssesS