The Waterbury Democrat., 1945-01-31

Zukauskas sat at the counsel table next to Public Defende Edward T. Carmody, as he has been doing dur ing sessions since the trial started, and Mrs. Zukauskas sat in her regu- lar place, next to the prisoners pen. At times Zukauskas bit his lips, but gave no other sign of any emotional struggle.
 Before the two Brooklyn men took the stand, James Little, former police officer, was called by the state, and told of calling both Deli- niks and the Royal restaurant on Nov. in regard to posting bail for ZaukauSkas. He said the accused gave him their names and asked him to contact them. The witness stated, he returned after each tele- phone conversation with message, he nature of which was not dis closed, and then Zukauskas gave him two other names.
 The accused was in the cell block when the conversation on bail was conducted, and he had just been returned there from city court, the witness stated. Tn city court Zukaus- kas had been given continuance on A charge of breach of peace and a 41O.OOO bond had been set. Little, who was a member of the police de- partment at that time said he was substituting for the regular court officer and had accompanied zu- kauskas both to the courtroom ana back to the cell.
 Pals Many Years
 The mortician, whose parlors are located at r Congress avenue, said he knew ZaukauskaS for 25 years, ''more or less" He admitted on ques- tioning by Prosecuting Attorney Will liam B. Fitzgerald that zukauskas worked for him part-time about seven or eight years ago"
 Asked if in the course of his em" ployment it was necessary for Zu'' kauskas to deal with dead bodies the mortician nodded his head.
 On Nov. 1, he said Zukauskas was at the funeral home between 4 and 5 D. m., the witness stated he talked to him for about 10 minutes ant ZukauSkas seemed sober, he stated in answer to questions by the prose cutor.
 On cross ss-examination by Defense Counsel w. w. Gager. Deliniks stat- ed Zukauskas did not work steadily for him, but did hold a steady job elsewhere.
 "He wasn't drinking man, wal he?" the defense attorney question ed.
 No, not much, not to my know ledge" the mortician replied.
 He was a good, steady person was he not" he was asked.
 "yery good" the former employer and close friend replied.
 Asked of ZukauskaS was addicted to use of hard liquor, the witness answered in the negative.
 Alexsaitis said he has known Zu- kauSkas for IS years or more, and that he saw him about once or twice a week or less frequently at the Royal restaurant. He said he saw him at the establishment between 5 and 6 D. m. on November 1.
 The witness said it was his day oil from work and he was standing outside the bar when Zukauskas came in. He said he treated the &C., cused to a glass of beer and that altogether Zukauskas consumed about three or four beers.
 The prosecutor asked What was his condition was he drunk or sober" The witness stated, He didn't look to me as if he was drunk" He stated that to his know ledge Zukauskas drank only beer.
 Refuses Drink
 Alexsaitis testified that he offered Zukauskas another drink just be- fore the defendant left. He said he couldn't drink any more because he was going to be on duty that night. he said he would have new boss, v the witness declared.
 Coroner Stephen Homick, 36th witness for the state, was called to the stand shortly after Il a. m., and indications were his testimony would be lengthy.
 A legal battle over admissibility of certain evidence by the coroner arose and considerable amount of time was devoted to arguments on the issue.
 Homick said ZuKauSkas made cer- tatin statements to him at p. m. Nov. 3, and that transcript was taken. He said he told ZukauSkas there was evidence Mrs. Plungis was dead and that there might be criminal prosecution and that he might be one of the persons held responsible for her disappearance. He said he told the defendant any anskers given would be voluntary, and that anything he said might be held against him.
 Asks About Lawyer
 Zaukauskas then asked about a lawyer, Homick said. He told the coroner he could not afford a law yer, the witness said. When told the public defender would repre- sent any person who committed a crime Zukauskas replied T didn't commit no crime" Homick testified. All of the questions and answers were read from the transcript
 Attorney Gager at that point stated he wished to offer evidence as to admissibility of the statements. Judge McEvoy asked if he wished to produce a witness to give evil dence, and the lawyer replied The wished to give the sort of evidence that ordinarily would be given in absence of jury.
 The defense attorney stated the statements were taken when Zu- kaus was illegally detained. He said the police purported to arrest and hold him by virtue of proceed Ggs in city court that day
 He added the only thing in city court was the filing of an informa- tion. He said no warrant was issued for the arrest of the defendant al-