Evening star., 1950-03-06
GIores-And GIoring Questions


temptuous manner. Inspector William J. Cum
nino11an, states that at a time subsequent to
December II, Captain Richitt boaSted to him
that he had glared at me auhen discussed the
matter OF the uniform 1Oth him.-From Super
intendent of Police Barrett's charges of misbe-
havior on the part of Captain Anthony Richitt
The above account of insubordinate glares
directed at the Superintendent of Police by
Captain Richitt is only one side of the story.
Captain Richitt has not been given opportunity
to answer it, He might plead that he glared in
self-defense. Major Barrett can also glare. All
of which is interesting, but relatively unin-
portant.
The most glaring things that came out of
Fridays and Saturdays hearings on the blow-up
in the Police Department are the questions that
remain unanswered
One relates to Captain Richitt's future status
in the Police Department. He has been trans
ferred from No. 3 to No. 8 Precinct. Ordinarily,
such transfers are made at the discretion OF the
Superintendent of Police. They may or may not
be disciplinary. They need not be based on
formal charges But such charges have been
made, and published. Captain Richitt is plainly
entitled, in the circumstances, to formal oppor-
tunity to answer them Commissioner Young
would be we'll advised to set up special tribunal
to examine these charges. If they are sustained,
the question is whether the punishment of trans
that opens up another question as to why they
were made and what may lie behind them. 1t
is not clear now how Captain Richitt and Major
Barrett can both continue to operate in their
present jobs in the same Police Department.
The most glaring question of all is who was
lying before the Davis subcommittee, and why?
Somebody lying
When did Major Barrett first notify Captain
Beverly C. Beach and Captain Richtt that the
Davis subcommittee was interested in gambling
enforcement in No. and No. 3 Precincts? Was
1t on January 3d. as Captain Richitt and Private
Ernest Reid testified, and as the date of Captain
Beach's report indicates, was it on February /,
Major Barrett testified?
When did Major Barrett first learn of the
subcommittee interest in the subject? Was 1t
on February l. as he says it was, or was it some
time before February 1? Did he learn about it
first from Committee Counsel Fischbach, as he
says he did on February l, or from Special
Assistant Corporation Counsel Daniel B. Maher,
as Captain Richitt says he said on January 81?
What was the motive behind Emmitt
Warnings conversations with Captain Beach,
Captain Richitt and Inspector George r.
Wallrodt? Why would this man. with his reputa-
tion as gambler, seek out at least two of these
high police officials to impart or to receive in
formation about the investigation of gambling by
truth when he denied on the stand Gas did
Major Batrett) that Major Barrett had COM
municated with him as to the subcommittees
investigation? Or did Captain Richitt correctly
quote him as referring to conversations with "the
boss" Major Barrett? Is Warnings version OF
these conversations correct or is the version
given by the police officials correct?
Somebody, certainly, lying-and lying
for purpose. The testimony was under oath.
1t was taken down. A representative of the
United States Attorneys office was present. 1t
is assumed that the record will be closely studied
there with the idea of finding out whether
provable perjury was committed-and by whom.
The Davis subcommittee did not make
thorough attempt to get answers to all the
questions that were raised. The subcommittee
had not intended to go publicly into the Warning
affair, of which it had learned from Captain
Richitt on February q But after Captain Richitt's
press conference Thursday night, the committee
decided and wisely, to bring. the matter out into
the open under oath. The record of testimony
supports Chairman Davis request for additional
appropriations for continuing it's investigation
of Washington crime. That request should be
granted.
But in the meantime, Commissioner Young
may find it difficult to allow the charges against
Captain Richitt to remain unanswered, along
with Captain Richitt's own assertions. The
method chosen to dispose of the Conroy Murphy
charges in the Fire Department-by appointment
Of a special tribunal-offers a precedent for
getting at the root of the trouble between Captain
Richitt and Major Barrett The root appears to
60 deep.
- -