Evening star., 1950-10-12

the first hearing on a motion fol-
a new trial.
Mr.. King told the caller he
would meet him under any condi-
tions the man would name ano
repeatedly promised immunity
But 1t was not until after Mr.
Williams had been granted new
trial and the daughter publicly
accused of writing the letters that
the man came to Mr.. Kings home
A conference was arranged, at
which time the two girls looked
at the man, but still maintained
Mr.. Williams was the person they
saw.
The truth serum and lie detec-
tor tests followed. Mr.. Williams
also took the tests. IL
An unnamed psychiatrist who
administered the sodium amytal
test told Mr.. King, Il am con-
vinced that he (the unidentified
mani wrote the anonymous let
tiers mentioned in the newspapers
regarding the case" The psy-
chiatrist also said the man re-
ported. under influence of the
drug, that he did not know Mr..
Williams and that there was
absolutely no collusion involved.
viii Take Treatments.
HE (the unidentified mani
admits previous episodes of ex-
hibitionism and wants to be cured
of this aff1iction," the psychiatrist
reported.
He seems quite sincere and J
believe he can be helped to the
extent that he will not get into
any further difficulty with the
law" Under an agreement
reached between Mr.. King ane
the man, he will take regular
treatments from a psychiatris1
and the psychiatrist will report te
Mr.. King. ....4
The same psychiatrist reported
that he was of the opinion Mr.
Williams was not a psychoneu-
rotic. nor an exhibitionist, ano
that he was not guilty of the Of
fense for which he was found
guilty.
l.. H. Harrelson of Deception
Tests Associates concluded after
the lie detector test that Mr.. Will
liams did not commit the offenses
and that there was no collusion in
volved in the letter writing. How
ever. Mr.. Harrelson also reported
he did not think the unidentified
man had committed the act.
Protested Innocence Vigorously.
Mr.. Williams was arrested as he
was driving home from work late
in the afternoon of April 10. He
was stopped by a passing traffic
policeman who had been hailed by
the two girls.
He thought he had been stopped
for speeding until taken to the
Tenth precinct, when he was told
he was to be charged with in
decent exposure. He protested his
innocence vigorously, and insisted
he was the victim of mistaken
identity. He called Mr.. Rogers, a
fellow church member, a member
of the law firm of Hogan and
Harrison. Although the firm does
not normally handle criminal
cases, it agreed to defend Mr.. Will
liams because of his friendship
with Mr.. Rogers.
Throughout the four-day trial
before Judge Fennell, and at sew
eral later hearings on the new
trial motion, defense attorneys
protested Mr.. Williams was the
victim of mistaken identity. They
said he could not have left his
place of business on Maine avenue
S.W. and arrived at the spot of
the alleged offense in time to have
committed 1t.
Defense attorneys asked Judge
Fennell to exclude every one from
the courtroom. in an effort to
shield their client from any pub
licity. However, the case became
front page news when three re-
porters walked into the closed
courtroom and insisted they had a
right to be present. Judge Fen
nell, after an overnight delibera-
ton, ruled that newSmen have an
inherent right" to attend all
criminal trials.
Many friends of Mr.. Williams
rallied to his defense at the trial.