Evening star., 1952-06-29

agreed that Nichols would come
to Simkins' home later the same
evening. Nichols testified that
Simkins demanded that he tell
him what Nelson had revealed.
When Nichols refused to talk
about police affairs, Simkins
threatened him. saying that he
would call up Major Barrett
and have Nichols in Major Bar
rett's Office at 9:15 the next
morning.
This angered Nichols. He
telephoned 1t. Pittman, who
was on duty at the 18th pre-
cinct headquarters and de-
manded that Simkins and Pitt
man meet there when Pittman
came off duty, to thrash the
thing out. Nichols met Pittman
and the two waited together in
the street for nearly an hour.
Simkins finally drove by in his
car, but when he saw Pittman
and Nichols he drove rapidly
away.
The following morning at
9:15 am. as predicted by Sim
kins, Nichols was summoned to
the Office of Maj. Barrett. There
Maj. Barrett accused Nichols of
helping Nelson oppose Simkins,
ending with a threat to send
him to the grand jury and to
the penitentiary and offering
him Is minutes to resign from
the force. Nichols, who relates
that he faced it out with Bar
rett and threatened to engage
counsel and defend himself
fully, was never subjected to
any further disciplinary action.
After this interview 1t. (now
Maj.) Robert v. Murray and
Captain Strange were Dispatch
ed to see Nelson.
Police Visit Nelson.
Nelson testified as to the visit
from Strange and Murray, at
his apartment on a Sunday
morning, but recalled only
discussion about Nichols. 1t.
Murray himself elaborated, by
pointing out the extraordinary
fact that Capt. Strange-one
of the accused officers "going
to investigate himself'-was
personally ordered by Barrett
to the interview. It is clear
from the record that Nelson
at the time knew a great deal
about protection paid to the
police and Alcoholic Beverage
Control inspectors.
This crisis for the police de-
partment occurred early in
March, 1948. simultaneously an
even more extraordinary fiasco
was taking shape in the United
States attorneys Office. Although
the shooting occurred on Janu-
ary 8 and the assailant was
identified and arrested on the
same day, the matter was with
held from the grand jury for a
lapse of more than 3 months.
And on March 6, before any
testimony had been given.
Charles Nelson was arrested on
the same charges which had
been placed against Leake. The
cases were presented before the
same grand jury and the as
Sailant and his victim were both
indicted on April 10. BY this
device both Nelson and his wife
were silenced behind legal priv
ileges Of a defendant so that
neither could be compelled to
give evidence. At the same time
Nelson, who had no criminal
record, suddenly found him
self facing grave felony charge.
Nelson, who until then had been
still free to talk if he chose,
was discredited and put in fear
of a long prison sentence; all
the rights ordinarily vested in
the public, through its courts
and grand juries to compel the
disclosure of facts. were sum-
marily destroyed. Nelson had
also to be paid off, as a double
precaution to insure his silence,
and the record shows that he
was-by both Simkins and, just
prior to the trial, by Leake.
The matter ended dismally
in yet another departure from
all recognized principles of
forceful prosecution and law
enforcement. a consolidated trial
combining the prosecutions
against Nelson and Leake in
one case. This consolidation
was effected on motion of the
Government. The case came
to trial in September; of course,
neither defendant took the
stand; the evidence was meager
and confused: and the trial
court had no alternative but to
dismiss without submission to
the jury. Leake was exonerated
on exactly the same footing as
the man he shot down.
Other Gamblers
Roger SimkinS was by no