Show STAns ATE n COUNSEL I DOES NOT AGREE Divergence of Opinion About Admission of Walker and Lawrence to Bail 0 POINT FAVORS DEFENSE ASSOCIATE ATTORNEY WITH WITHDRAWS WITHDRAWS WITHDRAWS DRAWS FROM FROM COURT ROOM In the hearing on the motion to admit Fred C C Walker alker and Edward dward I Lawrence La the time alleged murderers of Dr Karl hurl S Beers to bail ball yesterday afternoon in the district court at Ogden O den District Attorney George Halverson stated that the state could not hope hopa to convict the two men of the charge of or murder in the de degree degree degree gree and by b so doing doln opened op a breach himself and Judge W V L Ma Maginnis Ia ginnis associate counsel for the prose prosecution prosecution cution that is likely mely to result in the lat withdrawal from the thc case When Lawyers Differ The two attorneys differed widely In their arguments for the prosecution Judge Mag contending that the men should not be admitted to ball bail and the district attorney practically recommend recommending ing that they be bail ball Mr Hal Halverson Halverson Halverson verson said that in his opinion there thre was not sufficient evidence to convict the themen themen themen men of murder in hI the first degree desree in spite of ot the fact that he had filed information Information mation against both of oC them charging that crime Withdraws From Court Room Judge Maginnis who had been Jean retain retained ed by Mrs Beers to assist in the prose prosecution prosecution cution of the case intimated strongly that the district attorney did not know tho thin law as applied to this case excused himself and withdrew from the court courtroom courtroom courtroom room It was rumored last evening that as the result of this difference between him and the district attorney Judge Ma Maginnis ginnis had decided to withdraw from the case Mr repeatedly repeated 1 called atten attention attention attention tion to the fact that the state would tot be b unable to prove the crime charged and said that if it could not do so there was no reason why the men should be de do deprived d of their liberty At the close of lIf the arguments yesterday the court took the case caso under advIsement Status of Case The present status of the B Beers ers murder case is a peculiar one Shortly after the arrest of ot the thc two men on he charge clarg of murder it was rumored about Ogden that the tho prisoners would woul l get off easily be chuse of the fact that County Attorney Harris and District Attorney Halverson as well as the Ogden police department t e in sympathy with the men Tin The Themen men were kept In the city jail all for a Ions bug buger Jon Joner er time than Is usual with such prison prisoners ers em before being removed to the county count jail The Th reason given for this was that thai the quarters at the city Jail were more mon comfortable than those of the county count jail In order to counteract this supposed prejudice In favor of the accused men on or orthe the part of the city and an county officials Mrs Beers employed Judge W V L Ma Maginnis ta ginnis to assist In the n This action was from the anything but acceptable to the official prosecutors prosecutors prosecutors tors Since Judge Maginnis has ha entered the case there has existed a sort of or arm armed armed armed ed neutrality between him and the tin county and district attorneys It Is said sala At the preliminary hearing the county count attorney declined to permit his taking part in the case He sat In the cout couri room however and listened closely closel to tc the thus evidence When hen the thc case reached the district court there was no legal way to prevent the entrance of associate counsel for the state and the district attorney reluctant reluctantly ly h acquiesced In the time formal entrance ol of Judge as a his assistant When the tho arguments were presented presente l yesterday esterday it was apparent that the two had not consulted together as to the time grounds on which they would dispute the contention of or the defense in its effort to secure bull ball for the prisoners Are Arc at Variance Shortly before noon today Attorney W WR Wit V VR R it Hutchinson made a formal application for the admission of Fred C Valker and Edward Lawrence to ball bail He II based hIs hie motion on the evidence and records of oC tile the case in the preliminary hearing before Judge Murphy Judge Maginnis objected to the motion unless it were put in the form of writing The court adjourned until 2 in order that this might be done At the reopening of ot court the motion was resubmitted Attorney Hutchinson argued briefly In support of it He said the evidence of the states own witnesses at the preliminary hearing had shown conclusively that It was a justifiable homicide that it was not a capital of offense tense and was therefore one in which ball bail should be granted He Hc called call d attention to the hardship of the confinement of the prisoners their standing in the com community and the extreme unlikelihood of their trying to evade justice He suggest suggested ed that In each ease case was not too small an amount of bail ball to insure tH Ui Ir lr appearance at the trial Respecting CoUrts CoOrts Powers In reply Judge Maginnis for tor the prosecution prosecution prosecution tion argued that the transcript of another court could not be used as a grounds gr lUnds for forthe forthe forthe the motion for the admission of the pris prisoners prisoners prisoners to bail ball He said that such a mo motion motion motion tion could only be made on the as filed by b the district attorney This Information he said charged murder In Inthe Inthe Inthe the first degree a offense This would leave heave nothing for tor the court to do but deny the motion Attorney Hutchinson took exception to the view ta taken taken taken ken by the associate counsel for tor the state tate and the lawyers cited authorities on eith either elther er side The district attorney took the position that his colleague c was wrong Tons and that the attorney for the defense was right The court held that the records of the lower court were admissible In form forming formIng forming ing the basis for an argument for a new trial Judge Maginnis aid said that the time crime crim was as the result of or a plot pot whereby Dr Beers Bers B ers was enticed to the place and brutally murdered He insisted that there had been no justification whatever for the killing When Judge Jude Maginnis had con concluded concluded eluded the district attorney arose and made a remarkable talk that was de decidedly decidedly favorable to the defense Quoting QuotIng QuotIng ing from the tho official record Favors the Defense Mr Ir Halverson If your our honor please I Ido Ido Ido do not know that I have anything to sub mb submit submIt mit on this case It seems to me the ques question Question question tion simply t Is Is there reasonable grounds to believe bell eye that the tha defendants can be convicted of mir in the first I degree If Ir there is reasonable ground round to bele It then bail ball should be bc denied But unless the proof Is evident or the presumption strong as laid down own by Judge field in the California why they are entitled to ball bail as a matter of right and the whole question strikes me meIs meIs meIs Is there thero reasonable ground to believe that thata a conviction can be secured for murder in inthe Inthe Inthe the first degree The Court Do you OU think this Mr Halverson I can say that I do donot d dOnot not believe that the conviction can be sus sustained for Cor murder in the first degree degre 1 I want to be perfectly candid If It Judge Jud Maginnis 1 thinks the verdict of murder In Inthe Inthe Inthe the first degree Is probable under that evidence then I 1 would say with him that I bail ball should be denied dented 1 I want to say frankly that I do not agree with my brother on the ground that the constitution constitution constitution makers intended to punish before proof of guilt I do not agree with my brother on that score I do not think that thatis thatIs is the law but the whole question as I 1 Isaid Isaid said Is Can a conviction in the first de degree degree gree be reasonably expected upon the ev evidence eVidence evidence that the state may produce and andI I shall submit that matter wholly to your our honor Unless there is a reasonable ex expectation expectation that the defendants can be con convicted convicted convicted of murder in the first degree then the defendants are otherwise ball bail should be denied I think the state should present the case as fairly as It Itcan Itcan itcan can present it because it is not hot the U duty of oC the state In any an case to ask for br more than the evidence and the thc law demands and that th t Is s all we desire in in n this or any an another Other cac ca Mr The authorities do not no support the th position taken by b the dis district district district attorney If U the court ourt please I have an Important engagement nt at 3 and andI andr I r would Uke Jo obe be excused at this time The co tt J Mr Ir Maginnis and b II immediately left the courtroom Mr Ir Hutchison closed for fur the defense with aL as arother other oIlier appeal for the thc liberty of oC the prison prisoners prisoners ers based on the remarks of the district attorney Judge Howell said that he would take tho the matter under advisement and announce his decision later laterI I |