| Show r t W N v v- v vr r W 7 7 1 N J 1 PEARCE PEARCE LOSE SEPARATE TRIALS PLEA I COURT STARTS QUIZ will FOR JURY AS CASE OPENS Two vo Face Charge o of T Taking king Earnings of Women Trial of former Mayor E. E B. B Erwin Erwin Er- Er win and R. R O. O Pearce an attorney charged in a Salt Lake county grand jury indictment dated June 13 with with profiting j profiting by earnings of ot fallen women opened Thursday in Third district court The defendants defendants' first move mono after after after aft aft- er disposal of preliminaries s was to move mo for a separate trial for each defendant Judge Herbert M M. Schiller who will conduct the trial first In a series based on 20 indictments re returned returned returned re- re turned by the grand jury on the Salt Lake City police department scandal scandal scandal scan scan- dal and alleged state land board administration administration administration ad ad- ministration irregularities denied the motion Selection of ot eight jurors to hear the evidence and pass upon the guilt or innocence of ot the accused men under facts presented during the trial started at once It was expected expected ex ex- the examination of ot venire- venire men would be completed and the jury formed before the end of the day Twenty venty prospective jurors were In the first gr group up examined The indictment specifically accuses accuses ac accuses ac- ac Mr Erwin and Mr Pearce with vilh receiving money on June 1 1937 from women engaged in Since it was originally handed up b by the grand jur jury it has been supplemented by bills of particulars lars charging that Golden Holt a police officer collected the money from various arlous houses of ill fame and turned it over to the de de- de- de Burton W. W Musser attorney for Mr Erwin at the outset of ot the tho trial requested the court to direct the state to indorse on the complaints complaints com corn plaints the names of ot all witnesses the prosecution expects to use USI at atthe atthe atthe the trial Judge Schiller ordered state attorneys attorneys attorneys at at- to comply with the request adding I 1 do not think it necessary necessary necessary sary to delay the trial however until the list is furnished defense counsel It may be supplied duning during during dur dun ing the day Prospective jurors were excused from the courtroom as counsel prepared prepared prepared pre pre- pared to argue the motion for separate separate separate sep sep- arate trials Judge Schiller also at atthe atthe atthe the request of ot state tate attorneys excused excused ex ex- more than a a. dozen prosecution prosecution prosecution tion witnesses until later hater in the day It being explained their ence ence was not necessary while the motion was presented and venire- venire men were undergoing examination Judge Schiller mildly criticized defense counsel for not filing earlier the motion seeking separate separate separate sepa sepa- rate trials I wasn't advised until just now that hat a motion had been filed said the he judge It should have been filed a long time ago if it defendants contemplated such action The statute does not say so your honor replied Mr Musser Before arguments on the motion began Attorney H H. L. L representing representing representing rep rep- resenting Mr Pearce indicated that his client also joined in the request for separate trials Of Ot course I recognize the statute makes this a discretionary matter with the co court rt said Mr Musser as began presentation of ot the motion I believe I should hear something something something some some- thing of an affirmative nature as asto asto asto to why separate trials should be granted broke in Judge Schiller r. r Mr Musser to the true bill bilI or complaint wherein it Is 15 stated In effect that the defendants defendants defendants defend defend- ants are alleged to have ha received mone money knowing that it was as earned in prostitution and without giving ing any consideration One of ot these defendants defendant may have known this and the other may not have One of ot them may have given a consideration and one may not have Evidence which the court may hold is against one defendant may be ruled out as against the other said Mr Musser Defense counsel added that the state in opposing the motion failed to show separate trials would in inconvenience inconvenience inconvenience in- in convenience anyone We believe the lateness with which this motion was filed should be taken into consideration by the court said Brigham E. E Roberts deputy county attorney who with Parnell Black attorney for the state liquor control commission and as associate associate associate as- as prosecutor in the c case c at bar bat and Beverly C. C Clendennin special deputy attorney general appointed appointed appointed ap ap- ap- ap pointed as grand jury prosecutor will represent the state in the Er- Er win Pearce trial The question of prejudicing the states state's case Is I e beIle thc the main point here and not the matter of convenience con or inconvenience incon as Mr Musser contends continued Mr Roberts The state contends that in every instance evidence which Is ble against Mr Erwin will be e ad- ad against Mr Pearce Your contention then is that they are both principals 1 asked Judge Schiller Yes your honor replied Mr Roberts Judge Schiller then proceeded to summarize arguments of ot counsel The court holds that the proof requiring separate trials is The motion is denied ordered ordered ordered or or- dered the judge A bailiff was instructed to summon summon summon sum sum- mon prospective jurors back to the courtroom from adjoining corridors and examination of ot the group as to the general qualifications to servo on the jury started i 1 t t. t I |
