OCR Text |
Show "DJUIOf S CASE ' IS TAKEN UP IN SUPERIOR COURT 4- -T 4. ---- LOS ANGELES, Feb. 27. -r f Clarence S. Darrow, the Chi- cago attorney, Indicted for jury bribing; suffered both a loss and a gain In court proceed- Ings involving charges against f him today The loss -was the 4- expected plea of guilty which 4- Bert Franklin, the former Mc- -f f .Namara detective, entorod to a -r f- chargo of attempting lnfluenc- -f -f ing of a Juror in the trial of -f James B. McNamara, the dyna- 4- miter, now serving a life Bon- -f tenco In San Quentin penlten- 4- tlary Franklin's plea was ta- 4- 4- ken as proof that ho would be 4 the state's chief witness against 4- 4- Darrow. 4-4-4-4-4-4-4-4-4-4-4-4-4-4-4-4-4- Tho gain was a ruling by Presid ing Judge George H Hutton of the superior court that he district attorney attor-ney must furnish Darrow 'ith a "full transcript of tho evidence upon which the grand jury Indictmenta against him were based, before tho court would sot the trial of the accused attorney." at-torney." Tho Franklin caso came up first. Franklin pleaded guilty to having attempted at-tempted to Influence Robert F "Bain, the first Juror sworn, in "the McNa-uiara McNa-uiara case. The chargo of having actually ac-tually bribed Bain was dismissed and the "trial of Franklin on the accusation accusa-tion of having attempted to brlijo George N Lockwood, a prospective juror In tho same caBe, was postponed postpon-ed for 90 daj'B . Tho time for sentencing sen-tencing him on tho charce to which he pleaded guilty was set for Friday, and he was released on his own recognizance, re-cognizance, so far as that cose was concomed. It was reported that his only punishment pun-ishment would be a light tine. Hla ball in the Lockwood case was reduced from ?10,000 to $2,500. Victory For Darrow. Darrow's victory camo in iue v.i-ternoon v.i-ternoon Judge Hutton at that timo reversed his own former ruling that the district attorney need not provide-the provide-the indicted attorney with a full transcript tran-script of grand Jury testimony In reversing himself, the Judge said that since he made his former decision de-cision he had had time for more study of the matter and had come to the conclusion that changes and modifications modifi-cations in the statute since the supremo su-premo court ruling upon which ho had based his own ruling were such that he could dlsrogard the decision ot the higher tribunal. His last opinion nullified tho appeal from his former one that Darrow's attorneys had made to the district court of appeal Judge Hutton's reversal of himself was a surprise to the prosecutor's office of-fice and caused John D. Fredericks, district attorney, to assume personal charge of the Darrow cases. Fredericks Fred-ericks greeted Darrow in a friendly manner when he first entered court, which was an hour or so after Judge Hutton's ruling Fredericks shook hands with the indicted lawyer and ticy later had a confidential talk with their heads upon 'each other's shoulders. Offens to Reverse Himself Again. Judge Hutton, in response to questions ques-tions from Fredericks, offered to reverse re-verse himself again and let tho transcript tran-script question bo settled by the court of appeal Later he decided to hold his latest ruling In abeyance until tomorrow afternoon, by which time tho district attorney said he would have decided what course to take. Fredericks said ho had three possible pos-sible plans to pursue as the result of Judge Hutton's decision. One was to offer tho Darrow defenBe, in addition addi-tion to the present partial transcript In its possession, all the- notes taken by one of his deputies who was also a stonographer, and who was present at the grand Jury sessions wncn tho official reporter was absent The second sec-ond plan was to re-submit the entire case to the grand jury and the -third was to file Informations beforo a magistrate, mag-istrate, as is done in the majority ot criminal cases. |