OCR Text |
Show 1 DARROW TO (. BE RETRIED Jury, Standing 8 to 4 for Conviction of Lawyer, Law-yer, is Dismissed Los Angeles. March S. After delib- , erating since 8:30 o'clock vesterday 1 inorning, the jury thai tried Clar- ! t enoe S. Darrow on a charge of jury i ' bribing reported at In 13 o clock to- f. day that It could not decide whether I the formed counsel of the McNama- ra nromers was guiuy or innocent. Twelve ballots were taken and the C best that Darrow had at any time I was six jurors That was early in the I balloting, and in a short time two were I won over by those who desired a con-f con-f viction The jury never at any time stood i 11 for conviction and 1 for acquittal Foreman Pettingill. whose request fur i Insiructlon when the jury first re-I re-I ported shortly after 10 o'clock was construed to that effect, said he meant no such tiling Fight to four was the ' nearest the jury ever came to a decision, de-cision, he declared. Wanted Instructions f This morning the jury asked for 1 fur h. ! ni. 1 i. .n - Tl,. ;,-!!!:, nous sl asked for concerned points relative to the credibility of the testimony given P by an accomplice who, in the pres-l pres-l tnt case, according to, the contention f Of the prosecution was Kranklln, for-j for-j mcrly Dai row's confidential agent and a convicted bribe giver The outstanding juror also wanted more light on the legal principle of a reasonable doubt .ludgc Conley save I the jury a typewritten copy of the I instructions which he had already read to them. In these Instructions Judge Conley I informed ihc jury that the testimonj W of an accomplice could not be credit -) L ed uless it was supported by corrob-3 corrob-3 j . orative evidence. As to reasonable iV doubi. they must not convict even on corroborate e eidenco If they conscientiously con-scientiously believed there was reasonable rea-sonable doubt of Ruilt. 7 The vote on the last ballot accord ing to the announcement of the foreman fore-man stood 11 to 1. hut whether for acquittal or conuctlon he declined to say. The judge said, if there were no objections, ob-jections, be would issue further instructions in-structions and send the jury back for Further deliberation. This was done and the jury retired at 10 20. The jury reported at 11:36 o'clock that they were unable to agree and Jud?e Conley discharged them. The last ballot stood 8 to 4, but whether I for acquittal or conviction was not J stated. Darrow's counsel immediately announced an-nounced that he would ask for a retrial re-trial Mr Darrow asked that the time for petting a new trial be fixed a week from next Monday Deputy District Attorney Ford was reminded by the court that he had said durlnK his closinc argument that !, he would not try the case again "Did this mean thnt the Indictment against Darrow would be dismissed'' Ford replied that he referred only 1 to his own personal attitude and had j no authority to speak for District Attorney At-torney Fredericks ; Judge Conley then announced that, if the prosecution decided to dismiss the indictment It could do so between now and the time for the next calling of the cas". March 24. After further parley Judge Conley. on his own motion, fixed March 31 as a date for the new trial, which will be the third on charges almost Identical. Iden-tical. Darrow thanked the court and added: "I'll fight It out. I should have been acquitted on the evidence and 1 shall surely fare better the next time " The jury, it was stated, stood 8 for conviction and 4 for acquittal |