“I don’t care what the jury says,” said Attorney W.S. Britt here Friday night in his plea to Judge M.V. Barnhill to set aside a verdict of guilty against Dan L. Nye of Fairmont, charged with burning an automobile for insurance money about 4 years ago.
“It looks as if Hoyt McQueen is prosecuting this case instead of the State of North Carolina,” said Mr. J. Dickson McLean, also representing the defendant and who pleaded for nearly an hour to get Judge Barnhill to set the verdict aside. The two attorneys made pleas such as have not been heard here in a decade.
The jury returned the verdict condemning the defendant after spending nearly two hours in debate. Immediately after the decision was announced, Attorney Britt began his plea. This was Thursday night about 7 o’clock. Judge Barnhill stated that he could not hold court open any longer and that he would near their pleading Friday at 2 o’clock, but a jury trial was in the way at that time, and it was nearly dark Friday night when the last appeals were made.
Attacks Solicitor’s Speech
During Mr. Britt’s plea he stated that had he been in the court room and heard Solicitor T.A. McNeill make remarks to the jury that had been reported to him, he would have certainly called him down. He attacked the methods of the solicitor vigorously, stating that he had been told the solicitor had told the jury that “he was tired of prosecuting negroes, Indians and poor white men and seeing them convicted, and some white men of wealth, prominence and influence found not guilty.” There was a difference in opinion and interpretation as to the solicitor’s remarks during his speech.
Didn’t Believe Testimony
Messrs. Britt and McLean based their final argument on the ground that practically everybody who had heard the trial believed that Hoyt McQueen, prosecuting witness, had testified falsely. McQueen had testified that John McRae, the negro connected with the case and who was dismissed of the charge, told him that Nye burned the automobile in his presence. McQueen also testified that Nye was brought to this house by Mr. H.G. Stubbs of Fairmont early one morning, stating that he wanted Nye to spend the day there as insurance adjusters were in Fairmont adjusting the loss on another fire, and that he (Stubbs) did not want the insurance men to see Nye.
Denies Charges
Taking the stand for himself, Nye denied all the accusations and made an excellent witness. He testified that the fire was accidental, caused, he believed, from overheating transmission. He explained, and had corroborative evidence, that the insurance company paid him $635 for the loss of the car instead of the $1,000 he carried because the model of the car had been misrepresented in applying for the insurance. A garageman stated that he had told Mr. Nye it was a later model than it really was and that he thought it was, he said.
Ask Light Punishment
After the attorneys found that Judge Barnhill was not going to set the verdict aside, they began a renewed plea for light punishment. “There was ample evidence and the jury elected to convict. The case was tried as fairly as this court knew how,” said Judge Barnhill. Maintaining that their client was innocent, the lawyers continued to beg the Judge with their eloquent speech and well-directed pleas for a fine instead of felon stripes.
Confinement and Fine
The judge stated that he had to consider the defendant guilty, and that he must put him in confinement. Practically everyone thought sentence would include a term in the State prison, but the clerk was ordered to enter a judgement of 4 months confinement in the county jail, without work on the county roads, ad a $500 fine.
Notice of Appeal
Attorneys for the defendant were again on their feet and asked that the defendant be allowed to hire out to some reputable firm or person. This the judge overruled. Notice of appeal was given and bond in the sum of $2,500 was fixed for appearance and $75 for appeal bond.
Opinions Differ
The case attracted county-wide attention. There was evidence that the defendant had been suspected regarding incendiary fires. A large number of people from Fairmont and vicinity were in the court-room throughout the trial. After the verdict of guilty had been rendered, many of them came before Judge Barnhill, at the instance of counsel, and stated that they did not believe the defendant was guilty.
Another Burning Case
Another case, that of burning the Carolina hotel at Fairmont, of which Mr. J.A. McDonald of Maxton stands indicted, was expected to be tried at this term but was continued until the November term.
From the front page of The Robesonian, Lumberton, N.C., Monday, Oct. 5, 1925
newspapers.digitalnc.org/lccn/sn84026483/1925-10-05/ed-1/seq-1/
No comments:
Post a Comment