view raw text
DELAY IN BRIGHTON BEACH CASES Lawyer Stanchfield Demurs to the Indictments and Postponement Until August 11 Taken New York August 8 The case against tho Brighton Beach officials and John Cavanagh under the new antibetting law still hangs lire Argument lireArgument on the motion scheduled to be made by John K Stanchfield before Judge Dike in the County Court for leave to inspect the minutes of the grand jury to ascertain how the indictments against the Brighton Beach Racing Association William J Kngeman John G Cavanagh and Christopher J Fitzgerald were found was postponed until Aug ¬ ust 11 11Lawyer Lawyer Stanchfield has filed demurrers to the in ¬ dictments which contained some interesting points on Stanchfields version of the standing of the in ¬ dictments dictmentsFollowing Following is Lawyer Stanchfields demurrer to the indictments 1 That the indictment does not conform sub ¬ stantially to requirements of section 275 of the criminal code in that it does not contain a plain and concise statement of the acts constituting the alleged crime without necessary repetition 2 That facts set forth in said indictment do not constitute a crimes 3 That more than one crime if any is charged therein within the meaning of section 278 4 That more than one crime If any is charged therein within the meaning of section 279 5 That the Indictment Is bad for duplicity in that it sets forth separate and different offenses if any anyG G That the said indictment charges or attempts to charge that the defendants were owners of cer ¬ tain advance information and sheets upon which such advance information was written which Infor ¬ mation and sheets were to be used for gambling purposes and that the defendants did so use such sheets Tor such purposes That substantially the same facts are charged by the same grand jury under another Indictment to constitute the crime of conspiracy and to constitute a misdemeanor and that the present indictment Is bad for duplicity 7 That said Indictment while stating the crime charged as that of being common gamblers presents Continued on second page DELAY IN BRIGHTON BEACH CASES Continued from first page a statement of facts which in effect charge violation of section 351 of the uenai code and therefore Indictment duplicityS is bad for duplicity S That indictment charges in substance that the defendants did procure and permit a certain sheet of paper designated as advance information to be used In making bets and wagers in violation of sec ¬ tion 351 eual code but that the method of making bets and wagers designated therein was not a viola ¬ tion of such section prior to the enactment of chap ¬ ters 50C and 507 of the laws of 100S and that sue laws are unconstitutional and void That such laws were enacted only through participation of the mem ¬ ber or member of the legislature who claimed to b entitled to nct by virtue of chapter 727 of laws of 1007 and that such law was of itself unconstitu ¬ tional and void
