Evening Republican, Volume 15, Number 190, Rensselaer, Jasper County, 12 August 1911 — DUNLAP CLEARS CLIENT; J. WILLIS NOT GUILTY. [ARTICLE]

DUNLAP CLEARS CLIENT; J. WILLIS NOT GUILTY.

State Failed to Establish That He Was Exceeding Speed Limit and Defense Was Strong. '"* Not guilty. That was the verdict of Squire Bussell, who heard the case of the State of Indiana vs. James Willis, proprietor of the Willis garage, charged with having exceeded the speed limit while driving his automobile in Rensselaer some three weeks ago. The state had six witnesses who were sure that Mr. Willis was going at a speed exceeding 15 miles an hour, but they had no means of telling how fast he was going, no one had kept time, and John A. Dunlap, attorney for Mr. Willis, quite clearly stated the case to the court when he said that evidence of that kind proved nothing on which a conviction could be procured. - * ■ z Prosecutor Longwell handled the state’s side of the case and tried hard to make a conviction, but When the defense introduced Vermont Hawkins, of Chicago,* - a brother-in-law of the defendant, and an expert chauffeur, who was seated in the car with Mr. Willis at the time of the alleged violation, and he testified that he was watching the speedometer all the time, and at no time did they exceed 15 miles an hour while within the city limits, the state’s case was about the same as lost Attorney Dunlap stated that the evidence they had thus given was positive, while the state was merely guessing at the speed. He .showed that all the state’s witnesses were in front of the machine when they alleged that it was going fast and compared their position with that of people on a depot platform who imagine a train that is coming into a station is going at enormous speed, when it is almost at a standstill. He also brought out that Mr. Willis was taking relatives to the home of Leslie Alter, in Union township, who was reported very sick that day, following his frightful burns. Judge Bussell took the case under advisement Friday after hearing the evidence and the argument, and did not render his decision until this Saturday morning. He stated that the state had failed tb establish the speed of the auto, tfnd that if the defendant was charged with a serious crime, the evidence would not be sufficient to merit consideration. He said that while the purpose of the trip to see a sick relative was an extenuation for exceeding the speed limit, he did not think it necessary to consider that feature, because it was not established that the driver had gone faster than the law allows. \ 4 Both Mr. Willis and his attorney were much elated over their victory. No case in the justice’s court in recent years has created so much interest with the people.