Jersey Journal/1881/The Four Burglars. A Searching Cross-Examination To Break Down a Defense of Alibi

From Wikisource
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Jacob Lindauer and Frederick Lindauer in the Jersey Journal Friday, June 03, 1881.png

County Courts. The Four Burglars. A Searching Cross-Examination To Break Down a Defense of Alibi. A Vacillating Witness. The further bearing of the case of the State against the alleged Bayonne burglars, was continued at 9:45 o'clock this morning. Mrs. Lindauer was on the stand, and in answer to a question of Mr. McGrath, she explained the great number of pawn tickets found in her house by saying that her husband was out of work a great deal, and it was necessary to raise money in that way. Cross-examined by Mr. McGill, who went over the pawn tickets. The witness gave, at his request, descriptions of the several articles represented by the tickets. Witness said that when she asked "Fritz" where he got the things which he sold and gave her, he replied that be had bought them at an auction sale. When asked where she is now living, witness replied, "170 Orchard street."
"Why did you say yesterday that it was 146?". "I made a mistake."
"How long have you lived there?" "Four months."
"When was you married?" "Fifteen months ago."
"What month?" "I can't remember."
"Was it winter or summer?" "I don't recollect."
Witness continued that she had been married before, five years ago, to a man named Adams, she could remember neither, the month or the season, but did remember that Adams died in the winter. In questioning the witness as to the names of her sisters, and their residences, Mr. McGill made the witness contradict herself in several particulars. Witness said that she pawned some of her things on January 10, Monday, for the purpose of paying rent, but that a friend came in and they went to the theater.
"Why didn't you pay the rent?" asked Mr. McGill. "My husband was arrested and I wanted the money for something else."
"But your husband was not arrested until several days later." "Then it was because I didn't have enough to pay with."
Mr. McGrath interrupted Mr. McGill, and said ho had been over the ground three times. The District Attorney said, "You are trying to establish an alibi, and I am getting at that. Please allow me to conduct the examination." Mr. McGrath appealed to the Court, and Judge Garrelson directed him not to interrupt the examination, as it was very important. Mr. McGill continued his adroit and searching questions. The witness said she had gone with her husband to the theater on the night of January 10 (the date of the allotted robbery) and on the following night, once to Miner's and the other to the London. She fixed it definitely that it was on the 10th she went to the London, but under the tire of questions she jumped from date to date, and from theater to theater, and then she thought it was either Friday or Saturday night that she went to the London, instead of Monday or Tuesday. She said that the Monday night on which she went to the theater, the weather was clear and pleasant.
"Dis anybody have an umbrella?" asked Mr. McGrath "Yes, sir, one of the gentlemen had one."
"Did he carry it over you?" "Yes, sir."
"Then it wasn't clear?" "I think it was raining."
"Wasn't it snowing?" "Yes it was snowing."
"Now, don't you remember that it was clear?" Witness (confused) — "I don't remember whether it was clear or stormy."
Where did your husband work?" "At 109 Bowery."
"Didn't you work there?" "No, sir."
"Who kept the saloon?" "I don't know."
"Didn't Fred Lubin keep it?" "Yes, sir."
"Didn't you work for him?" "Yes, sir."
"What doing?" "Waiting on the tables.
The case will probably run over to next week. Mrs. Lindauer's cross-examination closed at ten minutes of twelve, after she had been under fire for two hours and five minutes. The defense then called to the stand Jacob Lindauer, who testified: At the time of my arrest at 141 Mott street; I worked for my brother Fred, at West Hoboken.
"What sort of a place was it?" asked Mr. McGrath. "Well, some call it a hotel, and some call it a house of prostitution. I call it a house of prostitution."
The witness explained his movements on the night of January 10th; went to a theater on the Bowery. When asked why be used the name of Wilson when pawning things, the witness took the opportunity to give his brother Fred another cut, saying: "When I was with my brother, I was often sent, by him and his wife, to the pawn shop and they always told me to use that name. The pawnbroker got to know me and never asked for the names, but always wrote Wilson." The witness then went on and described his movements up to the night of the arrest: "after he bad gone to bed there was a knock at the door, and my brother's wife came in."
"What did she say?" "She said she thought my wife was alone, and she had a man downstairs with plenty of money and a gold watch, and she wanted to bring him up and rob him; I did not make any reply." Witness then spoke of the arrival of the officers and the arrest; Detective Bowe said they would search the house; there was a dollar on the mantelpiece, and when witness went for it, it was gone. "I then said," continued witness "I don't want any want any Jersey 'cops' here; I've lost a dollar already, and I don't know what else may be missing by the time the search is over"; Bowe said he did not take it, and said that Heins took it. Witness denied any knowledge of the things found in the house by the officers. I was not in Bayonne on the night of January 10th or the morning of the 11th, and all I know about the robbery spoken of is that I was brought before the court to plead.


This work is in the public domain in the United States because it was published before January 1, 1925. It may be copyrighted outside the U.S. (see Help:Public domain).