Honolulu Star Bulletin

GRAND JURY MAY HEAR EVIDENCE AGAINST POLICE
Suspended Officials Unable to Learn Cause of Action of the Sheriff
Members of the territorial grand jury may be summoned tomorrow to listen to the evidence against Captain of Detectives Arthur McDuffie and Deputy Kellett, which they will be asked to consider, with the view of bringing indictments against the two accused officers of the police department.

W. W. Thayer, attorney-general, made this statement today and qualified it by adding, that it is possible because of the illness of Arthur G. Smith, deputy attorney-general under whose directions the official side of the investigation into the affairs of the police department has been conducted, that a postponement may be asked.

Both Attorneys Thayer and Smith stated this morning that they are anxious to have the case presented to the grand jury at the earliest possible date. Smith was at his office today and, though not fully recovered from his illness, he said he felt much better, and it is thought probable that he will be able to present his case tomorrow.

The grand jury, at its last adjournment, was directed to be ready to convene at the order of the city and county attorney. Attorney-General Thayer was informed this morning by Arthur Brown, deputy city and county attorney, that the jury could be summoned to sit tomorrow.

Suspended Men Ready.

While the attorney-general's department is anxious to have the case disposed of, E. C. Peters, the attorney for McDuffie and Kellett is no less anxious for the charges to be reduced to a definite shape. He addressed two communications this morning, one to Chairman Wirtz of the civil service commission and one to Sheriff Jarrett.

In the former he asked that an appeal to the commission be allowed and

(Continued on page three)

GRAND JURY MAY HEAR EVIDENCE AGAINST POLICE

(Continued from page one)

hearing held at once in the McDuffie matter; in the one to Sheriff Jarrett he requested that, if he could not inform him of the specific charges against Kellett he could at least let him know whether the detective was suspended, discharged or lowered in rank.

Sheriff Jarrett informed the Star-Bulletin this morning that in both the case of McDuffie and Kellett a suspension pending the determination of the charges had been made. This fact becomes material in case of appeal to the commission, where the regulations set out that in case of discharge or reduction in rank, specification of the grounds for the action must be given by the suspending authority; which Jarrett nominally was in this case. Differing from this is the rule where an officer is suspended it is not then necessary for the sheriff to state the cause. The suspendee is given the right, however, to have the merits of the removing authority's action looked into by the commission, which is called an appeal.

That both Kellett and McDuffie will ask for such a hearing was determined this morning but it now seems likely that the commission will not take a hand until the attorney general's office gives its consent. Attorney General Thayer stated this morning that as the charges against McDuffie and Kellett were of a criminal nature they must properly be put before the grand jury, after which, if the commission should desire, it can give a hearing.

Information Kept Secret.

The civil service commission's function is purely disciplinary, while what we have against the detectives is criminal, pointed out Thayer this morning. We will therefore present our case to the grand jury and ask that indictments be returned. If they fail to consider the evidence sufficient, we can then turn over what we have to the civil service commission.

The attorney general's department did not wish to give out more information this morning. Both Thayer and Smith appeared confident that they have a strong case against the detectives, and that it is now in shape to present to the grand jury.

As the case is nearing its critical point, Sheriff Jarrett has begun to hold his tongue. When he was informed that a hearing before the commission would be asked for Wednesday evening, he opined that he was ready for it. Beyond this, he had nothing to say.

It was learned from the attorney general that Jarrett, when presented with the formal demand from Peters for Kellett asking a specification of the charges and answer to the question of whether the detective was suspended, reduced in rank or discharged that the removing authority had conferred with Thayer, and that the latter advised him not to reply to the letter, at least not for the time being.

Another Unanswered Letter.

Peters' letter to the sheriff, which so far has not been answered, he says, reads as follows:

Hon. Wm. P. Jarrett,
Sheriff, City and County of Honolulu.

Sir: On the 25th inst., on behalf of John Kellett, request was made of you for certain information which thus far has not materialized.

It occurs to us that the illness of the Hon. Arthur G. Smith, deputy attorney general, does not prevent you from informing Mr. Kellett of what you intended by your actions of the 24th inst., whether it were removal, suspension or discharge.

You yourself should know what you intended to do, and at least, in justice to Mr. Kellett, should inform him.

Respectfully yours,
E. C. PETERS.
Attorney for Mr. Kellett.

Notice of Appeal.

The following is the notice of appeal by which request is made for a hearing before the commission on the McDuffie charges:

Under the provisions of section 2, rules 7, of the Rules and Regulations of the Honolulu Civil Service Commission, Arthur McDuffie hereby gives notice of appeal, and does hereby appeal to said Honolulu Civil Service Commission from the decision of the sheriff of the City and County of Honolulu, of the 25th inst., suspending him from the position of chief of detectives.

Dated this 27th day of October, A. D., 1913.
ARTHUR McDUFFIE.
By E. C. PETERS,
His Attorney.