◆ SpookStack

nN THs COLaT: They ere all dated august 30, ins FORSKaN; The date of issue. THs COUT; Yes, well maybe 1 can make that a ditties plainer, of Course, these ehecks never wers issued at all, you undsrstend that? THS FORsuWN:; 1 underatend, ae es. rs THE COURT; They nover wore issued at all by this fee bank, whoover had possession of these ‘checks filled ‘the wh ols - thing out, he filled the date out and he could put any date in thers he wanted to. | THS FORsMAN; Judge, 1 vould just ike te show | thess to you, prob: bly that would be plainer to you, | THE COURT: i think j know what it 1a, all right, (Foreman hands exhitits to court) | —- 7 THS COURT; ls that typewritten on it? saan, 1 Wont to make a little further stutement about that. how you understand, gontlenen, there is no ovidenca here that this respondent, ir, Craig, passed any of these checks excs;t thit oue check that Lr. avens saic he pas sed, you Unverstend thot. Thare is no evidenes hore that Mr. Craig had posssssion of any of thesa checks excest thet one. These cheeks wera offared in evidenes for the sole Eurposa of showing tho property, soo of the property that wa3 stolen from tha bank, These che cks werd ‘stolen ‘from the bank, that. is in evidenes hers; but that doeon't prove or doasa't show | that this rospondent stole them. It doesn't show that he deted and passed them, Bat it only is to show that property stolen from the benk, this is property of that bank, Now 1 am Going to reopen this Gusea for the purpose of letting-- 1 don't consider it very m::erial, but imagmuch as the question is askec, 1 think 1 was mist::ken when 1 ststed a while a¢9 ~- 159 - oS