191 S.W.2d 979 (Mo.App. 1945), 26809, Motley v. Dugan
|Citation:||191 S.W.2d 979|
|Party Name:||MOTLEY v. DUGAN et al|
|Attorney:||Taylor Smith, of Farmington, and R. E. Kleinschmidt, of Hillsboro, for appellants. Samuel Richeson, of Potosi, for respondent.|
|Judge Panel:||HUGHES, P. J., and McCULLEN, J., concur.|
|Case Date:||November 20, 1945|
|Court:||Court of Appeals of Missouri|
'Not to be reported in State Reports.'
This is an appeal from a judgment for plaintiff in a suit for malicious prosecution.
On January 23, 1943, a little girl about 12 years old took a pocketbook belonging to Mrs. Ivan Nixon, at a dance in DeSoto, and a short time thereafter gave a portion of the money to Francis Streible, Jr., a boy about 12 years of age. Shortly thereafter Francis Streible, Sr., father of the boy, was arrested, and confessed to having a part of the stolen money in his possession. The arrest was made at the home of Frank Medley, Streible, Sr.'s stepfather, by plaintiff, who at the time was chief of police of DeSoto and deputy sheriff for Valle Township, in Jefferson County, and who had been working on the case with state patrolman Crockett and the night marshal, Mr. Hulsey. At the time of the arrest Streible had on his person two ten dollar bills. A question arose as to what to do with the money, whether Streible should take it with him to the police station, or leave it with his mother at the Medley home. At the time plaintiff told Streible that 'If that is stolen money, you take it with you; but if it is not stolen money, it is all right to leave it here.' Whereupon Streible replied: 'It is my hard earned money.' Plaintiff at the time believed that Streible was telling the truth, and permitted him to turn the money over to his mother. Streible then was turned over to the state highway patrol, and was taken by them to their headquarters in Kirkwood. Here Streible confessed to having received a part of the stolen money. Plaintiff was notified of Streible's confession, and thereafter went to the Medley home, where he got back the money from Medley, after telling Medley that Streible had confessed, and that the state patrol would probably come and get the money from him. He made no threats in obtaining the money, according to Medley's testimony. Upon receiving the money, plaintiff gave Medley a receipt for same. Thereafter he informed several of the other officers of that fact.
Later, but on the same day, February 1, 1943, defendant Dugan, constable of Valle Township, and his deputy, William Bates, also a defendant in this case, called at the Medley home. Medley testified that when they came to his home, they begged him to make an affidavit to have plaintiff arrested, but that he refused to do so. Defendants Dugan and Bates then drove to St. Louis. According to their testimony, the main purpose of their visit was to check the police records in St. Louis of a man named Trunk, who was being held on a criminal charge in Hillsboro. After checking the police records at the third district police station, they drove to the home of the Streibles, who lived in St. Louis, arriving about 9:30 or 10 p.m. Francis Streible, Sr., testified that when they arrived they asked him if he knew that plaintiff had gone
to his stepfather's home and secured the money that he had left with them. His reply was that he did not, and he asked them: 'What do you think I could do about it to get this money back?'; that defendants replied that the only thing they knew was that he could have a warrant sworn out for him and have him arrested. Streible then asked what crime he could charge plaintiff with, and they told him the crime of extortion. Streible did not know what was meant by extortion, so they explained it to him. Streible then told them he had to go to DeSoto the next day, and that...
To continue readingFREE SIGN UP