Are there surviving police or court records from Queens in 1927 that corroborate the newspaper lists and the 'discharged' disposition?

1. What the surviving‑records landscape looks like

Research guides from John Jay College and the NYC Department of Records & Information Services make clear that large runs of criminal‑court materials from the late 19th and early 20th centuries were preserved: trial transcripts from the Court of General Sessions covering 1883–1927 are cataloged at the Sealy Library, John Jay (CUNY), and the Municipal Archives documents the transfer and partial preservation of old town and court ledgers after consolidation of the city ^{[1] [2]}. The Municipal Archives’ collection guides also list New York City Criminal Court series spanning overlapping date ranges that include 1927, indicating institutional holdings that could contain contemporaneous court paperwork ^[4].

2. Where Queens‑specific records are held (and the limits of those holdings)

Multiple repository statements point researchers toward the Queens County Clerk’s office, the Queens County Supreme Court Library, and the Historical Society of the New York Courts as places that maintain historical county court files and can arrange access to scanned or microfiche records—again suggesting that some Queens files from the era may survive in official custody ^{[1] [3]}. None of the supplied sources, however, supplies an indexed list or digitized docket entries from Queens in 1927 that would let a reader cross‑check names and dispositions against newspaper lists directly ^[3].

3. Police reports, arrest logs and the practical hurdles to confirmation

Online guides and public‑records portals emphasize that modern mechanisms (court web searches, clerk request procedures) handle contemporary records, but archival retrieval for pre‑digital records often requires written requests, visits, or clerk assistance—meaning surviving 1927 police or arrest papers are not necessarily discoverable through a casual web search and may be spread across NYPD, court clerk, and municipal archive holdings ^{[5] [6]}. Commercial or aggregator sites promise background searches but cannot be treated as primary evidence of archival survival; the primary sources named by professional repositories are the real leads ^{[7] [8]}.

4. What the sources do and do not prove about corroboration of newspaper lists and “discharged” tags

Taken together, the sources prove that institutional mechanisms for preserving criminal court material that include 1927 exist—John Jay’s Sealy Library holdings for General Sessions, Municipal Archives collections and the Queens County Clerk’s historical services are specifically cited—but none of the provided materials offers direct page‑level or docket‑entry confirmation that the newspaper lists and their “discharged” dispositions were identical to surviving police or court records ^{[1] [2] [3]}. In short: archival survival is plausible and there are named places to search, but the supplied reporting does not itself produce the corroborating records or cite case‑level indexes from Queens for 1927.

5. Practical next steps to establish corroboration

The responsible archival route is to query the specific repositories the guides recommend: request searches of the Queens County Clerk’s historical indexes, ask the Queens County Supreme Court Library about trial transcript holdings for 1927, and contact the Sealy Library/John Jay and the NYC Municipal Archives about any transferred police court or General Sessions materials that can be searched by name or date—these are the holdings named in the guides as most likely to yield contemporaneous dockets or transcripts ^{[1] [2] [3]}. The available sources make clear that confirming whether a newspaper’s “discharged” notation matches an original court disposition requires consulting those primary files; the supplied reporting stops short of showing the files themselves ^{[1] [4]}.