Show ARGUMENT VAN COTT I Assistant County Attorney Opens forth for-th Prosecution I Assistant County A Qirney Van CoLt who made the opening argument for the prosecution addressed the Jury in I part as follows There Is one thing In this case which Is beyond controversy and hint II is I that the defendant killed Burton C Morris You have no doubt of that < and so the next question Is 1 was he Jus I titled He has Interposed here a defense I de-fense of selfdefense of justification lhal he did It to protect himself Now the most Inleresled person In his I whole ease standing heath and shoulders above all IH this defendant Jle Is I upon trial I for his life and of course there Is everything lo make him interested And now who Is this defendant de-fendant He Is a mal 1J years of age I f In the prlmo of his life above the average aver-age height and the average weight Ho has had experience with men Ho Is engaged In I an occupation which requires re-quires forlllude and presence of mind 1 you know I thing about human nature na-ture and if you know anything in connection con-nection with a gJimbllnghoue you know that such a life as this I man has led for twenty years has prepared him at least to have the presence of mind of the average man under trying elr cumslances And now gentlemen of the Jury It appearing that this defendant defend-ant has been a gambler for twenty years which In Itself Is an unlawful occupation can he go upon that witness wit-ness stand even though he wen simply sim-ply called In here and was not concerned con-cerned In the cnse would you place the same credit upon his testimony that you would upon the testimony ota ot-a citizen who might go upon that witness wit-ness stand and who had followed a lawful occupation Why you know that you would not and could not place tho same credit I tin It Mr Van Cut recalled the circumstances crcum stances surrounding the case from the lime Mr Benbrook entered the cafe tme and went into room 3 to the lime ho was found by i Olllcer Chase In the act of striking Burton Morris with the pls lol And right there I said Mr Van Jolt when Bcnbrook was caught In lIme very act of clubbing the man whom ho had killed he denied knowing anything about it denied knowing whose St was and denied using I THEORY OF THE SHOOTING You will remember that t the bullet which killed Burton C Morris went In on the right side Now I ask you to consider all the testimony that lila defendant has given upon lint mater and how In thu t name of heaven could anl he have over oho Burlon C Morris In that place If I ho shot him In the manner which he has lesllfied to If Burton U I Morris hal a nut In his band and one on his head how did that hole come to get through that hat I wll tell you That hal was on Burton Mor miss head 1 was Benbrooks hat in my estimation and as he Morris came out of tIme loom Benbtook had all the lime been watching for him Ho was not as scared a man as he triea to make you believe ho was When Bur ton came out of there why did Leila Slromberg shut the door She saw the gun As he came from the door the defendant shot at him I was then that Burton Morris rushed at him as any man would do He shot a second and a third time and In my opinion nnl tme It was the second shot that killed Morris Mor-ris and the third shot went Into the anl I wall and was fired after Burton Morris fell down by the sofa This defendant has disputed witnesses wit-nesses l every material point and always In favor of himself The con I Hiding gun stories were told and Mr Van Colt said that the one told by I Benbrook was absurd and silly Ho said that If Steve Keene had dared to deny point blank what ho had testified l hearing he probably to on the preliminary Ilatn Il ably would have made his story agree with hint of defendant but Kecnes story was told while time mailer was I sllll fresh In his mind and before he had had lime to fix It up He argued further I that if Bcnbrnok was as afraid I of of Morris as he pretended plenty opportunity was offered for him lo go quietly down the stairs and Out of the building Jle instated lint the evidence evi-dence in the case did not prove that the man wus Justified in his act and said It would be it blot upon the State oul and it could a i traversly upon Justice i well be said that the trial of a man In mll I this Slate for homicide was a farce If any but a verdict of guilty of murder In the first degree was returned by the jury I When Mr Van Cott concluded l Judge hues staled thai If It were agreeable lne tll to counsel night He8 llont would be I I J held to expedite matters as the Jury t hell undoubtedly boeomlng wearied Jt t wCle Is probable that night sessions will beheld be-held as here are five arguments yet lobo 4ury lo-bo made before iho case Is given to Lime S |