Show CON V 10 red FED cuc liioi ackil or of ju ic c S splendid pa mr r mckiou erchal er cral TOW pauls JUIS tle julao julho I 1 harge tia 03 fly anig ht the verdict Is civilly of voluntary manslaughter ahter mr highton resin resumed ills his in gumont at 2 ais 25 on friday do follies like choso of if at the train the incident ut at or the affair at tho ranch tho cumulative evidence by tile he defense 7 counsel thought null and so BO the court conid instruct A number cumber of citizens roB residents identa of 0 juab county and lehi were referred to as having testified lied of tho the good character ol of defendant it had bad been tes tea lined by me brain that tom gustin lad had not been thrown out aubol of tile cabin why had bad not bot been produced I 1 does not the testimony as to defend ants character prove all that was necessary to establish that character the attempts of tho the prosecution to products testimony in rebuttals rebut tall were most miserable failures the poa of the defense iu in relation to reputation was most impregnable 11 fe to the teb of 0 garit ellingsen earl end and others given to smirch defendants reputation and said it was a complete failure and humorously referred to the testimony of 0 earl in particular who claimed that 1200 persons persona spoke to him about defendants reputation and then them when questioned could only name three or tour four persons whom ho he hoard heard speak of all defendants reputation counsel referred to certain acts I 1 that prosecution had bad attempted to make mako capital of polite t had bad in iu lis his testimony mentioned all he could remember he omitted nothing the purchase of whiskey and beer at imers elmers the nic mee eting tink of ross and cantlin the incident at Perdu ui tile riding through the streets of lehi and the incident at the sevier savier river i w were re referred to and counsel asked what whal they amounted to nothing but boyish freaks ha harm leBa and certain certainly li showing no DO and malignant heart on oil the part of defendant thu relations between defendant and deceased were seen been to have been the most friendly the taking of green to california to on en able defendant to do which ho he went himself into an emigrant car unselfishly depriving himself of comfort so that he might befriend forrest green the payin forrest greens debt at chalmers Cha imera saloon showed the gene generous routs and friendly instincts of defendant toward his companion I 1 and many other incidents named domed counsel contended proved that there was no DO motive or intent to commit the crime as aa alleged C counsel lour isal proceeded to discuss the question of 0 insanity as applied in this case the results of the injuries received by defendant in his child hood and tho the corroborative testimony ot of eminent physicians boing to show the susceptibility of defendant to the influence of alcohol counsel claim ed that intoxication in this ibis case wits was involuntary voluntary iu ho hall hail noverleen never nover been warned of his hia mental susceptibility find and ou on that day clay when was committed he be drank with wit b no tion of the consequences it if the jury that the defendant was unable to distinguish between right and wrong on that fatal day it was their duty duly to acquit him in closi closing dg counsel made an eloquent quent and Byl apathetic appeal to tho the jury jary the argument which perhaps was thomast tho most powerful foll jogi cal andrae and rhe that had ever 1 been ten heard board in the court coart room of the first judicial exactly ut at I 1 at its close a suppressed burst of ap was board from the part of the house bousa reserved for the spectators which was promptly chocked checked how ever by the court A recess of a few minutes was taken on tho the reassembling reassembly of the court mr dickson began I 1 toe cIOS iLg argument I 1 ilia I 1 is only object was to d dis is charge his bid dut duty end ad not loot to appeal to the pa passions ssi a 7 and ad prejudices of the jury it had been intimated that the dist district ri ct attorney Al torney was waa probably in nee d by ambition or vanity conn eel bel did not think that all the milk of human kindness wits was concentrated in ill abb bisou bosou of defendants counsel cou speaker took the suggestion as an un in kind one and ten dod to make t bi duty daty imposed upon the speaker even more unpleasant and painful than alone f from fain the fact act that it was his duty under the law and its as the at cornoy for the people to seek the vindication of the law us as tho the fact of this defendant being on trial for his life may ma be to his bis father liia ilia mother or hit his sister aister the commission commis Bion of so BO great a t crimo crime bi that of 0 murder is a of the law lie hie jury were not here bore to tc wreak vengeance or deal out mercy they must render reader a verdict accord according to the law and the evidence they should perform that duty wari manfully manful full lj y and fearlessly counsel ilia hii duty he be connived concu cone ived it to be his duty that flat if be was wag convinced defendant defendi in was innocent to rise anti and in the tha pres ones enre of this thia court move that the defendant fe tie be discharged but if on nu the other hand band he be was fissured assured that til ill defendant was guilty tiie tilt plot HH owed to tile tho people binl uti juat I 1 a zealous though fai mr r t il I 1 hi 0 i amx H i go it 1 his hia sworn duty the I 1 la poad hi cc ui c alio bo failand to bring in in te stimon v eiten lie could uld still and should to abow that thi defendant defend int was responsible fol foi I 1 ani ill net act was waa unworthy to hold colw it nv was as sought bought by the of ilu do bense to show that there here was somo villainous conspiracy to deprie dean tho d defendant ii of his life or liberty the witnesses brought from nephi by the prosecution prose aution ution were wera unjustly aspersed asper iia eased Bed ad and bought to be shown liy by defendants counsel to I 1 be a a band of wicked aspirators headed beaded by an ambitious 0 and o inhuman prosecuting attorney atto iney it is possible pos Bible that forrest green is not eador that tho conspirators conspirator a leave lai e him conc aled somewhere 1 I say it is is unreasonable for mou mon to say they huie have a doubt that the lie hall bull from that kolod forrect green T ahe ill a that way may not have k killed lina him at and I 1 that hut ho he way may have died from beart hi art disease or 01 apoplexy it i ill al to gather unreason unreasonable ab 0 and can have no to weight on the minds minda of 0 tho the jury th abe wu mule a may have lucked kicked lien him or there may havo have been a hundred other rea reasons solis ahal nd for forrest areena death hut but hero is IB no testimony mouy no evidence that can remove or wipe out of lined found the plain facts that do da fork fondant dant fir fared edthe the bullot that deprived the unfortunate deceased deci aBed of lis ins life the insinuation that the ballet may not have produced the death or of for rest green is a horrible perversion of the doctrine of reasonable doubt jf it any man on the jury has a rational doubt of 0 this his young mans guilt then di discharge dih charge him but bat it if you ou are con vinced beyond a rational ration ill or reason able doubt that the defendant did kill forrest green too according to the charge us as contained in in tho the indictment then tor for cods sake ia do not mot let him go unpunished and un wh whipped I 1 d of justice every fahed mardei a r takes something from the security of every mans life point out to alio aio a land where the laws tire ara enforced and jurors bravely perform their duties all and I 1 will point out to you a land where peace and or I 1 der and prosperity pros ponty we know there was wa 8 no provocation for tho the taking of forrest greens life whether it was nu an e excusable hie act by reason of any mental derangement lie he way nay have suffered buffered from is is a tr matter iatter that the jury must decide upon tie no 0 to tile the I 1 levi evidence danca and the ilia law as given by the court A recess was taken until 7 30 at in tile the evenI nir the court re when mr dickson continued his argument Be ferring to the tie question of proof as to the ho Ic killing illing of forrest green and coin ruen ta of cou asel for tile do fi Iv nar iise he perhaps Borro winan WH wai responsible risible for the death of for arst n sl green because he failed to put a pillow under hai held heid we are ara told that lecause lie causo we did not put dr D in on ills hie stand wu we sou glit to sup press aroas testimony that would ba favorable to the defendant why cast elih imputation on oil the prosecution in tile the fice cleo of tile lie fact that it w was a 9 agreed between counah coul lAvI on both sides that thero there vm no ni necessity necea alty to bring dr don dan on hie file stand fur for the reason that be had bad not the wound and aid knew nothing whatever of the ilia case councel fur for tile defense ilef nife liml had spent hours in ineloquent eloquent and bf description t nf scenery y sweet and interesting to lillea to and or the lie rise and ami pro progress grves of am ain erlian e co very In live five no nn doubt but what litlie h nl till nil this to to do with the we were told finally und and tho the information doubt leas iless startled the jury uri that tho the do fons had no theory yet wo learn a eil that thero there were M ru several I 1 henries sifter ah de Jefe fondant killed by accident that he may have died pf af heart dienie that lie he k killed I 1 11 I 1 d lilt bilm ancon telou sly and that lie ho kirl killed e d him when he was wai insane defense to show that this youri young mans mind wits MIS in such it condition as riot not to inake lili ahn titi responsible this boy no doubt receive il at a severe injury and it la Is only a wonder that he recover ed cd but you ou will remember that from tho the time he went to school a year liar arter after the accident dawn to the present tie he hit had been in good health n and no I 1 was comparatively robust you find it a single in stance where he stiff stiffened ered from delirium Iler perhaps haps tile the only instance approaching puch fuch a condition was ahen during lire IW busy conclave week thede tha di wits tired and worn out but thero there was no sign or of natural tit that it t it II fired und and mark should luve have it n headache defendant hen 0 only aly 17 ITe years araut of ago was permitted to to till hii mothers side aide arid and po go d down own into as ai wild it country as arl ari zonal art al when there he mccu occupied pled MS responsible a 11 position as book keeper kepr fura a company ever after that thero there was wan nut not ono one single In shown where defendant defendi int manifested i igni that hit reason win impaired nut not a single until hint cital ily the last laal hai been cited elte dand unil on that day ile hr v deprived of hl j i leawon if he was deprived of it tit at a nil 1 I that lil mind WM vai and la Is as aa ahr I 1 it jell bell and that his hid memory w lisand li herive and bright look 11 HI t the aliu tit fondant while hw ho win kiki on in alln i stand ile iia sat nt there valion him oat abild inu collected in tin wise excited excil aier ai lr ed hut ai a i sell felt possessed its BS it any n y imn in ill shekry i he jury box arany member dt idly iby proved that ills hla mind was not in it I 1 ne I abt hut but th enthey say aay 1114 lil loina is affected affett wl when under tho of alcohol now dont you think he drank its much if not DI inure alcohol alco iol on that day than any ordinary titan man can stand tile law Is baat lint no matter it if tie lie was buffer sult ering 1 froni from xii mo hilary if lie knew what tit tho 0 cons mould u tw be he ii kul guilty in ty of chii arime anine though tie hud been in blell we have several in stanc i where here it hail had ben shown thal had hm been so drunk that lie he was wag ancon ui bous or claimed to t b be MI be still lie he must have known awl did know that ir if liquor had aurli tin 1111 eirten aunt upon hin him M a 3 wag as el lo lie 10 w liia till or of the circumstanced it Iter wards by others mena ro alny thoy vot not to him alint it 11 wits MII utown fur for him to drink it hi lit lie imd had done that defendant under the tha influence of liquor tit nt the ilia nich iiii fi 1 lir I testified flod that hint tie ho drank whiskey jacobs jacoba bru brought tight out to tile the ranch hut but wits was nut of thoroughly yet when 1 11 it WAs culled called to the tho island the ell oil time linw when hen baked asked ir if ho he was wa 1 drunk I or sober nober tit li saia i 1 I wits not dir drunk tink I 1 was nober it had been contended by like ihu defell so that rinne none of ho he boling nien men that hint flight a fit tile ilia ranch werm ciul still we find flint eliut the he in number drink it A killon kind 11 half of liquor jiow how afien have wo we found defendant defan dant 1 I tunk ind and cat a whiskey bot bol till llo around willi alli him why scarcely a time limn or a circumstance has haa been referred to lo connecting connect lne ailin with it hul but what lie he hag ha been drunk und and had it ahl v hl key bottle on his peron how 0 rutn i I 1 ll 11 t lia be sid said that it a mark man fa millar with ahe in this casu baa a ms remoDa tle doubt us as to tn whether this defendant defend nt knew aliat hat lie fie wa win doltar when ho he drank dranic until he ha became intoxicated if he know abst liquor rendered him un conscious I 1 bo a la ahe aa much acco to tn tile he law art and us its guilty of murder as though chehad never been injured the question lit in this ciao cao Is s whether dere ile od but yot got drunk voluntarily or involuntarily to toi much condemn nation cannot be posed upon chal it a sink of I 1 iniquity and he ong lit to id be ba proe of ted but that dues does not excuse cucu io this C defendant cheru Is no arom tho the conclusion that this j young int man wai waa voluntary drunk on january last the 1 day I a y of if ilia horn homicide icide first thing li in l i the in orning they KO go into chalmers Cha liners und and take irke a drink WAS there any coercion If tr Forrest green tn in ste blead ad called for alcohol toddy old j id not defendant hen lapir r it anti and did ho he not drink I 1 it t counsel did not flat ed cure r 0 whether whet tier defendant drunk drank alcohol all day he drank it v voluntarily arid and ho be lud bad drank liquor often enough before that days day to know what tile tho effects of liquor attro youth who before had nevor never baited liquor there would be somo some in fit giving alvini him thu it benefit of a doubt doubr do you believe that roae itose lied when he said de defendant made chu orean green got lawn flown into the dust what motive could bitof havo tied had lit hi committing oreain uit eai when crona aid lie lia would 11 not fit 8 swear he a did not got but iowa down in the ilia road in obedience to defendants defendant vs command he could not remember doing so green either was so drunk 1 ai 1 the he could reino reme nober nothing or 1 1 hat a t lie ho would not remember Thomp thompsons sons evidence ovid enca was dds by the tie defense banse what object could tie he have fur for blackening hla his soul with perjury thompson thomps a hall had driven defendant a round around until until be would drive hita po longer then defendant told him film he would coin pel el bauo to driving and put P hid pistol against Thomp ions ribs wai and yet we find that tit at the lie white whit a house he WAI the he cause of considerable disturbance this thin Is ha a ease case of murder in the arst it it has been shown to you beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant knew what he was doing they had a quarrel in the silicon saloon |