Show PAGE PACE IS sheep thief is easily convicted HAD KEALLY HEALLY NO DEFENSE shipped the sheep under an assumed name SI oil sc Brea kins lusig case now on friday afternoon the agent and operator at P V junction gave some strong testimony in tho the case of the state vs SJohn john E pace tending to connect defendant witti with the theft of the four hundred as charged pace ordered two cars in the early part of august for shipment of the sheep under the name of 1 E patterson and the shipment was also aho made in that name finally when the money came on aug 18 defendant again signed the name by this time the agent had bad heard the defendants fend ants name was pace and before turning the anney over to him the agent asked for identification and joseph A barkis witnessed that the rie fend ants proper name was waa patterson Pat lerson charles mcarthur Me Arthur of price slept with defendant at P V junction at the time the time lima the sheep were being i shipped defendant told mccarthy that the sheep belonged to lo a man at spanish ork by the name of patterson who was waa having bunches bunche s of 0 sheep the sheep had marlis mars and brands ding to those deec described abed and claimed by ateo eo W vl 11 ms I 1 lon atwood of P V junction was present when pace loaded the sheep and to this witness defendant said the sheep belonged to hm pace be vave gave witness a av r buon i tion ot of iha b aad d same as williams williamb brand and said witness might have the stray shead witness caught some and killed them frank curtis cartis a boy helped d de elen dant load the sheep this witness also do de scribed ascribed williams brand Ps ea being on the sheep defendant claimed there thera were his defendants awn J A curtic said pace came with the sheep to P V junction on july 23 and claimed they were his pace this morning took the stand in his own defence ana simply claimed the sheep belonged to one patterson Pat torson and was handling bandling them for him it il did not take the iury lonz lone in tle the face of the strong evidence of the prosecution to find him guilty the case of the stae stat e vs va wm win T thompson and frank thomas was next called A separate trial wis wa a demanded and thomas was waa first tried the testimony cf the prosecution is that the two men entered the american fork coop co op on august 31 together and thomas took a pair ol of pants and hid bid them under his coat the clerks saw the act and when the tha two just afterwards walked oat together the clerks stopped them and the marshal was called caled who placed them under arrest there is not much question about the evidence but a legal leeal issue is ia involved as to whether or not it is housebreak house break ins the attorney for the defendant defenda fit john E booth appointed by the court made the prosecution cution elect whether to try the defendant for bouss breaking or larceny both of which counts were charged the prosecution choai housebreaking |