OCR Text |
Show WIVES CAUSE TROUBLE IN ALEXANDER JURORS INDIANAPOLIS. Feb. 16. After be- Ing out for forty-eight hours,the Jury J in the case of Dr, J. C. Alexander failed to reach an agreement and was discharged dis-charged at 10 o'clock Sunday. On the final ballot the vote stood eight for acquittal and four for conviction. On the first ballot the vote was seven for acquittal and five for conviction. On the next ballot the vote stood eight to four. There were several altercations in the ju'ryroom. The principal disagreement was between James E. White and Robert Rob-ert F. Lmgenfelter and resulted from a visit from the wives of these Jurors on February 8th. Mrs. White and Mrs. Lingenfelter had views concerning the trial before they saw their husbands and when they went to visit the Jurors Mrs. Lingenfelter, It is asserted, told her husband that Mrs. White had said that Mr. White would be foreman of the Jury and that he had been a warm personal friend of Prosecutor Ruckels-haus. Ruckels-haus. Mr. Llngelfelter later accused Mr. White of having come Into the case with his mind prejudiced against the defendant, and told of the conversation with his wife. Hot words ensued and the matter almost resulted In blows, the other Jurors Interfering. This had a disquieting effect on Mr. White, and later In the day. when he engaged In a heated argument with Jurors Brown and Theising. who were in favor of acquittal, ac-quittal, he was attacked with heart failure. The perplexing question In the minds of the Jurors, they say, was whether Dr. Alexander had guilty knowledge of the fact that the body of Rose Neidlin-ger Neidlin-ger had been unlawfully taken away from the grave. , |