| Show A ARGUMENTS T I IU IN BOUNTY U T rA Councel for Defense Seeks See liS to Get Testimony ol ot and Jones Thrown Out CONJECTURE AS TO OUTCOME Many Divers of ot Opinion I Regarding the onon ot Con Conviction Of dC Alleged Grafters Tho rho proceeding In fl th the case aO ca of tho th i David II IL t vl et t nL RL In Inthe Inthe It i the th matter of ot th the con conil il 1 t d o ly of at ar by Mr Ir GutIn Gustin Mr r th the slat Lt on the t motion no lon of ot the hi I to from tram the record the p of ot Ito and end Jones who I sire Arc and an accomplices I ud ed perjurer Judg I Diehl will t Ills his ruling on the I motion next week Mr Ir pointed out ou that there thelo l Is Ii u no nn of ot the testimony of ot o othoe t thoe two men In any Iy In material t L Lt RO R to 0 show chow the th t allegations AI of ot o t conspiracy to 10 b he be true H UI pointed out oil t i thAt hint the tho confession of Will wan se Ie secured cured curel by hy mean means of ot an Rn and 1111 atu 1 2 that It wee was not voluntary Mr Mi Hanson answering tile the argument I of ot Mr austin submitted to the court 1 t that It was Wl probable doubt that thet wag wae to 10 ti tibe be e and Ind appealed to him to con oon older this Ihl fact lie Its U a kd what strong or fir Wits noea ary to at ut attain uttam lain tain tam this thin b lItt than thul which had lisi 1 l ll l en presented by Mr r Jud S and Deputy D Clerks Irk Smith i 1 tnt Careful i 1 nt ot o th tile the of 01 tile the record kept In Inthe I i n the th county 11 office he hC h stated I nI would show chow this title lie He what moru mor u WAR A needed nestled than the tart fact that Phillips PhIllip s 5 wag In tho thu so 10 often on O Ono n ri nn no bu that lust line lias been ben shown to 0 f Dhow hat there WM w a n doubt L What the outcome of or O the tue Illa will IMS h 9 0 IH III n a matter that Is I th the mot most moe t conjecture on the part purt of oC those e a ta who lavo filled the tho court room sine n 0 the of or the trial Many Man of ot n f persona express their opinion n that hint while Willis there thero Is la perhaps not nit the Ui ne e technical evidence betor the court Ourt to n 0 consider tho the fart fact remain that fliRt the Ui e 0 moral weight of or th Ui testimony Im hn 1 them mo mOst malt t strongly an as m to 10 the proof of ot the allegations of ot tho tim 0 I oil nil doubt as ne to whether r or not lIot the tiit raM case will VIII ever OVer go n R m Jury jur ur In the dl court hut hilt ay sey that time t If Jt It U do thies H there can all lie 11 little IIttI doubt douht ot of a II conviction It la 15 that the 1 r will w It nn tin inure In the COHO COHe e eI I unit tillI RM AH R time the has haN leI It IH IK imro I I Ihle iiO that at al tile the the time motion of nr it tho tit defense Is IC decided by IY the court url the tha theOMe 0 OMe cn will to 10 a It clone Coe with the a of oC the time and the tha deCell and Ild time the matter of oC Itu It Il being 1 o 11 i referred to tm th the dl t will al III aliko it I iko Io li tie he decided by Dl Diehl hl |
