| OCR Text |
Show WAS GOOD ENOUGH REASON Accused Man's Lawyer Asserted His Client's Innocence, So What Waa There for Jury to Do? t'Thn following story cither shows extreme Ignorance on thu part of n Juror, or It shows what n wonderful charm somu luwyers excrclso on a Jury," said a former marshal of a southern Indlnnn city. "A murder was committed and It was not long before we had thu man who we were sure hnd committed the deed. Hut he hud money and he retained re-tained the best lawyers. The two lawyers law-yers wo will mil White and Illuck, because be-cause Whlto and Illuck are not their real names. Tho Jury was mado up largely of men who tilled tho noil. They were of the honest sort. White and Illock, especially White, so presented pre-sented their client's case, telling how ho could not do such a horrible deed, using their handkerchiefs occasionally In the telling, that the Jurors were carried car-ried away ami voted for acquittal. "Later 1 met ono of the Jurors nnd I said to him : 'Jones, why dhl you vqto to acquit tho prisoner Tho evidence evi-dence showed clearly that ho was guilty. "'No, sir, thnt man was not guilty,' said Jones. 'What makes you think so?' I countered. 'Whv, liecaune Mr. White said ho wasn't 1' concluded Jones." |
