| OCR Text |
Show ARGUING FOB KAIGHN New Trial to Be Passed on Tomorrow. STRONG CASE BROUGHT IN Defense Offered ln Support of Motion for New Trial That Some of Knlghn Jurors Saw Stronp After He Was Shot and That This Had Some Jlcnrlng on Their Verdict State Claims That tho Defense Should Have Challenged the Jurors for Cause. (Sunda's nsllv ) The motion for n new trial for Roy Kalghn was argued jesterdny before Judge Morse hy ienntor Drown and Attorney At-torney Hoffman for the defense nnd bj District Attorney Clchnor for the Mate Aflet henrlne; the arguments the court uiinounced that he would tnke the motion under advisement and nn-noume nn-noume his decision nt 10 oclock Monday Mon-day morning The lime for passing scnt-nce on Ihe slayer of Wlllird S Hajnea wis set for I oclock In the nfternoon of the same day Col nnd Mrs Kalghn arid .Miss Co-ites were present In court during the uiguments paw stronh shootIno: The stand tnken hy Ihe defense Is that Ihe verdict was contrary to law and to the evidence ndduccd. nnd that It wns not rendered by n fnlr expression expres-sion of opinion on the port of nil the Jurors Stress was nlso laid on the fact that nine of the twelve nccepted Jurors were In their quarters In the Harmon block nn tbe nfternoon nf Sunda, Pep. tember Hlh when the shooting of Hurry Strong b Miles ltomnc oc-ruried oc-ruried In Ilnmney a silonn ln the same block, and that nt lenst three of th Jurors saw the wounded man come out ot the saloon walk a rod or so nnd sink to the sidewalk, with blood Jetting from Ihe bullet wound In his neck and that severnl of the Jurors saw Deputy Sheriff Sher-iff I'rntt nnest Hominy and that they talked over the matter of the shooting Hence It wns contended their minds were tn n grcnler or less extent biased, and the matter hail some bonrlng on their verdict Atlldavlts of Jurors Thomas V Partridge nnd lVirento intiiig to the effect that they had wlt-nessel wlt-nessel the events stated above and dis-inssc.l dis-inssc.l them at considerable length, were also read to the court Similar nllldavlts by Deputy Sheriffs Hurbldge. hlcntcr nnd I'ritt were nlso rend These made the further statement that the Jurors, on the morning utter the shooting shoot-ing had pissed the place where Strong fell nnd that they hnd seen the blood stnlns on the sidewalk The contention was made lb it such Incidents would naturally color the minds of the Jurors and also the fact that there hnd been no less than thirteen shootings In this city sitae the Haynes affair These were practically the reasons Riven why. In common Justice Hoy Knlghn should be granted a new trial Attorney Drown advanced the additional argument that, according to the evidence. Hoy Kalghn wns either guilty of murder In the first degree or innocent, and that the verdict relumed wns Inconsistent with the evidence evi-dence Introduced nt the trial UlCIINOFl'B ni:i'I,Y. District Attorney lllchnor argue 1 lint tinder section 4!S of the Revlsel Statutes the attorneys for the defense should have challenged the Jurors for cause, which they could have done even aflet the Jurors had been sworn The State Prosecutor nrgue.1 that counsel for Ihe defense knew of the llomn y-Strong y-Strong tragedy Hie diy nfter It had occurred as was shown by the cross-etntnlnatlnn cross-etntnlnatlnn of Deputy Slenter In regard re-gard to his nindii It Mr Slenter had said lint he had told Senator Drown ot whit the Jurors had seen of the Strong affair an1 that they had talked It nvei among themselves Mr Illchnor ronton.li. I that the statute settled that rnlnt and that the Jury had settled the question of Insanity by bringing n a verdict of voluntiry manslaughter On these grounds he thought that the mo. tlon foi a new trial should bo denied. |
