Show FIRST DISTRICT COURT i way 1982 88 alron I 1 P JJ ir WEDNESDAY MAY 2 P M jureall Ju ryall present the first witness sworn was amna 31 TODD lived at hooper knew tho the moores lived about 60 rods northwest of them witness s then pointed out from the map the location of here hers and moores residences she then said I 1 was home on oil the of april april 1881 on that day my boys to told d me there was a fusa fuss between the moores and tho the Drys dales went to tho the door heard beard them talking loud together they seemed to be quarreling james drysdale eat sat with a spade on ili liis s shoulder as the spade came down the crack of tho tile pistol went off could not tell which came first john hardman was with me at the door I 1 heard beard two shots did not see drysdale Drys dalo after the spade camo came down was too much excited to notice anyta anything else after the first shot the second 1115 shot went off immediately after tho the first do not know whether I 1 saw the flash or the smoke of the pistol tho the only person I 1 could describe waa was the old roan man drysdale Dry adale there were no fences between mo me and drysdale at the time I 1 saw him did not aeo see any one stoop forward after the first shot was fired the spade camo came down at the first shot the second shot seemed to be just after the other I 1 was much excited after the shooting started not before the canal I 1 speak of is almost two rods back from the street recognized old james drysdale b by seeing him in liis his shirt sleeves as 1 have often seen him at our well GUSTAV ISAACSON ISAAC SOy sworn said ho be resides at hooper moores farm joins joins me rue on the west my afy homo home is a little north of moores I 1 was home on the of april 1881 1 I saw a conflict going on from my window saw both parties boing to the fence saw scuffling lin joseph joseph drysdale and peter pet r moore jr it t seemed to me that moore backed to the west ivest side of the street and then he quit picked up his coat and moved away james drysdale followed with a spade on his ills ahou shoulder ider I 1 did not see what followed did not hear any shot fired went to the house to light my pipe mv my family advised me e not to go out olit again pill I 1 stayed in have heard no statement after the shooting I 1 know nothing more mote about the matter PETER ORr JP jr recalled bythe by the prosecution said I 1 know whitford wilson saw him after the shooting remember no talk with him ho ile was present when I 1 was talking with hammond had considerable talk with hammond did not tell him iliad I 1 considerable scuffle with the boys that the first shot did not take effect and the next shot I 1 plugged it to him did not say the first shot was a random shot or that the old roan man bent over when the spade came down aown did nt not say I 1 put the pistol within six inches of the old mans man s head and fired it and that I 1 meant it did not talk with Pink pinkham liam did not say to hammond hamond in ond I 1 was unconscious PETER MOORE SEN recalled saw hammond soon after the shooting he took dinner with me at the house do not remember mayine to him if I 1 had a pistol I 1 commence shooting before beloro peter did did not sa say it was a food rood tiling thing for the Drys Dry slates dales that I 1 had ad not a pistol or gun L D sworn said I 1 live at hooper was at the place of shooting i just after it was done peter said tho the first shot went off otT accidentally but the second shot I 1 put it to him we wo were talking to together ether ho ile began it he said what te he did was in self defense he ile attempted to tell the circumstances stances that led to the shooting this was in his fathers house hammond was not present Wil and I 1 had bad charge of him constable beinas turned him over touts to us in the afternoon I 1 still livo live at hooper LEV LEVI B D HAMMOND sworn said I 1 live at hooper know peter Al moore loore jr remember being tit at theooore theMo the Moore arc place shortly after the shooting saw sair had a short abort chat with him hini he lie said the boys aud and him had bad had a little fight joe and liim him struck each odier other tho the old man moore came and parted them and they started away the Drys dales followed them old men man drysdale drew a spade and struck him ho he had ills pistol it was drawn and went off but the second shot I 1 plugged it right to him I 1 was talking for a little while I 1 was with him some three hours his further statements were in reference to tho the begin beginning nin of T tho tile row that peter began it fy by punching joe on the nose he could not tell much more about said the old gentleman struck peter and then I 1 the p pistol i stol r went ent off D WILSON beorn said I 1 live at know the moores was at their yd place ce on the day of the tragedy had a conversation with peter petr moore when he said that tho the od old man stood near to him with a spade and him that he lie drew his pistol it went off OIT ho be drew it again and that ho be put the pistol within a few inches of the head of the old man and fired and lie intended it he drew his pistol because tho the old gentleman eitleman ent leman drew the spade intending to strike him tho first shot was an accident the second intended 11 j LAMMERS sworn live in ogden I 1 am the tile person referred to as having sold the land ian d to drysdale both parties rested the case when the court at the request of the prosecution took an informal recess of twenty minutes r P T VAN ZILK ZILE then delivered the opet opening li ing 8 speech each for forthe the people he informed in f armr the jury that they would have to determine from the facts produced reduced before them whether the defendant x efen dant I 1 is ia guilty of killi killing g mr Dry drysdale adale I 1 and if so wag was it murder in the first I 1 degree or was it murder in the second degree or was it manslaughter or was it justifiable homicide i let ide they the y had been selected to try the case because they ivero im impartial and were supposed to have previously known nothing of tho the m matter atter they must decide by tho the evidence and the facts and find the tile law in in the case as they haac been laid before them bythe by the witnesses they have a right to judge how lowthe the witnesses ne testified whether they spoke frankl frankly freely openly honestly IV willing 11 ng or unwillingly N when rhen they were on the stand they must also consider the relative conditions of tho the complainant and defendant to each other and whether tile old roan man drysdale ought to have been killed there is no dispute that lie lost liia his life by moore at the time and place named at hooper the question aes ues is was moore justified in all taking his revolver and driving the bullet bulle t through the old mans brain tile parties s occupied adjoining farms there was not much love between them there was no way wily out of the drysdale Dry edale farm without batill buying a strip of land from lammers ft A fence ba biad 1 I been put up across this strip and it had bad to be taken down Drys dales boys went to aloo hooper er from hero here to take it down gad had they a he thought they had they were not boisterous oil but peaceful and went about the matter quietly counsel then referred to the place from which the Drys dales obtained their water and how they got it ho ile then read from the statutes what is wilful murder ac ac c theary Th the jury eury lie continued had to determine whether the killing of drysdale was dono done without any considerable provola provocation t ion wit with I 1 malice if so then it is murder in the first degree you gentlemen of the jury will be called u upon pon to determine that question qu up estioc bior the first question fuestion is is ti the killing of drys 1 aale dale murder and if so what de ile grac I 1 cc Is there anything that lias has kii been brought to your minds that will fill justify peter moore arin jr in taki taking dg the life of drysdale the statements made by the defense that mr D drysdale ry adale struck truck peter moor 0 with v a s spade on the side of the head cuttin cutting through I 1 h the flesh to the bone and an d that the ti e spade was brought down with such force that it as though it would crush every bone ia in his tead head have been disproved disproved b by y witnesses on the stand they were not lot statements of ducts in tho the case they could not say eay the statements of if peter moore sen son andars and mrs moore were true for if the they were ere he lie would not have been here to testify today to day he would have been sleeping in liis his grave if drysdale had bad swung the sp ado with all his might and struck peter I 1 eter moore jr ns as testified defendant would have been cleft through from his head to liis his trunk in reference to the statements of mrs moore he said here hers was an all improbable story as was also the story of the fc hooting which tho the defense claims to have been done by peter jr while in an unconscious condition of mind tho defense claim these to be the facts in the case yet his own version of the shooting to wilson Hammon dand liam am is that the first firt was a random shot but the second one was designed by the defendant the tile killing v was done and you vou must determine 0 whether is wag i done by b peter moore jr with intent to kil kill T with malice aforethought malice aforethought expressed or implied an intention to deliberately take the life ofa of a fellow being thu ia 6 murder tho the jury must tin this s matter counsel then proceeded to show that there was not sufficient provocation to justify defendant in killing drysdale he lie said deliberate intention was proved by the fact that aftel the firing of the first shot he lie deliberately cocked the pistol pointed it to within sis six inches of the head of deceased and find pulled the trigger tri ager the r tilt was the death of the te li old man inan drysdale counsel quoted authorities in support of the statement he had made and the position he lie had taken it was not necessary ho lie said that any an tal special sp e cial length of time should be taken en t to 0 deliberate before committing the act there could be no question que tion as to the intention of defendant to kill drysdale Drys dalo these were facts ho he wanted to consider and determine he designed to do what ho lie did doand ought to be punished hed for it profound silence rei reigned gnedin in the courtroom during the delivery of the able and eloquent argument which was listened to with almost breathless attention by the jury and the audience there were several ladies present at the close of the speech the court was adjourned until 9 on thursday morning continued on rd page FIRST DISTRICT COURT may Terns 1 it T amerson Km erson Prest ehg continued from page one THURSDAY MAY 11 9 A 2 M 1 NATHAN JR made the opening speech for the defense after a few preliminary remarks in reference to tho the remarks of the previous speaker lie said paid in this case it is admitted that the killing was done and that deceased died from the effects of the shot fired by moore tho tile question now is ia whether the killing was justifiable or not the tile mere fact of killing does not alway constitute the offense ense pf af murder though done lone intentionally there must be a malice shown on the part of the defendant so the only question is whether he at the time of killing NY was as in fear of great bodily injury if so he be was justified counsel quoted statutes in support of his argument he ile then reviewed the evidence of the wit bitne acs the ago of the tile assailant is a material question to take into consideration in in this case by the jury E either ither a young or old person soa could pull the trigger of the pistol pi atol with like deadly effect so it was admitted that the old man drysdale could wield the spade in quest question ionas as fatally as it stronger r man counsel for the prosecution said there love between the parties but if any such testimony was given on the stand ho be did not riot learn it P moore sen said lie would do the Drys dales any kind nes that I 1 lie I 1 e could ho he then referred to the building build ill n of the fence by the moores and sail said the object was to save labor it would save building 70 or 80 rods of fence and arld it was not riot out 0 of fany any ill feeling to the there was not anything ii in this to indicate any malice malic on the part odthe of the moores to the complainants bul but it seemed evident to counsel that there was animosity on the tile part of the Drys dales in taking down the fence they went to the west side of it which he lie said was not riot necessary but it is fair to presume that they did so for the purpose ose of raising a quarrel with the moors Iklo ores counsel laid considerable str stress m on the conversation eaid said to have taken place between defendant and wilson and hammond in which defendant said he in the second shot 41 plugged drysdale this the speaker said was only another way of saying the shot took effect and not that ie did it maliciously when peter first went and sat down antho on the ditch bank he be was armed and if he lie went there with the intention of killing drysdale lie had an ample pa ae opportunity to do so and he lie wa would uld probably have aimed at him in in front and not behind whoever heard of a man lending bending down and standing quietly while another man shot him behind theeart the ear he could have shot him in the breast if he lie desired to kill him counsel then reviewed some of the evidence given by witnesses in relation to the reeling after the old man struck he said the account given before the committing magistrate was diffie different rent from that given eiven here the latter is unreasonable and not entitles to any credit by the tile jury counsel then their recapitulated recapitulated the conversation between peter eter and the boys at the ditch and said drys dales theory of this matter is in inconsistent he ile had referred to these things to show that peter was not the murderous malicious person he lie is said to be if there was any malice at all was it on the part of the Drys dales when they followed up the moores after the latter left to go home at this time when peter said eaid to them stand back ho be could have killed the old man or cither either of the boys if he be had a desire to do so but the old man rushed at him with the spade to cleave him in two and let peter r would have been justified if he lie had bad shot the old man through the heart and killed him and the old man moore would have been ju justified stifled if he had bad killed drysdale under the circumstances if the statements and theory of the complainants were correct he would have been justified f for or he was in great bodily fear he therefore wished the jury to take into consideration all these circumstances in making up their judgment ho he would have been coined n justified i n s tidied in shooting a man who pointed an empty gun at him the law aw justifies him in doing this peter eter is an uneducated man and it appears rs that athae at the time of the mo shooting 1 pt 1 ng he lie was excited I 1 and ancon clou cious and should not therefore C bo be held field strictly accountable for what he be did men will do things when they are excited that they do not remember after they are done counsel for the complainant said men assumed great responsibility lity when they attempt to take human life this is true and you Lent gentlemen lemen assume great responsibility in determining whether the life of the defendant shall bo be taken therefore take these matters into consideration and satisfy y yourselves whether the killing was done u under n circumstances that warranted it or not an BROWN ESQ followed mr tanner for tile defense in reference to what judge van zile said to the jury in relation to their |