The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1893-06-10
THE EYSTER MURDER TRIAL
Prosecutor HOFFMAN Half Way through
the Closing Argument.
Several Lively Tits Between the Attorneys
Crowd Shows by Applause Where
Its sympathies Lie.

ITS conclusion the interest deepens and
there Is much speculation as to the prob
able verdict of the Jury. Mr.. Healing occu-
pied the whole of the morning, yesterday,
IN concluding his argument for the defense,
which was begun the morning before.
In opening his argument be said that he
had promised the Jury when he began that
i. he should. during his argument mad
vertentiy misstats any Of the evidence he
would correct it and then corrected state
ment made in regard to Mrs. oysters testi-
mony. The statements Was in reference
TO the testimony given by her
where she said her husband did
not know the men who shot him.
Mr. Healing then spoke upon the question
of Identification. and impressed upon the
lury the doctrine of reasonable doubt on
this phase of the case. He urged upon them
an appreciation of the responsibility rest
ing with them in deciding upon the full
ness of the Identification of the defendants.
"A fact steres you in the face here that you
must consider. Detectives Thornton and
McGuff wero az her house within one hour
after her husbands death. and say that
they went there for the purpose of getting
the clothes worn by Eyster. Thornton says
that at this time Mrs. Eyster gavo< o de-
scription of the men that did not mt these
defendsnts DO you believe Thorntonf
Why did the two detectives drop out of
this easel Who took It upf Ward. And
the evidence In this case shows that from
that time there began concoction OF EVIL
dence that has never been equaled."
DENoUNCING THE POLICE.
Mr.. Healing then went st length into the
testimony OF the Off GERS In the case, and
denounced their testimony as false, ''as
shown" he said, both by witnesses for
the State and defense"
The testimony of the express agent,
Harry Seibert, as to tho time McAfee was
1t the express Office was taken up, and
counsel for defense argued that 1t was not
reliable from the fact that the witness ad-
Ditted that he did not look at any time
piece. but judged the time from the fact
shat they always began sending freight TO
the depot ct o'clock. Counsel argued
that it was impossible that this should
be true, and the testimony or Hattie
Mitchell, who testified that she saw him at
Second and Mississippi streets at $50
o'clock. be true also. The defense was will
ing to believe both witnesses honest and
willing to tell the truth. and concluded
that the express agent was mistaken Is 10
the time McAfee was there.
Great stress was also laid upon the re-
quest of the defendants made at the time of
their arrest that they be taken before
Eyster,, saying that they knew him
II.
speaking of this phase of the
case said that the most deplorable thing
that had happened since this shooting was
tho grave mistake made by the two off,
furnishing the best possible evidence as to
their guilt or innocence. In all my ex-
perlence. gentlemen" he said, 81 have
never heard OF case where criminal
made such q request. Remember. gentle
men. that they were told that Eyster WAS
not yet dead, and that he was lying not
more than o block and o half distant, and
II they were the guilty persons Eyster
would say they were."
Mr. Healing then reviewed the evidence
of a number of witnesses IN detail and re-
ferred to statements made by the deputy
prosecutor derogatory OF several of the de-
PENDANTS witnesses. He concluded shortly
before noon and court adjourned sill 2
cutor Hoffman began the closing arRu-
msnr for the State. At the time be ex-
pected to conclude his argument In q few
that the court would instruct the jury be-
fore adjournment and thecase would 60 to
them for deliberstion over the mass of tes-
simony introduced caused an unusually
Largo crowd TO gather In the cours room.
vhich has always been crowded.
HOFFMAN TAKES THE FLOOR.
Mr.. Hoffman went at onco into the
merits of the case without preliminary.
During the course Of his argument he re-
ferred to Q statement made by Mr.. Healing.
of counsel for defense. in which he said
that he was paid by the county. under ep-
pointment by the court. 20 defend Parker
and McAfee. Mr. HOFFMAN insinuated
that Mr.. Healing had not told all the
was made. and said that he had
come into the court with q threat TO take
change Of venue If he were not appointed.
That is absolutely false" replied Mr..
Healing, who was on has feet in an instant.
and appeal to the court to sustain me.
came into this court with affidavits of
the parents of these defendants and that
they were unable to employ counsel and
Husg TO defend them and upon
that showing the court appointed
me. Am L right or am 1 wroDgw
be asked. turning to Judge Cox. Il don't
want to be drawn into this controversy.
and want it TO stop. I will say, which L
thinks sufficient for the Jury. that MI.
Healing was appointed to defend these
men upon showing sufficient for the
court"
ANOTHER "SCRAP OF COUNSEL"
Mr, Hoffman again referred to the al.
Legged threat to take q change of venue, and
Mr. Healing was again on his feet Directing
10 the statements and appealing to the
: court TO sustain him. MIR. Healing said
tnoSe Doys were indicted lot this otfense
and were to be tried within week
thereafter; they were 10 be forced To trial,
and then said TO the court that if we were
Co be hurried into a trial we would be COM
PEELED to take o change of venue"
The handy of words continued sharp and
pointed for few moments till the court
again found il necessary TO interfere and
put q Quietus upon tho Quarreling. Mr..
Healing apologlZed to she court and prose-
cutor tor an ex preston used IN the heat of
wordy war. and the apology was accepted
by both sufficient reparatIon, and the
usual calm again prevailed IN the cours
room.
After the dove of peace once moro rested
upon the scene the prosecutor went into q
consideration of the law of circnmstantial
evidence. THE degree of certainty required
In cases of purely circumstantIal evidence
Is very high; the defendants guilt must be
shown upon every hypothesis. This case.
however. Is not one of purely circumstan-
tiai evidence. for we have the statement of
Mt. Eyster as TO who it was that killed
nim and they have been picked out
oy Mrs Eyster. 1t is the IN
erring finger of fate that has pointed
- the defendants" The prosecutor then
TOOK up the question of reasonable doubt,
which had been exhaustively argued to the
jury oy counsel for the defense. and gave q