Daily Kennebec journal. [microfilm reel] (Augusta, Me.) 1870-1975, 1894-05-11

nKely TO klndle such a flame in any
woman's heart? Is he the kind of man to
excite such love? You must be satisfied
that there was more than adulterous re-
lslions. qualification of lust. If lust were
all 1t wasn't necessary to kill her husband.
Don't understand that l admit for a mo-
ment that this woman forgot for an instant
the duty she owed the father of her child.
Laforest Trask was Henry Getchell's friend
far more than he was Mrs. Getchelrs. That
dull plOdding fellows story on the stand
here was the truth. You know that this
man almost every day had opportunity to
crafty his lust with this woman if they so
desired without necessitating the killing of
Henry Getchell. Lust could not by any
probability be motive for this crime.
The government must show to you that
these parties desired marriage. To COM
NIT such crime the woman must expert
ence such love that it would drive out of
her breast all love for the father of her
babe and fill it with an insane desire to be
with Laforest Trask.
You know how she bore patiently with
her husband because of his drinking habits,
how she said that he suffered more from it
than she did; you have seen that
she bore with him with that pa
tience which is known only to a
womans love. You have seen how this
woman took in this Miss Richards when she
was burned out, ald now this Miss Richards
turns against her like q viper but is obliged
in the end to confess the innocence of the
accused. You must believe that this woman
with no money, she, whom the government
says was so full OF love for Laforest Trask
that she would strike down the father of
her boy and who alone could do for her boy
what no other person could, you must find
that she was so filled with passion that she
would kill her husband by inches. sacrifice
her boy, sacrifice her own comfort in life,
and for what? To marry Laforest Trask
as you have seen him! What an exchange
What could she have to expect with such a
man?. This man, at the age of 40, lives on
his folks, owns only horse, hasn't the
ability to support himself, and yet for that
picture you saw upon the stand this woman
would sacrifice all! Gentlemen, do you be-
lieve it possible?
The government says that's the fact and
he would prove it to you. Now let's as
sumo he proved it, you don't believe it
thought supposing that she desired mar
Eldkc Will lIdSh. Ills WllS WAS Stlll IN
ing. 1t Is perfectly plain to all that Lafor-
est Trask could not enter the walls of any
court and claim divorce. But supposing
this was the plan was death necessary to at
tain this? Do you have the slightest doubt
IN the world after the knowledge you hav e
of the drinking habits of her husband that
Mrs. Getchell could have obtained divorce
and would have done so rather than kill her
husband?
If such be the motive in this case; if
there was conspiracy between Trask and
Mrs. Getchell to marry, as soon as husband
could be got out of the way, why has not
Trask been indicted? You cannot believe
she committed the deed under those condi-
tions unless she and Trask planned the
murder. He was not Indicted because the
government did not have faith in such a
motive as it would prove.
The prosecuting attorney here, with his
eight years of brilliant record as prosecuting
lawyer, knew that he must furnish a mo-
tive that would transform this woman into
a fiend.
The innocent person does not know the
truth, the guilty does.
This case is one which calls for the most
careful analysis. Now let's talk over what
the government has here to prove this pas
sionate love. First the testimony of Abbie
Keen who tells you that Mrs. Getchell
made Laforest the present of harness,
Abbie Keen was thinking we could not find
out the truth. Mary Whitney tells you
about her lying on the lounge with Trask.
This looks suspicious but on the
cross-examination it was shown
that she had been trying to
get sleep on the hard chairs and being
unable lay down on the lounge before all
present. If that were true it would prove
nothing. But we have shown that it
was not true. Let's remember that
the prisoner is to have the presumption of
innocence in her favor. If this lounge in
cident were true, the presumption of inno-
cence is in favor of the prisoner. Again is
the rank dishonesty of Abbie Keen self con-
fessed. She tells that Trask went into the
defendants room when she was abed. Here
is one of those half truths stated in belief
the stupidity of the counsel would let it pass.
On cross examination she admitted that
Mrs. Getchell was sick abed. Then how is
Lura Richards taken in out Of charity by
this woman, she would have you be-
lieve fiend. She had to admit
that Mrs. Getchell was sick in bed
when Trask went into the room. Is this
proof of an adulterous love that must end
in death? Then we are told of his bringing
food there from his kind mother and the
witness who told it ate some of the food
Then comes Ida Haskell and she was
obliged to admit that Henry Getchell was
about the house when she would have you
believe adultery was committed. You re-
member this testimony. There is no need
of arguing it.
You have the testimony about them going
into the oods but you have the testimony
of the winter road to Trask's and there
is no need of discussing that. Then
we have the testimony of f. d. Rob-
inson as to Trask riding home from Au-
gusta with Mrs. Getchell once. And this
to prove adulterous relations in view of
the fact that he rode home with her from
Augusta hundreds of times.
Twas little surprised the State shoul |
offer Geo. p. Ellis as a witness, a self con-
fessed falsifier, who admitted it was like
ly he had told an untruth about this letter.
If he would tell an untruth off the stand,
he would upon it. In the first place The
letter as stated by him is inherently i'm
possible. Delivered to him Wien he had
got to 90 out of his wsy to 60 to Mr.. Trask's