The Seattle post-intelligencer. [volume] (Seattle, Wash. Terr. [Wash.]) 1888-1914, 1895-10-02
IRE ATTACK on REV. GIBSON.
Durranf-s Attorneys Insist That >us-
picion Points strongly TO Him.

san Francisco. Oct. l-One Of the at
t0rneys for the D1rrsnt defense, A. ".
Thompson. has consented to outline the
facts and theories which caused Deuprey
IN his opening statement 10 throw sus-
picion upon the pastor OF Emanuel church
and TO intimate 10 the jury the reasonable
doubt which the defense wished 10 show
viii pOint toward the same gentleman.
The theory OF AF. GibSon's guilt comes
entirely from the lawyers. and they are
glad 10 stand BY their opinions. The first
suspicious OF the defense IN regard 10
the matter arose during the preliminary
examination. from Mr.. Gihsons OWN tes-
timouy. IL was IN regard TO the Minnie
Williams case that the first doubts arose.
In his testimony, the defense states, Mr..
Gibson made many admissions that looked
queer. and some denlslS that looked more
queer. According 40 MS own story. they
say he was in his study from until 7.So
on the night OF the Williams murder. At
the latter hour he left his study and walk
ed TO DR.. Eogeis. a distance Of three
blocks arriving there shortly before ). II
occurred 10 Durrant's attorneys that that
was slow time.
Later Or. Gibson modified his testimony.
stating that he arrived al the Nogels A
reasonable time after 7:S0. But. accord
ing 10 Mrs. McNey. they point out. Mss
williams n she went directly 10 the
church. must have arrived there at about
the same time. Their conclusion is or
yious. The two we're there alone for an
hour and a half, and their theory IS that.
the murder committed. the perpetTstoT
went 10 the Vogel social and enjoyed him
self.
Another point dwelt upon by the defense
is the fact that the lock Of the library
door was pried of. and by the pastors
ch.seI The forcing they Ike % talk about.
Both Durrant and King had keys 10 the
h. = harr
forced IL The person who forced the
lock dsd not have a key to IL. they argue
one OF the dranlatic points IS that Glib
son by his own admission, was the last
person known ID have been in the church
on Friday night and the first on Satur-
day morning.
In the Lamont case they have a new
ground for suspicion which has never
been made public and which did not ap-
pear in the preliminary examination. This
is the fact hitherto unknown. but which
the defense expects 70 prove by one or
more competent, unimpeaehable witnesses,
that Blanche Lamont had intended 10 ad-
dress the prayer meeting on the evening OF
April 8 1t seems that on the Sunday even
ing preceding Blanche Lamont's disappear
ance she remarked at the meeting of the
Young Peoples Society OF Christian En-
deavor. which met before evening service
and at which Miss Lamont was a faithful
attendant, that she was going 10 speak II
the prayer meeting on April 8. on the sub
tect of My Dual Life and wished to con-
suit her pastor on the subject. That she
did not see the minister on Monday or
Tuesday the defense can prove. They do
not expect TO show that she visited his
study on Wednesday. but they can prove
by young ladies who overheard her remark
that she intended TO consult him. and they
can also show that Wednesday afternoon
was her FIRST opportun.ty.