The Salt Lake herald. [volume] (Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1870-1909, 1895-09-26

the most cool ard impressive individual
present.
cross-examination of Detective Gibson,
Deputy Coroner Hallett and Mrs.
Leake. The last mentioned was ques-
toned regarding her eyesight, main
tanning that it is good and that she
had never had any optical trouble.
Gibson said that he had found a
Ratchet in the belfry on the occasion
Of his second examination and the
deputy coroner testified that when he
first viewed the body of Blanche La
mont in the belfry, the mouth Of the
dead girl was slightly open.
Opening Statement.
Attorney Eugene Duprey, for the de-
Tense then began his opening state
ment His intimation that the murder
was not committed by Durrant, but by
Rev John George Gibson, pastor of
Emanuel church, made in a significant
allusion to the resemblance of the
preachers handwriting with the let
tering on the paper enclosing Blanche
Lamont'S rings, created a marked SEN
sation. The address of Duprey began
with definitions on the duties of jurors
IN capital cases. He attacked the news
papers for the articles written and pub
lished concerning Durrant, and warned
the jury against improper deductions
from circumstantialte evidence. Duprey
then said:
THE district attorney has presented
strong case of circumstantial evil
dence, which at first would create
strong suspicion of the guilt of the de-
PENDANT. We claim that beyond a
strong suspicion the prosecution has
failed to go. We contend that with all
the testimony introduced the only is
sues to be passed on have not been an
swered. Where did Blanche Lamont
forfeit her life? When did she meet
her death? Who caused her death
These questions have not been an
swered. a fourth question is the cause
of death. fifth has not and never
can be answered: What was the mo-
tive of the accused to take the life of
Blanche Lamont? Under the testimony
thus far we claim to ask the court
at this time to instruct the jury, with
out one word, to acquit
Great Promises.
LAS a duty to the defendant. his par
ents and the community, his lips
should be unsealed. You are entitled
and shall know where Durrant was
and what he did on April 3, from the
time he arose in the morning until he
went to bed at night. The district at
torney promised to show that Durrant
was not where he should have been on
the afternoon of April 8, namely: at the
! lecture room of Cooper Medical col
lege. Where is that promised proof?
No alluSion to it has been made The
prosecution called between forty and
fifty witnesses. OF that number all have
given material evidence. Three elder
ly ladies, three young ladies one
broker, a Victoria hotel-keeper, a police
court shyster and his colleague, have
furnished the substantial testimony
upon which the prosecution relies. We
insist that the proper proof is wanting
to connect the defendant with the muir
der. We will show that other men had
access to Emanuel church. Proof may
point to others. Let US carry you along
the ground upon which we ask for a
verdict for the defense. First, you shall
hear from the mother of Durrant; how
he was interested in church work ond
what he did for Emanuel church.
Meeting Lamont.
We will tell you how he met Blanche
Lamont and Of his associations with
her. Mrs. Durrant will tell how her
son was dressed when he left home on
the morning of April 8. She will tell
what her son did that evening The
good repute and honorable character of
the defendant will be proven. The at
tendance at the Cooper Medical col
lege and his general demeanor will be
shown. On the morning of April !
Durrant left his home and walked to-
ward the house Of George King SO that