Richmond dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1884-1903, 1895-11-19
Another Remarkable Occurrence in the
Multi-Murdsrer'S Case.
FORGED AFFIDAVIT PRESENTED.
The Lawyer who Offers II OF
> Prisoners COunscI-Hc Is Held 10
Perjury.

the pIcSinIHg Judge OF the court Like
al the phases Of this singular case. this
ordinarily routine procedure furnished a
sensation.
Holmes was brought from prison TO
court The weeks confinement since his
conviction has added to the omaciation
that was so marked when he was in
court before. and a hectic flush has taken
the place OF his former pallor. He has
also lost the easy look OF confidence that
be wore during his trial. and. although
he was composed. his anxiety was plain
ly visible.
The sensation was furnished boy Mr..
shoemaker one of Holmes COUNSEL.
Nj. Shoemaker presented an affidavit
from a witness purporting to be- named
Blanche Hannlsan. The witness swore
that she kept Il ciear-stOre on CsllOwhW
street. near the house where Pietzel
was Killed ana that she knew the dead
man and that he told her that he intend
cd TO commit suicide. District-AttOr-
ney Graham asked that the witness be-
called to- the stand. ana Nh Shoemaker
replied that he did not know where she
was. Then Mr.. Graham called "A pr-
Nate detective, named Swetzler. TO the
Ttd4lu. \ i' ilr ANNAlNf N'FAillffA Afial SlOt-
maker, weeks ago. had written out the
affidavit and given him so 10 pay some
one TO swear 10 IL. Then Detective
Gtyer was called. and he testified tnat
SWctZer had shown him the affidavit be-
fore IL was signed. Then a woman was
called To the stand who said she was
"the Blanche Hannlgan' who signed the
affidavit She swore that she knew no
thing about the statements in the aif-
dayit. Her name. instead Of being Han
nigan, was Rhea, and she is the ma
trOn I'm the Fourth Police District. II
was at the suggestion Of Detective Geyer
that she went with Swetzler to Shoe
maker and impersonated Blanche Han
nigan." Shoemaker gave her so and
took her before a notary public, and
She swore 10 the statement.
This astonishing testimony. that seemed
to clearly point TO a perjured affidavit.
evidently surprised the Court, and when
Shoemaker attempted TO make some con-
fused statement. Judge Thayer suggested
10 him that his greatest safety lay In 81
lcnce.
Mr. Rotan. Holiness other attorney.
stated to the Court that he knew no.
thing Of the affidavit and then he began
argument for new trial.
ARGUMENT OF DEFENCE.
The main points Of the reasons for ask
ing for new trial were given in these
dispatches last week. when the appica-
ton for a new trial was filed. The princl-
pal allegations in asking for a new trial
are that the District Attorney Influenced
the Judge i'm introducing evidence show
ing that the children were killed by
Holmes; that the defence was not ready
10 proceed. and hat the court erred on
a number of points In the trial.
IL Hafqn 4rurIgI "A lurr and a
minutes. and then District-Attorney Gra-
ham replied. In his argument Mr.. Rotan
had dwelt uIon the inaimissability of the
evidence of Miss Yoke on the ground
that the Commonwealth had not clearly
shown she was not the prisoners wife.
and that therefore she was not "A compe-
tent witness. Mr. Graham reproduced the
prisoners letters 10 the willamette Gll)
wife acknowledging the ceremony Of mar
riage. and then Mr. Graham sprang "a sur
prise on Holmes that perceptibly took
him aback. Mr.. Graham put In evidence
record from the Chicago courts OF an
application for divorce filed by Holmes
asking for q separation from his real
wife who lives in Gilmert0n. y. II. lie
also produced an affidavit from this wife
thai. while making tha now famous jour
ney with Mrs. Pietzel and Miss Yoke.
Holmes came 10 see her. and resumed
his relations as a husband with her
Mr.. Graham removed the contentious
set up by the defence. and step by step
demolished them, and i'm a manner that
was absolutely conclusive shed food
of convincing light unOn Holiness guilt.
During the trial. Mr.. Graham was fire.
quently restrained hy points Of law In
referring To the prisoner but in his re-
view Of the evidence TODAY. he was re-
STAINED by no such conditions, and he
fairly withered Holmes with his scorching
arrasnment OF his various crimes.
HOW WAS PIETZEL KILLED?
The weak point in Mr. Grahams case
during the trial was how Pietzel was ac-
tually killed His inference was that
Pietzei was choloformed to death by
Holmes. but he never brought this ont
clearly. Judge Wilson seemed struck by
this. and asked Mr.. Graham how Pietzel
was killed. Mr.. Graham said that IL
was the contention OF the Commonwealth
that Holmes chlOrOformed him 10 death.
hut the District Attorney did not make
it clear how they believed the dead man
was murdered.
Mr.. Rotan spoke on this point. and ad-
dressing the court in his closing argu-
ment. dwelt upon the improbablity of
"A man Of Holiness physique overcoming
a man OF Pieizel's strength and killing
him with chloroform.
lie also contended that the Common
wealth had produced evidence 10 show
that Pietzel bought a pint Of whiskey
the night before he died. but there was
no evidence 70 show that he was drunk
on the day he died. thereby enabling
Holmes 10 administer chloroform to him
in that condition.
In concluding his argument MIR R0tan
asked the court TO take particular note
in rendering their decision Of the medical
evidence offered at the trial. which. he
c0ntendcd was incomplete and incon-
elusive Judge Thayer replied that the
court would consider this phase Of the
case. and especially. as requested by Mr..
Rotan.
Then Judge Thayer, addressing Mr..
Shoemaker. told him that he had most
unpleasant duty TO perform. He said
that i'm view OF The use Mr.. Shoemaker
made Of the affidavit he presented in
court this morning the court had no
alternative but 10 hold him in $3.50 bail
for subornation Of perjury. Mr.. Shoe
maker stood pallid and nerve.ess while
Judge Thayer was speaking, and when
his Honor had finished. he made an |
EFFORT 10 say something but |
his voice choked. and he sat down 81 |
lDntlv. The court reserved its decision |
upon granting Holmes a new trial. but |
that a new trial VIII he refused. from |
the line Of questioning adopted by the |
Bench IS undoubted.
Shoemaker procured bail. but refused 1
,o make any statement in regard to the /
affidavit He would only say that IL I
was a most cruel and unexpected develop |
ment to him. and that he understood his /
Whole professional career was at stake. !
Alr. Roian. Mr.. Shoemaker's colleague. |
was greatiy worried over the AFFAIR. rs
he feared it w9uld reflect unon him.
hut as il was clearly shown in court this |
morning that he had no hand in pro-
curing the affidavit the bench Of judges
exonorated him from blame. Mr.. Rotan |
EXPRESSED the opinion that Shoemaker