The news & observer. [volume] (Raleigh, N.C.) 1894-current, 1895-10-03
DURRANT'S ONLY HOPE
1T Is TO THROW SUSPICION
UPOV THE PASTOR OF
EMANUEL CHURCH.
EVIDENCE AGAINST Mr.. GIBSON

missions and Some Queer Deniais on
the Preliminary ExaminatiOn--An-
other New Ground for Suspicion
made Public Yesterday--DurIaa' IS
LAWYERS Again Fail in Their At
tempt to Prove an AIibi.
SAN FRANCISCO, Cal, Oct. 2.-One of
the attorneys of the Durrant defense, A
W. Thompson, has consented, in the
light of the remarks made public by Rev
J. George Gibson, to outline the facts
and theories which caused Eugene Da-
prey, in b S opening statement, TO throw
suspicion upon the pastor OF Emanuel
church, and 10 intimate to the jury that
the reasonable doubJ which the defense
wishes to show will point toward the
same gentleman.
The defense does not like Mr.. Gibson's
remarks at all In the first place Dur
rants lawyers say that the pastors as
sertion that Durrant considered him
guilty was entirely uncalled for, as Dur
rant never expressed himself on the
subject The theory of Mr. Gibsons
guilt come entirely from the lawyers,
and they are glad to stand by their
opinions.
The first suspicious Of the defence in
regard to the matter arose during the
preliminary examination from Mr.. Clio
sons own testimony 1t was iu regard
to the Minnie Williams case that the first
doubts arose In the testimony, the de
fence says, Mr.. Gibson made many ad
missions which looked queer, and some
denials that locked more queer Accord
ing to his own story, they say he was in
his study from until 7:30 the night of
the Minnie Williams murder. At the
latter hour he left his study and walked
to DR.. Vogel's, distance of three blocks,
arriving there shortly before s. It oc
CURED to Durrant's attorneys that that
was slow time. Later DR.. Gibson modi
fed his testimony, stating that he arrived
at the Vogel's reasonable time after
7:30.
But, &C ,ording to Mrs McVey. they
point out, Miss Williams, if s2e went
directly TO church, must have arrived
there at about the same time. Their
conclusion is obgious; the two were there
alone for an hour and half, ard their
theory is that after the murder was com
mitted, the perpetrator went to the
Vogel social aud enjoyed himself.
Another point dWelt upon in this CO..
necsion by the defense is the fact thai the
lock on the library door was pried and y
the pastors chissl, the forging they like TO
talk about Both Durrant and King
had keys to the lock, therefore the for
mer would not have forced it, they
argue.
One of their dram2ti points is that
Gibson, by his own admission, was the
last person known to have been in the
church on Friday night and the fist one
on Saturday morning.
In the Lamont Ca they have new
ground for suspicion which has never
been made public, and did not appear in
the preliminary examination. This is a
fact hitherto unknown, tut by which the
defense expects 10 prove by one or more
competent witnesses, that Blanche La
mont had intended to address the prayer
meeting on the evening of April 3 1t
seems that on Sunday evening preceding
Blanche Lamont's disappearance, she re-
marked at the meeting OF the Young Peo-
pies Society of Christian Endeayor, which
met before evening service, at which Miss
Lamont was a faithful attendant, that
she was g9ing to speak at the prayer
meeting on april 3, on the subject of
"My dual life," and wished to consult
her pastor on the subject. That she did
not see the III MISTER on Monday
or Tuesday the defense can prove. They
do not expect t. show that she visited
his study on Wednesday, but they can
prove by the young ladies who over
heard the remark that she intended TO
consult him, and they can also show
that Wednesday afternoon was her first
opportunity.
The defense in the Durrant case did
to day that which it has often urged the
prosecution to do. Attorney Duprey
called 10 the stand fifty nine members OF
the class to whom Df Cheney lec.ured on
the afternoon of April 3, and asked each
Of them if he answered 70 Durrant's name
at roll call Every answer was In the
negative. Attorney Duprey went further
and asked eacn student if he knew of any
other member Of the class who had an
swered to Darrant's rame. Not one
witness had any information on the sub
iect. OF the students summoned to the
stand, not one knew whether Durrant
vas az the lecture room in Cooper Col
lcge on the day that Blanche Lamont
was murdered. Neither could they call
TO mind any other student who was
there Ii is expected that the remaining
fourteen members of the class will DC
called to the stand to morrow.
Great stress was laid by both sides tc-
day on the memory Of the witnesses as
10 the individual students who attended
the lecture While the prosecution
showed that no one Of the students who
were placed on the stand remembered
seeing Durraat at the lecture, the defense
brought ont the fact that the witnesses
did not remember any other udent who
was present. To days testimony there
fore, resul ed 10 no matt rial advantage tC
either side. Earnest Mccullough, a ciyi
engineer, testified with regard TO the
dimensions and interior arrangement o
Oppenheim's pawnshop. The object o.