The Salt Lake herald. [volume] (Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1870-1909, 1895-10-03
STILL FISHING.
Why Attorneys For the Defense
Suspect GInsOn.

SAN FRANCISCO, Oct. 2.-Cre Oil
the attorneys for the Durrant defense
A T. Thompson, has consented IN the
light of the remarks made pubic ~
Rev. j. George Gibson, to outline ths
facts and theories which caused
Eugene Deuprey in his opening state
ment to throw suspicion upon the pas
tor of Emmanuel church, and to lnSi-
mate to the jury that the reasonaoie
doubt which the defense wishes 10
show viii point toward the same gen
tleman.
The defense does not like Mr. Glib
sons remarks at all In the first place
| Durrant's lawyers say that the pas
tors assertion that DuTraDt considered
him guilty was entirely u-called
for, as Durrant never eN-
pressed himself on the subject. ana
would not have declined the pastoral
hand had it been extended 10 him at
any time since his arrest. The theory
Of Nj. Gibscn's guilt comes entirety
from the lawyers. and they are Sl&d
to stand By their opinions.
The first suspicious of the defense In
regard to the matter arose during the
preliminary examination from Mr.. Go
sons own testimony. 1t was in re-
gard to the Minnie Williams case that
the first doubts arose. la his testi-
mOny, the defense states, Mr.. Gibson
made many admissions that looked
queer and some dcnials that looked
more queer According to his own
story, they say, he was in his study
from until 7:30 on the night OF the
Williams murder. Al the latter hour.
ne letS his study and walked to Dr.
Vogels, a distance of three blocks, ar
irving there shortly before s. 1T Oc-
Cured TO Durrant's attorneys that thai
was slow time. Later. DR.. Gibson nod
flied his testimony. stating Uhat ne ar
rived at the NOgel's a reasonable time
after 7:30. But according TO Mrs. Nc
Vey, they point out Miss Williams If
she vert directly to the church, must
have arrived there ct about the same
time. Their conclusion is obvious-,he
two were there alone for an hour and
a half. and their theory IS that, the
murder committed, the perpstrator
went 20 the YOgel social and enjoyed
himself.
Another point dwelt upon by the de-
Tense is the fact that the lock of the
library door was pried off and by the
pastors chisel. The forcing they like
70 talk about. Both DurrEnt and King
had keys to the lock. therefore the
former would not have forced it. The
person who forced the lock did not
have a key 20 it, they argue.
One Of their dramatic points is that
Gibson. by his own admission, was the
last person known to have been IN the
church on Friday night and the first
one on Saturday morning
In the Lament case they have a new
ground for suspicion which has never
been made public, and which did not
appear in Ine preliminary examination
This is the fact, hitherto unknown,
but which the defense expects to prove
by one CT more competent. unimpeach-
able witnesses, that Blanche Lamont
had intended to address the PRAYER
meeting on the evening of April Srd. Z
1t seems that on the Sunday evening
preceding Blanche LamOnt's disappear Z
ance she remarked at the meeting of
the Young Peoples Society of Christian
EndeaVor which met before evening SER I
vice and at which Miss Lamont was a /
faithful attendant, that she was going
to speak at the prayer meeting on
April 3rd, on the subject of My Dual
Life, and wished to consult her pas
tor en- the subject. That she did not
see the minister on Monday or Tues
day. the defense can prove. They do
not expect to show that she visited his
study on Wednesday. but they can
prove by the young ladies who over 4
heard the remarks that she intended
no consult him, and they can also snow /
that Wednesday afternoon was her
first opportunity.