The record-union., 1897-05-13
ment In the States Prison at San

ment In the States Prison at San
Quentin for period of fifty days.
Your petitioner sets forth that he
was denied a fair and impartial trial
under the laws of the State and as re-
quired by the Constitution of the Unit
ed States, and that in the event that
the alleged judgment now pending
against him should be carried into
execution whereby his life should be
forfeited, that he would be deprived of
his life without due process of law and
in direct violation of the provisions of
the Constitution of the State and the
United States
That your petitioner is justified in
contending that by reason of the false
publication of articles in the daily
newspapers Of San Francisco, and the
constant reading thereof, the minds of
the people at large of San Francisco
as we'll as in the State to a great ex-
tent, were Influenced with deep and
bitter prejudice against your petitioner
without a hearing.
That your petitioner is further ad-
vised and believes that such bitter SEN
created by the publication. reached the
minds and disposition of those who
were impaneled as a jury to try the
charge against him, and particularly
in this; that the jurors, being at lib
erty during the whole period of the
trial. to go to their homes and places
Of business before and after daily
sessions of the court, were subject to
IA hoo ,.s,,e =
upon the street cars while travelling to
and fro and at their homes and places
OF business, and by and between peo-
pie whom they We're brought into con-
tact with upon these occasions, and
that such opinions delivered by reason
or meretricious and vicious publica-
tons of the daily newspapers. We're
aVerSe to your petitioner and virtually
caused a sentiment of conviction to
exist in the minds of those who should
have borne, throughout the trial, i'm
partial views of and concerning the
evidence
That your petitioner is further ad-
VlSed and believes that the conditions
In and about and in the court room it
self, We're such as to create fear in the
minds of the jurors called upon to try
the case as to the safety of their indi-
Vidual selves and in regard to dam
age and disadvantage to their bust
ness interests
i mat your petitioner further advises
ana believes that the impressions so
MADE forced the alleged jury to a con-
cIuSlon that inasmuch as the express
IONS OF a large number of people were
adverse to his innocence that it would
De Tor their best interests to follow the
views OF the populace, and that thereby
were WreSted from said alleged Jurors
d disposition of impartiality that they
might nave possessed either indiyid-
ually or collectively.
That the publications were not di
rected against your petitioner alone be-
tore trial, but throughout all of the
trial and such publications were freely
at the demand and command of any
ana all Of the jurors alleged 70 have
been selected to try his case and he is
convinced that if all of the material of
such publications were not carefully
read and digested. that at least am
phauc portions were preiudicial and
had adverse influence upon the minds
OF the Jurors, against him.
THAT the jury did not deliberate
upon the evidence submitted to them
your petitioner further sayith that
the language and conduct of the trial
Judge was both prejudicial to him
throughout the alleged trial of the
helnous charge made against him.
our petitioner here positively as
3eits MS innocence of the crime
charged against him, and asserts flIrth-
er that the evidence that was admitted
against him was purely circumstantia1
ana not of that character of circurn-
stantlal evidence which is demanded
by law.
our petitioner further sets forth
that there was evidence of identity in
troduced, which came, however from,
persons and under circumstances which
at once determined it as fragile and
without worthiness of belief.
That there was no evidence or nroof
made OF any motive for the commission
OF the act by your petitioner.
That there was no evidence intro
duced as to the time when. or how mr.
where the crime was committed and
that in fact the evidence entirely failed
TO establish any crime to have been
committed by him.
ON the other hand, your petitioner
asserts that the evidence in his behalf
was PLAIN and direct; that he was not a
the time or place where the witnesses
as 10 identity claim that he was.
That 1t was further shown bv tha
evidence of your petitioner that at the
periods testified to by the witnesses a.
to identification he was mem
Der of his class listening to the lecture
of Professor Cheney at the Cooper Med
zeal College
That the evidence of your petitioner
was supported by several of the students
in relation to different circumstances
taking place during the afternoon of the
day on which it was alleged Blanche
Lamont was seen in company with your
petitioner.
That the testimony of your petitioner
was further supported by the negative
evidence of some seventy-five students
out Of class of eighty.
That il was fllrt her s,lpnortad bx, tba