Kansas City journal. [volume] (Kansas City, Mo.) 1897-1928, 1897-11-28
TWEL IRE CHOSEN
MEN WHO " = eide GoDDARD's
IA. q . :CTED.
TAKEN TO THE HOTEL LYNCH.
THIS IN SPITE OF PROTESTS OF
ATTORNEYS.
Takfng Of Testimony VIII Begin To-
morrow-Mr. Lowe Has Read Up
On the Law and Il Expect
ed to DO . Bit
Better.

Better.
The twelve Jurors who will try DR.. JEFF
ferson d. Goddard for the murder of Fred
erick ]. jackson, were selected yesterday
at noon. They are:
G. r. Allen, Independence.
August Dehmer, 2613 Grand.
Henry Ebbs, 24o9 Grove.
Jacob Hinkle. 1904 East Eleventh.
ID; D; Faulconer. Little Blue.
Thomas Lawson, Lees Summit
H. 3. Sibley, Raytown.
Richard T. AIRY, Martin City.
]. H. Hart, independence.
William T. Posey. al West Fifth
]. ]. Reynolds. Raytown.
The lawyers for DIR. Goddard protested to
Judge Longan when the jury was selected
and sworn yesterday against allowing the
twelve men to stay at the hotel of Hugh
Lynch. The judge did not heed the request.
He placed the Jury in charge Of Deputy
Marshal Joel Mays and said he might lodge
and feed the jury where he chose.
Deputy Mays thereupon proceeded to the
Hotel Lynch with the jury. despite the fact
that many ugly rumors have been circulated
concerning juries that nave been kept at
this hotel. Deputy Mays can probably ex-
plain why he preferred this hotel to the Vic
toria or some other hosiery.
When the Goddard case was tried before
the attorneys for the defense requested that
the court order the jury sent to some
hotel other than the Lynch. because of the
dark rumors concerning the easy access to
Jurors in this hotel. Judge Longan ordered
Deputy Marshal ]. ]. Dunn, who was in
charge of the jury. to a x the jurymen to
some other hotel. He engaged rooms for
the jurors at the Hotel Victoria, but after
stopping there one night took the jurors to
the Hotel Lynch, making q weak excuse
for his action when asked why he had dis
obeyed the courts instructions. He also
spoke sneeringly of the defendants attor-
neys, and upon request of Attorney Beebe
he was relieved from further duty. and
Deputy Mays was given charge Of the jury
and cent back to the Hotel Victoria The
action of Dunn caused much omment n
reflected no credit upon Marshal Chiles' Of
fee. A great many people are wondering
why Deputy Mays has 80 openly and nan
ifestly courted adverse criticism by taking
the present jury to the Hotel Lynch. Mem
bers of the Shannon ang could probably
explain why the jury has been taken there.
The hearing of testimony in the God
dard case will begin at 8 o'clock tomorrow
morning. It is likely that the coming
trial will be more sensational than the
last one. It will be IL Judge Longan allows
the introduction of evidence tending to
show that there was a criminal intimacy
between DR.. Goddard and Mrs. Jackson.
The indications are that Judge Longan will
allow the evidence to go in. At the last
trial he ruled that such evidence was not
admissible.
The Goddard case is proving a pretty
good training school in the law for Pros
ecutor Lowe. At the first trial, when OBJ
lection was made to the Introduction of
such evidence, he was wholly unprepared
no mee mo one SRaerioh Shows. Ee haS W not
prepared himself for such an issue, and
II was made clear that he had no knowl-
e ease of to oe t ihw de pgiahiema t Si.as one H In w ras
as helpless as a child. He had not a sim
gle authority to quote. He had no word to
cision bearing on pa' the point ne1 favorable ~ o to
the state His preparation of the case had
been SO 1itifully weak that he sat dunn
The next day a lawyer kindly told Mr..
Lowe of the Kansas decision quoted in The
journal yesterday. This opened his eyes
but it had already been passed upon. Since
then Mr.. Lowe, or some friend. has been
locking up a little law on the point.
trial will be over the Introduction Of this
evidence, and the fight over It will probably
,beGin Monday morning. DR.. Goddard's
Ing an alleged intimacy between Mrs. jack
son and DIR. Goddard and no evidence
jackson and DR.. Goddard will be admissi-
BILE, because 1t would distract the minds of
the jury from the real issue in the case
than the one charged in the Indictment.
This was The contention of DR.; Goddard's
gan sustained them. But since then Pros
books fairly bristIe with supreme court 5aT
such evidence is admissible, and many of
these decisions will be laid before Judge
court decision in the Arthur Duestrow
case and the decision of the supreme cour,
OF Kansas is a case similar to Goddard's.
week. Prosecutor Lowe will present the
following decisions to sustain his arru-
tons and m of DR.. Godd Gs re end
Mrs. jackson is admissible;
The American and English Encyclopedia
vi <iN AiAN 40 " otbhi ttAl kOOkI
among lawyers. and contains the law OF
the two countries summarized. says:
o the trial OF an Indictment for muir
der IL Is proper for the prosecution to in
troduce against the defendant evidence of
improper devotion to or criminal intimacy
with a female, to which devotion or in
timacy deceased was an obstacle. in order
10 show motive in defendant for killing
the deceased"
This encyclopedia cites in support of this
abstract principle of law dozens of decis-
ions of supreme courts on the point. An
other law principle laid down by this au-
thority. and backed by numerous decis-
ions of the higher courts. is this:
mony going to show motive is material to
the issue. because there can be no murder
without malice and no malice without
motive"
A decision of the supreme court of New
York in the case of William Pierson is to
the point. Pierson was convicted of killing
Seaman B. Whitney. At his trial the prose-
cution introduced evidence tending to prove
that the relations between the prisoner and
Mrs. Whitney We're somewhat intimate be-
fore the death of her husband. but there
was no clear proof that they were GRIM
inal. Persons lawyers appealed to the
supreme court on the ground that the
evidence introduced at the trial about the
intimacy between Pierson and Mrs. Whitney
was Incompetent as showing motive for the
killing because IL tended to prove another
crime than the one charged in the indict-
ment. The supreme court said in its decis-
ion affirming the sentence of death on Pier
son:
s.Chs evidence was competent, Crime is