The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1898-10-12
PLEADS FOR HIS CLIENT
ATTORNEY DUNCAN FACES JURY IN
THE INTEREST OF MRS. GOODIN.
Argument VIII BE Concluded To-Day
Question of Mrs. Lulu kline's
Punishment.


Furnishing Mrs. Lulu Kline in the event that
the jury fails to convict Mrs. Goodin, who
is now on trial. or is unable to reach YER
dict. 1t is understood that Mrs. Kline went
on the witness stand with the prison doors
staring her in the face A short time before
the trial began Prosecutor Wiltsie went to
Mrs. Kline and asked her if she was willing
to stick to her original confession and APP
pear as the prosecuting witness in the case.
He informed the woman that there was
nothing in the statutes to compel her to go
on the witness stand and repeat the story
she related to the police, thus eliminating
herself. Mrs. Kline replied that she would
stand by the state. The prosecutor then
said to her that it must be understood she
was going into the case at her own risk,
that there could be no agreement by which
she might expect mercy from the state on
account of her confession.
Attorney John S. Duncan, counsel for Mrs
Maud Goodin, the accused woman, began
his argument at O'clock yesterday after
noon and will not conclude before noon to-
day. 1t is expected that Charles S. Wiltsie
Will close for the state. However, Mr.. Wilt
sic is feeling badly and it may be that he
will not be able to speak. He said yester-
day evening he would certainly make the
closing argument if his physical condition
would permit. During the course of his
argument yesterday Attorney Duncan said
in referring to the testimony and confession
of Mrs. Lulu Kline:
1T is an unreasonable, preposterous and
improbable story. It is told by an adul-
teress, by self-confessed criminal, by a
woman who in some way hopes to benefit
herself by telling it. You must believe it
all or none. 1t is not incumbent on Mrs.
Goodin to prove her innocence. 1t is not
incumbent on her to prove whether she was
or was not jealous of Van Malta and Miss
Haskinson. 1t is not incumbent on her to
show what motive prompted Mrs. Kline to
throw the acid on Dr. Haskinson. The bur-
den of proof is on the state throughout"
The attorney, referring to the testimony
of Van Malta, went on to say He swears
that in May, 1897, Mrs. Goodin threatened
if he took Miss Haskinson out riding she
would blow their brains out. He still kept
on riding with the doctor, which clearly
shows, il true. that in May, 1897, Mrs.
Goodin was violently jealous of DR.. Has
kinson Does it not impress you, gentlemen,
as being remarkably strange that Mrs.
Goodin postponed the execution of the
threat for over year? Do you see how,
consumed with jealousy as Van Malta
claims she was, she could have delayed a
year before wreaking, her vengeance? Much
in this case depends on what conclusion
you reach on the subject of the relationship
of Mrs. Goodin and Van Malta before he
left the Empire block in 1897. If Mrs.
Goodin's story is true then she had no mo-
tive to commit this crime. Ii they were en-
gagged to be married and she broke the en-
gagement in 1897 she had nothing to do with
the commission of this crime. How much
credit do you give Van Malta on this SUBJ
ject? He says he never went buggy riding
with her but once, and then she paid for
the horse. He did get her a bouquet, but
theater, never went out with her any place.
This is his uncorroborated story. We have
the testimony of Mrs. Goodin whose man
ner on the witness stand entities her to as
much credit as he is entitled to. The gift
of a watch chain, the rides, the theater, en-
gagement, money loaned, broken engage,
ment and ALL Mrs. Strouse, the accused
womans daughter, tells of the frequency OF
his visits, the present of the watch chain,
the engagement and the theater. Which
will you believe? The only two persons on
this earth who have testified to having
heard Mrs. Goodin make threats against
Mr. Van Malta and M, Miss Haskinson are
James Van Malta and Lulu Kline.
And what a queer, absurd story Mrs.
Kline tells of what passed between herself
and Mrs. Goodin The utter absurdlty OF
all that trance business must be apparent
to all. Mrs. Goodin was not only the Gus
todian of the block, but her rooms seem
to have been the gathering place for all the
women in the block The transoms of her
doors were both open all the time. She was
a dressmaker and invited and received the
public. Mrs. Strouse, Mrs. Van Horn and
Mrs. Loder, women whom Mrs. Kline says
were present when these frances were go
ing on, all say they never say anything of
the kind You don't think Mrs. Kline was
a fool do you? A person any one would
try to deceive or work? Her manner on the
witness stand was against any such propo-
sition. Yet the state. wants you to believe
Mrs. Goodn was working her through these
frances or pretended frances and that she
took it all in"
d. WEBSTER PLAYED POKER TOO.
Mr.. Duncan in speaking of the different
witnesses for the defense referred to Robert
Strouse, the son-in-law of Mrs. Goodin.
"Oh, but they say Bob Strouse has admitted
that he has played poker. Why, gentlemen,
history tells us that both Daniel Webster
and Henry Clay were both splendid poker
players. Some very clever lawyers at the
bar are very fond of an exciting game of
poker. have tried it myself. You don't
know what a pleasant game 1t is and how
exciting it can become when there is some
money up. Is there anything in these facts
that leads you to believe that either Strouse
or his young wife were parties to the at.
Yet if you believe anything Mrs. Kline
swears to you must believe that MRS:
StrOuS6 furnlSned her mother WIFI a pistol
and razor and urged her to take the life of
DR.. Haskinson. If you don't believe TINS OF
Mrs. Strouse you must acquit her mother
Mrs. Kline tells you that more than
month before the 23d of May, at the request
of Mrs. Goodin, she purchased for her some
Vitriol. Mrs Goodin says she never asked
her to do anything of the kind and that
she made no such purchase for her. 1t is
insisted by the state that two ACIDS were
used, sulphuric acid (vitrioD and muriatic
acid. ! presume that is true. Some Gays
after Mrs. Kline's arrest Mr.. Miller, a
policeman, went with Mrs. Strouse to
search her mothers rooms; amongst other
places she showed him was the kitchen
closet. In there was found the large bot
tie you have been shown that is produced
here as an evidence of Mrs. Goodins guilt.
Mrs. Kline does not pretend to have ever
seen that bottle. The bottle in which she
claims to have seen the acid she did not
buy was small bottle. Her vitriol bottle
held a pint; neither of those bottles have
been found. Tt is very strange that II Mrs
Goodin destroyed those two she did not also
make way with this one Mrs. DAVIS, one or
summer of 1896 she purchased some muriatic
acid in that bottle; that when she lert the
block she left that bottle empty there. ana
was present when the police officer found II,
in the same closet in which she had left II.
Gentlemen. are you going TO put the pres
kitchen closet down as an evidence OF my
clients guilt? 1t is not consistent with ner
innocence. 1t is not pretended that any
ether persons who had charge OF those
closets while Mrs Davis was away used
muriatic acid. l have no doubt they have
all been before the grand jury or inter-
viewed by some one for the state
THE ROOM HUNTING TRIP.
Mrs Kline. as part of her story, tells
TT falxa hxyn ar