The Topeka state journal. [volume] (Topeka, Kansas) 1892-1980, 1901-11-15
Testimony In Klusmire Murder
Case Nearly Completed.
Defendant Completes His Story
of Wife's Death.
HE HOLDS UP WELL.
Becomes Confused, However,
Over Minor Details.
Doctors Give Evidence About
Death by Hanging.

Oskaloosa, Kan, Nov. 15.-The cross
examination of w. H Klusmire, who is
charged with the cruel murder of his
wife was completed late Thursday af-
ternoon. He told his story fairly well
and it was evident that he had gone
over it often in his mind but there We're
little details which he had overlooked
and under the cross-fire of questions by
Attorney r. B. Walch he became con-
fused and uncertain in his answers.
He however adhered pretty closely to
the account of his wife's death given
by him at the time of his arrest.
The testimony for the defense is near
ly all in but the case will not be COM
pleted this week.
The cross-examination of the witness
was continued by Attorney r. B. Welch
after the noon recess and he first testi-
fed as to a conversation with his wife
at one time when the latter claimed
that the children were threatening to
send her to the asylum.
He said. also that on the night of
May II, his wife had sat in the rocking
chair, previous to retiring, holding her
head in her hands, moaning and say
ing my Godi My God. Take me to
my mother" He again gave an ac-
count of finding the body in the barn;
his account of his fainting spell, and as
to when he had heard the gurg1e in her
throat. was very much mixed. He sta
ted that there was a gurgle in her
throat when he took her down, in re-
moving the rope from her neck, and
that her body was still warm.
When asked by the attorney for the
state as to what he had done immedi-
ately afterwards, he said that he had
placed the body on sill and sat by
her side about 15 minutes, when asked
why he did not go for assistance, he
replied that he disliked to call the
children to see such a sight: and that
Joe Stach would probably have him
arrested because he had appeared
against Stach in a law suit. The point
was brought out that he claimed to sit
there calmly by her side when he could
not be sure but if assistance had been
called she might have been saved
His story to the shoes which he had
taken with the clothing for the sake of
gone away, was decidedly crooked. He
first stated as a reason for taking an
old pair of shoes that they weren't
much account and worthless; later he
said that they were Carries, but that
at the time he thought they We're his
wife's.
A very impressive scene in the trial
in the afternoon was when the uues-
tion was asked of the witness as to why
he had driven the posts into the ravine
and planted the trees. He said, why,
I wanted to remember the place, and
Here he was interrupted by the i'm
pressive question:
viii, was there any danger of your
ever forgetting that placer"
why, no; 1 wouldn't forget but after
it was all over, so the children wouldn't
be frightened, 1 intended to tell them
about it. Then later L was going to
put bluegrass sod over it, plant some
roses and fit it up-"
Attorney Welch, looking directly at
witness, and with finger uplifted said:
NOW, VIII, wasn't the reason you did
that was because you didn't want that
body to wash out and show? Did you
not tell Frank that you guessed that
draw was fixed now?"
1t developed that the witness had said
this to the boys some time Tuesday.
He said that the stories told the chill
dren in regard to the receipt of a letter
from his wife in Texas and one later
to a telegram being received were
not true.
1t was very difficult at all times to
hear the defendant, and part of the
time some of the members of the Jury
sat leaning forward and with their
hands up to their ears.
Attorney Hayden, when he took up
the questioning of the witness, asked
him if he had not received a sunstroke
some time ago, and if since then he had
been unable to think as we'll as form
erly- The reply was in the affirmative.
At several times in the afternoon
there were animated discussions among
the lawyers, when questions were asked
for the purpose of laying foundation for
impeachment of testimony of the de-
fendant and Judge Gephart was very
firm in his rulings.
DR. ENGLAND TEsTIFIEs.
DR., England, of Valley Falls, Kan,
was then called by the defense.
His testimony was to the effect that
he had viewed the remains of several
persons who had met death by hang
ing. He said that the usual marks upon
the neck of a person dying by strangu-
lation are depressions upon the neck
and slight discoloration.
That in at least one instance in his
experience there were no marks upon
the neck the result of a rope; that in
another case there had been marks on
the neck but no depression; that in
neither of these cases did the tongue
protrude; that the pupils of the eyes
were dilated slightly.
Attorney r. B. Welch then cross-ex-
amined the witness and asked him as
to what recognized textbook he could
quote from as stating that death could
result from hanging without leaving
marks upon the skin. He failed to
quote any.
Attorney Welch then asked:
rs there any difference between
death from hanging with a rope above
the thyroid bone and from hanging with
a rope above the hyroid bone?''
From my own pevsonal knowledge
I may answer, do not know
When asked if he gave it as his opin-
ion. as a physician and surgeon, that
in the first instance of hanging COM
ing within his experience death had
been caused by strangu1ation he replied.
II give it as my opinion as a physi-
clan ard not as expert evidence in this
case"
Long sighs by some of the lawyers
The cross-examination revealed moth
ing further