Deseret evening news. [volume] (Great Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1867-1920, 1902-06-16
THE VERDICT.

The verdict IN the Mortensen case
given by the carefully selected jury, Is
that OF the general public. Any other
result would have been a surprise Il
the great majority Of the people who
have followed the investigation win
intense interest, since the day the BODY
of the unfortunate victim OF assassin
atlon was found IN the shallow grave
IN the field. How any other conclusion
could have been arrived at, In view oil
the evidence presented on one hand
and the absence OF evidence on the
other Is impossible TO conceive All
the facts testified to. pointed in the one
direction.
The attorneys on both sides are en-
titled TO credit for the manner In
which they conducted the case, The
prosecuting attorney did his full duty
and did It well. His clear, irresistible
logic was particularly in evidence In
the final argument. in which he unfold
ed link by link. the chain that con-
nected the accused with the most helm
Gus crime in the annals OF Utah, The
defenders also fought brayely They
uid all In their power to save from ig-
nominlous death the man who had
placed HIS desperate case into their
hands. but they were from the 'irst
fighting the inevitable.
Much has been said about the admis-
sion Of revelation" as evidence, We
do not believe the jury was influenced
by any such evidence. One OF the wit
nesses on being pressed for an explana-
tion---and that by the defense-as to
how he knew that the accused was the
murderer OF his son-ln-law, stated that
God revealed Il to him. Another man
under similar circumstances and with
similar experience, might have said;
II felt IT," or 1T came TO me intuitive-
w." There is nothing very uncommon IN
such experiences, and Il Is not strange
that devout worshiper should feel
convinced that his intuition his con-
victlon tno matter what name II Is
called by was caused by divine in1u-
ence. To him II was revelation,
But there IL no reason TO believe that
the Jury took notice OF II as evidence
There is eminent legal authority for
the statement taat II would have been
an error for the court to order that
part OF the testimony stricken out. II
was brought out by the defense on
cross-examinatIon aud no motion was
made TO iave II stricken out How
could the court order Il expunged, when
there was no motion made to that eff
ifect2
But the Judge. In his charge, told the
Jurors that they were the sole judges
of the credibillty OF the witnesses, Of
the weight and effect of the evidence,
and of the lnfcrences TO be drawn there
from. He charged them that they had
the right to consider the state Of mind
OF any witness at the time Of the oc-
currence of the things about which he
has testified. in so far as the evidence
enables them TO Judge IL; and the prob
ability or improbability of the truth OF
their statements, in view OF all the 9TH
err evidence. If the jury followed these
instructions, they We're not Influenced
by anything but legal evidence.
Mortensen has been tried and found
guilty. The penalty fot the crime OF
which he stands convicted, Is death.
Regret. and even sorrow. may be felt,
that man with the opportunities
Mortensen has had of leading a use
full life and entering into glorious
eternity, should throw away his
chances in this manner; but the deep-
felt sympathy win be bestowed not
upon him. but upon the wife aud little
ones. whose earthly support was cut
on In youth by the hand OF a murderer,
and for those innocent ones, upon
whom the murderer has brought des-
pair and disgrace II is well that
crime should be punished according TO
law. as speedily as possible. It is only
to be regretted that too many murder
ers OF both sexes, are permitted to es-
cape the penalty, 10 propagate the
species and perhaps their characteris-
tics. II is this uncertainty In the ad-
ministration OF justice that renders the
death penalty when applied. less ef-
fective than II would be, We're human
laws executed as surely and impartial
ly as are the laws of'nature.