Deseret evening news. [volume] (Great Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1867-1920, 1902-05-27

TIME WORSE THAN WASTED

The dllatory tactics engaged In by the
attorneys in the Mortensen case have
caused great deal of unpleasant
comment among the people who take an
interest in the proceedings We have
been requested TO mention this, and do
so out Of regard for public opinion very
generally expressed.
We understand to some extent the po-
sition In which the attorneys for the
defence are placed. They not only
have their own anxiety to secure a jury
unprecedented against their client, but
they have to consult his personal wishes
and Yield TO his expressed dsapproval,
when they might perhaps be willing
themselves to accept Jurors who give
evidence OF being unbiased, But it APP
pears TO lookerson, and TO persons who
read the accounts OF the examination Of
jurors, that great many unnecessary
and really irrelevant questions are pro-
pounded. Time Is thus worse than
wasted. The expenses OF the trial will
necessarily fall eventually upon the
taxpayers, and are being increased dali
ly to needless excess, because Of the
apparent endeavors to exclude compe-
tent and able citizens from the panel.
Some of the most singular queries
have been put to jurors, and hypothesis
have been conjured up which seem to
be entirely unnecessary to be aired in
the court room, and IN some instances
TO be really absurd. Here are an ex-
ample or two:
IF you were accused OF murder In the
first degree, and you were Innocent and
you We're the only person living who
knew you were Innocent, but you We're
q victim of circumstances against you,
would you feel justified In testifying
10 falsehood in order to save your
life?"
This query was very properly ruled
out by the court, almost before the
prosecuting attorney could lnterpose an
objection. Here is another question,
apparently put to confuse the Juror;
"Could you give the defendant the
benefit Of the presumption Of innocence
at each and every stage Of the pro-
ceedings"
And again;
"Could you presume him innocent all
the time the prosecution was putting
on its witnesses?"
One more:
III you were sworn TO try this case,
when you went into your jury room to
consider the evidence, would you, II
you could upon any reasonable ny
pothesis reason out the innocence OF
this defendant
People wonder why the mere fact |
that juror has visited the spot where
It Is said the murder was committed, |
or where the body was buried, or Its
immediate vicinity. should be held as a
for sitting upon the
case. Other trivial objections that have
been taken. thus causing the dismissal
Of several Intelligent and unprejudiced |
persons from service, have occasloned |
much dlsapproval In the minds Of the
public, and It does seem as though |
some OF them were inadvlsable and |
hat thus the securing Of jury has
1een needlessly hindered and prolong
"a.
After almost interminable question
ng on the part Of the defense and the
uror has survived the inquisition, one
question from the prosecuting attorney
Ias served to dismiss the exhausted
uror. OF course II he would not find
verdict against the accused on cir
umstantal evidence only, in case
there the penalty is death, he would
4 be competent to sit on the charge
ow to be investigated. We think
owever, that several persons who have
cen objected TO on this ground, have
OF fully understood the question, not
ppreclatlng clearly the value Of such
and the lmpossibllity, In many
ases Of obtaining any other kind Of
sidence. However. the prosecution is
lily justified in rejecting a juror who