Deseret evening news. [volume] (Great Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1867-1920, 1902-05-21

thought he was excused by the court,
The court accepted the excuse, but or
dered the Juror not to leave the court
again until excused.
The first three tallsmen to take seats
in the jury box were Thomas G. Gill,
Joseph f., Mullett and Francis Bolto
They were all excused for implied bias
Mr.. Gin stated that although he had
read about the case In all three OF the
daily papers, he had formed no opinions
and had no impressions, He said, how
ever, that on the morning the body was
found he was at Hendries store He
was challenged on that account for
actual bias" and as the state did not
resist, he was excused
The next three brought forth Henry
Klenke, S. T. King, and Walter C.
Squres. The first named proved
gem Several times he convulsed
the spectators with laughter by his
blunt answers, and the court had TO
admonlsh the spectators that the room
would be cleared II they did not behave.
Mr.. Rlenke stated In positive terms
that he did not have an opinion as to
the guilt or innocence Of the accused,
and that he had no Impressions. He
stated that he was In the produce bust
ness.
Where did you come FROM"
Brooklyn"
did you come here to go into bust
ness?"
Yes"
Did you come here to work for your
brother?'
II came here to work for him; now
own the business and he Is working
for me-"
Mr., Klenke said he, was not acqualnt-
ed with James Sharp, any OF the Wat
kins. the defendant or any Of his rela-
tives. He had not talked with any per-
son interested In the case, and was very
positive that he could give the defend
ant fair trial, and render a verdict in
strict accordance with the law and the
evidence.
Would the fact that his wife and
brothers-in-law have apparently de-
serted the defendant influence you
against hinS'
Positively no."
Would you require the state 10 prove
the defendant guilty beyond reason-
able doubt, or would you want the ac-
cused TO prove his innocence7"
~ would want the state TO prove him
guilty; ] certainly would not want him
to prove his innocence II the state did
not prove the man guilty"
do you believe In the old maxim
that Il is better that 80 guilty men be
set free than that one innocent man
should be conyicted?"
No; don't take any stock in max
inns"
81 think you misunderstood me-" said
G. b. Stewart The question was then
put In a different form.
You have got Inc up stump" said
Klenke. II don't want you TO go
around the block 20 ask the question
III you ask me what I would do with
the 800 guilty men, ! win tell you pref
ty quick. II I had the problem to an
swer then would act"
At this time his honor said the at
torneys might suspend Juror Sam
Levy was then examined on his voir
dire, and an adjournment was taken
untll2 p. m. this afternoon
KLENKE is EXCUSED.
At this afternoons session the de-
Tense received mild shock when the
state used its fourth peremptory chal-
lenge TO get rid OF Juror Henry Klenke:
Attorney c. h. Stewart continued the
examination Of the gentleman, and
asked him II he had any scruples
against capital punishment.
II have not" he replied.
Have you against circumstantlal
evldenoe?"
We'll would require that evidence
10 be pretty strong" The Juror was
for No. thA lAf
and Mr.. Eichnor took the yenireman In
hand
Have you any bias or prejudice
against that class Of evidence known
as clrcumstantial evidence"
No"
Would you hesitate TO vote for
murder in the first degree where the
penalty was death. and where the evil
dence was wholly circumstantial?"
mo: II the evidence was strong
enough"
do you believe IN a state of exist
ence after death7"
~ don't know"
That's ALL said Mr.. Eichnor.
THE defense may take its sixth per-
emptory challenge" said Judge Morse.
eve pass the Juror" said Atty.
Stewart
The Court-The state may take It's
fourth peremptory challenge"
we will excuse Mr.. Klenke," said
Mr.. Elchnor In an emphatic tone
As the juror stepped down and out,
q disappointed look oyerspread the |
countenance Of the accused. II was
quite evident the defense wanted the |
Juror, and II was decidedly surprised |
-. In
8. F. King. W. G. Squires, John Ca |
mencIn and +. W. Gardner were each |
excused for implied bias L. NJ, Bailey |
was then examined upon his statutory |
qualifications, and his name placed In |
the Jury box.
Albert Shaw. a contractor, declared |
he had no opinion now but he might |
have had one when he first read about |
the case
You would have 10 have evidence |
to remove that impression or opinion"
Well yes"
Then that opinion might influence
YOU rs the trial progressed II you were |
sworn to try the case-is that not
trueY'
Yes. Il might"
The venireman was challenged and |
excused
Washburn S. Chinman was OF the
opinion that he could try the case fair
~ and impartially Notwithstanding the
fact that he had formed an opinion as
10 the guilt or innocence OF defendant.
He told Mr., Eichnor that he could lay |
his opinion aside and try the case Inn
PARTIALLY but In answer to Attorney
Stewart he said that Il would take ev-
idence TO remove his opinion After the
second challenge by defense he was ex-
cused.
Alexander wanlsss and GeorGe !