Deseret evening news. [volume] (Great Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1867-1920, 1902-05-20

Hon. James Sharp was In attendance
az this afternoons proceedings II be-
ing the first time he has been in court
for several days. But little interest
was manifested in the case, and outside
Of the talesmen summoned for jury
duty, there were probably not over a
dozen spectators present. OF the 20
venIremen summoned for this after
noon, only 20 showed up, and OF that
number eight were excused. Those who
passed the examination upon their
voir dire were. John A. Evans, Geo f.
Evans, James S, Murdoch, X. A, An
drews II. d. Barber. Louis Hook, Il.
A. Sorensen, 3, G. Raybould,
The further examination Of Juror r.
NJ. Bishop was resumed. He stated
that he knew James Il. Hay In his llfe-
time, but the fact that he was ac-
quainted with decedent would not af-
feet his verdict.
"Do you know Mr., Elchnor"
Eyes sir, have known him a good
many years. We have worked together
In campaigns"
would your acquaintance and ASSOC
citation with Mr. Eichnor in politics af-
feet your verdict in this case?"
mo. sir"
40 you know any of the ofIicers?"
yes, sir; several Of them"
Have you tailed with them about
this case?"
"No, sir"
Are you In any way related to any
Of the officers or parties Interested In
this case?'
YES, sir"
(Which oneY
Deputy Sheriff Eldredge. He and
married sisters"
Would the fact that you had read
that defendants wife and brothers-in-
law have deserted him, in any way af-
feet your verdict?"
mo, sir; not in the least"
In the case Of Juror r. NJ. Bishop, II
developed that he had something up his
sleeve, and that something" was what
the district attorney was looking for
Atty. Barnard Stewart asked the juror
IL the fact that public sentiment was
so strong against the defendant would
In any way influence him In rendering
his verdict. Mr. Bishop replied that IL
would not. He said that In his eX-
perience ne has found that public opln-
Ion sometimes goes wrong. The attor-
ney then got down TO the question OF
revelation, Ii being the first time that
subject has been referred to today.
Asked II he believed Mr.. Sharp re-
oeived the revelation, Mr.. Bishop SAID
he hardly knew how to answer that
question. The attorney insisted upon
an answer Of yes" or mo" and finally
the Juror replied In the negative. Dur
ing this part OF the examination Nor
Jensen eyed MFR. Bishop intently. The
defense then asked II Mr.. Bishop would
vote for conviction OF murder in the
FIRST degree where the evidence was
clrcumstantial. Then came the blasting
OF hopes. The Juror replied emphatical-
ly that he would not. The defense
passed him for cause and Mr., Eichnor
challenged him without asking a ques.
tion. OF course there was no resistance
from the other side and Mr. Bishop was
excused.
w, ]. Burton, George w Dent and II.
J. Faust each had opinions and were
challenged and excused for implied bias.
f.. S. Squires in answer to questions
put by Barnard Stewart for the de-
tense, stated that ne had not formed al
opinion Fs to the guilt or innocence
OF the defendant. He said that lac
could not forget what he had read
about the case, but he could lay II aside
and try the case fairly and impartiaily
The fact that defendant did not put
IN any evidence would not affect MS
verdict in the least as he would require
the prosecution TO prove him guilty be-
yOnd reasonable doubt. Mr.. Squires
stated that he had seen defendant
about four years ago; he had waited
upon him In his barber shop He stat
ed further that he knew Mr.. Morten-
sens father in California; that they
were associated together-in a religious
way about seven years ago. During
the year that he was there he saw
the elder Mr.. Mortensen once a week
He also knew defendants mother and
brother Jesse. He was acquainted with
Mr. Sharp good many years In a
religious way. He stated further that
he had talked with a party who had
visited the scene of the murder and
who had described the grave and sur
roundings, but II did not affect his
mind or make any impression as to
the guilt or innocence Of the defendant.
Mr.. Squres had no belief or dis
belief as to whether or not Mr. Sharp
had revelation that the defendant was
guilty Of the murder Of his son-in-law
50 he was challenged by the defense
nd evqtca1