The Worthington advance. [volume] (Worthington, Minn.) 1874-1908, 1904-03-25

y - a w I..l .!l ~ b. N! N
fHS YsScsu II Y ~ u u slsl G
i u I would ~ that the force sumo,
lent 10 produce such fractures would
destroys large portion q the brain
and render it unfit for further use as
brain, and the result on the parts
not destroyed would ma e them un-
able to perform any fun ,tion. MY 4
opinion is that death occurred prac-
tically instantaneous tha It all volun->
tary motion would stop pit once, and
ali involuntary motion would be
very limited in extent a pa OF snort
duration. ~. ~.
Noon recess. ..,~, . ~.
Tuesday afternoon; -
>Cross-examination of DR.. May: "
Have had no experience with. gun
shot wounds in the h bad. Have
never been present vine b a man re-
ceived gunshot wcahd in the head
been present before death
ensued. My sources of Information
as to effect of wounds in the bead
has been derived from bobks, some
experiments, etc. 1t sonnet times hap
pens that conclusions OF medical
men concerning the effects OF :.
wounds are afterward shown not to 7
be right. No two men would prob
ably act the same-in muscular at-'>
t1on-before death. In forming my
opinion of course used my, know. :.
ledge other than that of medicine in
arriving at it. One Of my reasons
for believing that death was practice
ally immediate is that Ibelieve that
the functions of the organs presid i
ing over the respiratory organs were 1
destroyed. Base this conclusion on :
what believe to have been the dam
age to these organs Did not SEQ
these organs. There might be SER
ious damage not visible to the max y
ed eye. My opinion is there must
have been great injury to these
parts.
DIR. Clark, rebuttal: Assuming the
testimony of DIR. Walker to be true
concerning the fractures OF the
skull, my opinion as to the. amount
of injury which would result to the
brain from force which would so
fracture the skull, is that it would
be very extensive, that death would
ensue at once, and that motion
would cease Immediately. This
would not only be brought about by
the wounds, but by the conclusion
and shock to the brain.
Cross:examination: Conclusion is
the result of a blow. It jars the
brain. The amount-of the jar would
cause amount of injury heavy jar
might produce death, a lighter one
might MOTT might produce uncon-
seriousness. Have seen three or four
cases of gun shot wounds. Have
no personal. experience as to the
effects Of gun shot wound in the
head.
DIR. Tomlinson, rebuttal: Assum-
ing the testimony of DR.. Walker
about the fractures in the skull to
be true, my opinion would be that
force sufficient to produce such frac-
lures would cause death-would de-
stroy the functions Of brain practic-
ally Immediately. The force of the
impact of the blow would produce
concussion-a condition OF commo-
tion-to all parts Of the brain. Vol
untary motion would cease immedi-
ately, but as to involuntary, don't
know. My opinion is that a second
or two would be all, %<.
Characterization: Don't believe
that such a severe conclusion cou Id
exist without serious injury to the
medulla. "a number of instances of
severe injury to the brain were CIV
en- the jury where a se,ious injury
had not resulted:) Void not make
a positive assertion as tp the length
Of time involuntary M otion might
continue.
Redirect: Witness fold of case
where he had made a post-mortem
of a head two hours after death
where a similar wound was receiv-
ed. He found the brain about as
described by DR.. Walker. :.r .ee*..
STATE RESTS. !.
DR.. Andrews, called IN febuttal* for
defense: TOOK the hands of Klause