New Ulm review. (New Ulm, Brown County, Minn.) 1892-1961, 1905-05-17

prison are gaping, and there is every
inducement for the defense to fabricate
Perhaps the defendant knew that his
machine was to be sent away at once
when he used it. Perhaps he knew
nothing about alignments and pur
pie ribbons.
The mail clerk, Ray, didn't know
where his stamp was the week
before the homicide. Did Sta
ton Agent Thompson and Mr.
Hage lie when they said that they saw
Hanska depot, on Oct 2Sth? Is the
jury going to make so grave a mis-
take as to throw away their evidence?
Did the defendant have an opportu-
nifty to kill DR.. Gebhard? In other
words, was he at or near the premises
at the time of the homicide? The evil
dence on tnis point is overwhelming. In
considering the testimony of witnesses
regarding time, we must make much
II.
nobody is taking note of them When
the news flashes upon them they are
startled and they do not think of
consulting the time The different books
of Scripture do not tally as to time,
but because of this do people throw the
Gospel aside? They were written by
the apostles, who all lived and talked
with the Saviour. If there is little
discrepancies as to time it shows that
the witnesses in this case have not got
together and fabricated 1t is the best
test of their authenticity.
Saw Koch Go By the Window.
AS soon as the Baltrusch boys saw
Koch go by the window they heard
footsteps going up the stairs. It was
but natural for him to walk loudly up
the stairs. He could afford to nave fif-
ty men standing by and watch him go
up the stairs, considering his social po-
sition and standing. His taking the
perfume to Miss Fitzpatrick and being
in Hoidale & Somsen's office were prop
er and tended to disarm suspicion. He
could walk boldly to DR.. Gebhards Of
fee, strike the blow, leave with his
hammer in his pocket, and nc word of
suspicion would point to him.
You can very safely say that the
time that the murder took place was
about $40, considering the evidence of
the witnesses. Was the defendant there
then? We maintain that he was. The
defense has not produced the witness
that it promised to, who was to say
that another man was seen approaching
the stairway. There has not been a word
OF evidence that there was Il man stand
ing in the stairway, as the defense in
opening insinuated. Not witness has
been produced by the defense who saw
DR.. Koch going home that night If
an unknown man committed the
deed, he must have known the de-
PENDANTS hatred for DR.. Gebhard, and
must have had divine knowledge that
the defendant was going to pass the
doorway. He must have had the de-
PENDANTS handkerchief and hammer and
pencil. But DR.. Koch got his pencil
but an hour before, and somebody who
was in Hoidale 4 Somsen's office must
have been the man. When the defense
is besmirching this man and that in
order to shield the defendant, why does
it not turn to the men engaged in that
card game? This unknown man must
have looked like Koch and known anat-
omy. | wondered when counsel so cruel
ly referred to Dr. Reineke whether he
took the jury to be composed of sim
pletons and fools to believe anything
so preposterous.
Hammer, Handkerchief and Pencil.
The hammer, handkerchief and pencil
were found on the floor. Three con-
tusions were on the victims head, as
though done with a hammer, and many
cuts as though done with a knife You
will be justified by the evidence in be-
lieving that the assailant began with
the hammer and finished with the knife,
and made his escape through the win
dow.
1t is conceded that there was in the
Koch family for many years an old
hammer, with broken claw, battered face
and home made handle. The defense
tried to impeach Edgar Dingler by men
convicted of crimes and asked you to
believe them. 1t doesn't appear that he
ever served in jail with any of those
witnesses. He may not be what we
would desire, that he is meak and un-
lettered boy, but it is writ that the
truth is sometimes spoken by babies
A boy sees what you and [ would not
see, and he saw the old hammer on the
window sill in Koch's barn The cir