The Sisseton weekly standard. (Sisseton, Roberts County, S.D.) 1892-1929, 1905-05-19


agree upon verdict. 1t is impossi-
bic, at this time, to state how the jury
stood. but 1t is reported that large
majority favored acquittal. Two jul
rors favored a finding of a lower de-
gree of murder. but that was held i'm
possible under the evidence The state
has not yet announced whether a third
trial will be held.
Mankato, Mimi, May 14-Attorney
Brown occupied the whole of yester-
day afternoon in his closing argument
for the defense in the DR.. Koch muir
der trial. He had not concluded
when court adjourned, and will con-
tinue to-day.
Judge Cray then will instruct the
jury and that body will retire, in all
probability before noon.
While the final arguments of Mr.
Childs of the state and Mr.. Brown of
the defense were being made yester-
day the court room was crowded to
its full capacity.
Throughout yesterdays proceedings
the youthful defendant showed little
concern.
Brown AssaiIs States Case.
Mr.. Brown summed up in part as
follows:
you have heard from the prosecu-
ton the imaginary details of this
crime. You have been told how the
murderer went step by step upon his
prey. Is there any evidence of that?
You have been told how a profession
al fiend could do this atrocious and
unnatural crime; could realize that he
had been seen and recognized by an
acquaintance and could go to his
home and bed, to sleep soundly, when
would follow him. The next day he
went down town and mingled with the
people and kept at his work, not as
though he expected at any time to be
tapped on the shoulder by the sheriff.
What Was the Motive?
I'VE have a real, not an imaginary
crime, and the defendant has been be-
fore you and told his story. We do not
ask you to believe word of it. Why
do men commit murder? History
teaches us that men commit murder
only for the most serious motives. and
that is where we meet the most seri-
GUS stumbling block IN this case. The
great, ringing question is Why would
he do it?'
"You are told that at Hanska I,
stranger to DR.. Koch came to him;
was in his Office a few minutes, and
received a proposition to kill DR.. Geb
hardt for pay. If the defendant had
harbored designs upon DR.. Gebhardts
life, it is unbelievable that he would
say to an absolute stranger what he
is said to have said to Ulen.
"The evidence in this case does not
rise to the dignity of circumstantial
evidence Circumstantial evidence
must be admitted as facts, but in this
case we dispute every circumstance.
Considers the Pencil.
There is the bogy pencil The de-
PENDANT has never denied that he had
such per Gil. Who has said that the
pencil did not come out of some one
else's pocket, and is there any proof
that DR.. Gebhardt did not have a
pencil?
"'The defendant could not have gone
home that night with bloody clothes
without his family knowing about it.
If the plan is going to be adopted in
this county that PERSONS relatives
are to be condemned as unfit to tell
the truth, we might as well dissolve
this little clay government that we
have ana go back to primitive times
Attorney Brown here went into re.
cital of the evidence produced regard
ing the hammer found near the muir.
dered man, and also regarding the
handkerchief with the initials &c.
r. X"
Hammer Was Gebhardt's.
He said that the evidence showed
beyond a reasonable doubt that the
hammer was the property of Css
Oc