Daily Kennebec journal. [microfilm reel] (Augusta, Me.) 1870-1975, 1905-05-20
MRS. ROGERS HEARING.
Counsel Presents Reasons for Granting
Her . New Trial.

Montpelier, VT, May ia hearing
by the supreme court Of vermont on
the petition for a new trial Tor Mrs.
Mary NJ. Rogers, sentenced to be
hanged for the murder of her husband,
Marcus NJ. Rogers, was begun here.
Friday. Thomas w. Moloney of Rut-
land, counsel for Mrs. Rogers, present.
ed affidavits of physicians and other
persons bearing on the case, particu-
larly bringing out the point that the
doctors who performed the autopsy on
Rogers body did not report upon a
fracture of the skull at the base of the
brain which subsequently was discov-
cred.
Mr.. Moloney then made an extended
argument in favor of a new trial, con-
tending that the government had en-
deavored to prove that Rogers died of
suffocation, whereas it was possible
the injury to the skull might have
caused death. He alluded to the con-
fession of Leon Perham, the. alleged
accomplice of Mrs. Rogers, who is
serving term Of life Imprisonment for
that crime. He also spoke of what he
termed the low order of intelligence
of Mrs. Rogers. of insanity alleged to
be in her family and Of her weak phys
ical condition at the time of the MUIR
der.
Mr. Moloney stated that if violence
sufficient to fracture the skull was APP
piled then the whole testimony of Leon
Perham. which afforded the principal
ground for the conviction of Mrs. Reg
ers. was false. If Mrs. Rogers had in
| fiicted such an injury, Perham would
have had no reason to conceal the fact
and fabricate story about the use of
| chlorOfOrm, the attorney said. Ihe
| sole purpose of Justification on the
part of Perham, he said, was to tighten
| the blame on himself for he was the
only other person who was with her
at the time the crime was committed
| and who could have inflicted the in
jury. Mr.. Moloney claimed that Per-
hams affidavit in which he admitted
| that he falsified "to save his own
| neck" made it plain that Rogers was
not killed in the manner shown at the
| trial.
Regarding the insanity theory Mr..
| Moloney cited affidavits to show that
Rogers had believed his wife insane and
| ndu TepOTleu IL " Il piiSSitit live N"y y
| before he was killed and that two days
before his death this physician had ex-
amined her and found her suffering
from form of insanity.
| Attorney MalOney's arguments occu-
MED the entire forenoon session of the
court This afternoon, Attorney Gen
| Clark c. Fits argued in behalf of the
state. opposing the peti,icr for new
trial. The contention of the state was
| in brief:
| That the fracture Of the skull Of Mar
Gus Rogers was made by the physicians
who performed the autopsy. in remov-
ling the brain. which they found to be
normal. thereby disposin;s of the theory
THAT Rogers had received G wound or
the head severe enough to cause death,
that the evidence does not prove insani-
ty: that Mrs Rogers was in Benning.
ton all day. two days before her hus-
bands death. thus contra dieting the
levidence of the Hoosick Falls physician
who depOsed that ne examined her fol
symptoms of insanity two days before
the murder. and. lastly, that the state.
|ments of Leon Perham to the effect that
he had testified falsely in the county
court could not be relied upon, the state
lcontending that Perham was mentally
weak and would give any kind of a de.
sired answer under duress.
Attorney General Fits declared that
ID. A. Guiltenan. one of Mrs. Rogers
/ counsel at the time OF the trial in the
county court. had six months in which
to prepare his case and that if there
had been any evidence of insanity he
would have discovered it. The HOOsick
Falls physician. who claims to have ex-
laminod Mrs. Rogers, and Mrs. Josie
ICaIlahan. the woman's mother. were
Ineither summoned. although both were
within a short distance Of Bennington
the scene of the crime ard trial. Nc
levidence had been introduced. he said
to show that Mrs. Rogers acted any diff
lferontly before or after the murder than
she did at other times. nothing. in fact
that would lead to an acceptance of the
Insanity theory.
| The attorney general was followed by
John H. Senter Of this city, one of the
attorneys for Mrs. Rogers. Mr.. Senter
said that he did not claim that the affi-
davits of any one person was sufficient
to grant a new trial, but taken collec-
lively these aftidavits furnished, in his
opinion, cause for new trial. He
claimed that the new evidence would
raise a reasonable doubt in the minds
Of the jurymen as to the degree Of MUIR
der
The court took the matter under con-
:idera ton and will report it's decision
later. probably Monday or Tuesday,
next.