The Minneapolis journal. [volume] (Minneapolis, Minn.) 1888-1939, 1905-01-16
DR.. Koch Declares on Oath the Bloody.
Bit of Cloth Does Not Belong
T to Him.
Defense Opens Up Every Phase Of the
Case in It's Questions to the
Accused.

Special to The Journal. --:
/ New UIm, MInn., Jan. 16.-Dr. Koch
| was shown the blood stained handker--
chief this afternoon and denied It's own
ershIp, and said he had never seen 1t
| before. -
| He also testified that his black crav-
anet coat, which he wore the night OF
! the murder, was stolen from his office
three weeks after the crime.
] New Ulm, Mimi, Jan. 16.-The su-
preme moment in the Koch murder trial
| was reached at 9:45 this morning when
the defendant was sworn as witness.
! That which the defense had promised
and which the state had doubted that it
young dentist took the stand.
Even then the state was doubtful if
he would be fully examined, as it was
thought the defense would be afraid
to turn him over to the state for a
cross-examination. The state was mis-
taken, however. for the examination
had not continued five minutes when
every point Of the testimony including
the identity Of the hammer, the mail
ing of the poison and the writing Of
the word, Hsample, - as well as the re-
lations that existed between him and
Gerhard. -, s.. E..
m s.77 State Is Challenged. =.
This was simply throwing down the
gates and saying to the state:
"Here is the man. Examine and
question him; do whatever the court
will allow, and if there is one thing in
him or his relations with the murdered
man that will prejudice the case in the
/ Of fhn nd
]; DR.. Koch was good witness. He was
boyish in the extreme and he told his
i stery in az stra forward manner that
could not do otherwise than Garry
weight with it.
| Nothing New in Evidence. 49,
While DR.. Koch s testimony was one
Of the features of the trial, it contained
absolutely nothing which the public did
Of his whereabout on the night of the
homicide exactly as he told it to T h e
journal on the Sunday follow.
ing. In not even the slightest detail
was there variation. The state may
break down some part of his story in
the cross-examination, but the weak
points were not apparent on direct
His story was simple and straightfor
WARD. He said he knew absolutely
nothing about the facts surrounding
the homicide, and all he could tell the
jury was what he knew about himself.
When court adjourned for the moor
recess there was only one feature OF
the case about which he had not beer
:: questioned. That was the handkerchief
: found in the dead dentist IS room. But
he has already said, tho not under oath
that he knows nothing about it.
State Loaded for Rebuttal.
The state is making preparations fo1
some strong evidence in rebuttal. The
summonlng Of several witnesses gives
: weight to the report that the state will
try to impeach the testimony of Asa
?. Brooks, who swore positively that
the man he saw leaning over Gerhard 4
body was not DR.. Koch. It is also pos
slble that Anton Richert will be sworn
to testify that DR.. Koch g father had
told him that George had arrived home
: at 10 O'Clock on the night Of the muir
Koch and nullify the alibi.
: The evidence for the defense will
probably be completed today, the
state g rebuttal by noon tomorrow, and
Tuesday afternoon and Wednesday fore
noon used in making the arguments
Then the case will go to the jury some
time Wednesday afternoon.
Pale, but In Good Voice. T.,
At 9:45 this forenoon Mr.. Abbott
called DR.. Koch to the stand. Without
a moments hesitation the. defendant
walked briskly to the. stand, took the
oath and reclined easily in his chair
allowing one hand to rest in his Lar
and the other on the arm of the chair
He was trifle pale, but his voice was
clear and strong. He answered every
: question without hesitation and his an
pearance was that of a good witness
During the examination the juror!
leaned forward in their seats and lis
: tened intently.
"How long had you. known DR.. Geb
! hardq' asked Mr.. Abbott. :"
Ever since he came here.'
IBID he eyer y e do any professional
eyes, he did work for me in the frs
week Of September. !"
"Did you ever do work for him?'
eyes, last july
"Did he have any grievance agains
youq"
!: HING
1T did not
HDid you have any other offices?'
eyes, at Lafayette and at Hanska. ,
What What o were your purposes in open
tsTo get acquainted with the farm
! ers. [ had no intention Of continuin,
5 the offices permanently
"When was the last time you wen
|. to Hanska9o
1sOn Thursday, Oct. 90. On sugges
.. tion Of DR.. Wood I went down on Thurs
. day instead of Wednesday,
Did Not Send the Poison.
!. ssDid you ever mail or send that BIO,
!: to Dr. Gebhard or did you ever see tina
!. label before it was produced in court? ;
. emo, sir.
! Did you ever see that bottle befor