The Leon reporter. (Leon, Iowa) 1887-1930, 1906-01-11
WANTS A new TRIAL
Charles Woodard who was Convicted
of Poisoning his Wife, Files
Motion for New Trial.

W VaSVusuy no WIZ, uCo
Motion for New Trial.
Charles II. Woodland, by his attorneys
". r. McGinnis and G. w. Hoffman, has
fled petition asking that he be grant
ed new trial. He was convicted of
murder in the first degree at the jan
trict court in 1905, and sentenced to
life Imprisonment in the penitentiary
at Ft. Madison, whore he is is now con-
fined. He asks for new trial and that
the verdict of the jury and Judgment of
the court be set aside on the grounds
of newly discovered evidence, and upon
the grounds of fraud practiced by the
state in his trial in concealing certain
evidence that was in the hands of the
state, and the existence of said evil
dence not being known to his attorneys
or himself, and on the ground that one
A. r. Shrimplin, witness on the part Of
the state swore falsely as to certain
material issues in the trial Of the cause.
He further alleges that prior to the
trial of his case w. 3. Kelley, county
attorney, had in his possession certain
letters written by witnesses for the
state that would have shown conclu-
sively had the defendant known Of said
letters, that long prior to the death of
his wife the said Charles Woodland and
wife had absolutely refused to accept
the policies Of insurance upon her life
and his life and that the insurance COM
pany had been notified Of said fact. That
the letters were in the possession Of
the county attorney, and his examina-
zion disclosed no letters pertaining to
said cause in his possession. A copy of
one of these letters which was written
by G. B. Townsend and sent to defen-
dents company was in the possession of
said Kelley, and concealed by him dur
ing the trial. That neither the defen-
dant or his attorneys had any know
ledge of said letters, or that the same
had been written by witness upon the
part of the state until after the motion
for new trial had been filed and judg-
nent rendered in this cause, and not
until long after the adjournment of the
January, 1905 term Of court. That had
che defendant or his attorneys known
Of said letters they would have been
introduced upon the trial Of the cause
and that had said letters been intro
duced upon the trial it would have
taken from the jury tho consideration
of the question of motive for causing
the death of Eliza j. Woodard, so far as
her life insurance was concerned. That
defendant and his attorneys made a
diligent inquiry to learn all facts of
evidence in said cause and did not and
could not learn Of the existence Of said
letters until long after the conviction
of the defendant. That had either the
defendant or his attorneys know Of said
letters the same would have been in-
troduced in evidence in the trial of said
cause. That A. r. Shrimplin, as defen-
dant is informed and believes, furnish
ed the letters to the county attorney Of
Decatur county, and that he knew Of
the contents of said letters at and
prior to the time he delivered the same
to the county attorney. That notwith-
standing this knowledge the said A. r.
Shrimplin had actual knowledge Of the
contents of said letters, he knowingly,
vickedly and designedly swore on the
trial Of said cause that the insurance
on the life of Eliza j. Woodard was in
full force and effect at the time of her
death SO far as he knew. That said A.
r. Shrimplin at the time knew said
policies were not in force, and were alb
solutely void. That the defendant ex-
poets to show that the parties who
went by on the load of wood the day of
the death of Mrs. Woodland, and being
seen by Jane Brown were not S. Y.
Harger and son, but were parties haul
ing cord wood, and expect to show by
Mrs. Brown that the parties she saw
were in fact hauling cord wood. And
expect to show by Roy Harger that he
and his father were hauling stove wood
in the bottom of the wagon bed the day
Mrs. Woodard died. The defendant also
expects to show by one George Bush
that he was at the Kirkpatrick home
the night of the day that Mrs. Wood
ard died, and that the testimony Of
Hlias Hendrickson and Harrison Brown
was in part manufactured and untrue.
Wherefore the defendant asks that the
verdict and Judgment rendered against
him be set aside and that he be granted
a new trial.
Bfant Raised Them.