The Montgomery advertiser., 1907-12-03
NO PROSPECT
 OF A VERDICT

affected her lentally."
 aShe was no wanton," he added. "She spurped offers of wealth. It was not the breaking up of a family. It was the defense of her young and the seeking of a name for her children"
 Judge Powers read to the jury letters found at the time of the tragedy and already introduced as evidence, fnclud- ing one from Mrs. Bradley to Brown re- ferring to her love for him and the fa- nous. note to Brown from Mrs. Adams. mother of Maud Adams. These letters. Judge Powers said. he forced the gov- ernment to produce.
 "I object" said Mir. Baker, "to the statement you forced us, "Yes,' shouted Judge Powers, you wanted to hold them back for dramatic effort and we forced you to introduce them."
 The court instructed the jury to dis regard the reference to forcing the evil dence.
 The expert witnesses for the govern ment. said Judge Powers, were really associate counsel for the government. Judge Powers closed at 12:30 and the court immediately took recess.
 Attacks Insanity Plea.
 It was 1:13 p. nn. when the court re- convened and District Attorney Baker began the closing argument to the jury. Mrs. Bradley who sat trembling and on the verge of collapse during the morn- ing session had benefited by the noon- day rest and appeared in better condi- tion as she re-entered the court room. MT. Baker at once plunged into the de- fense of insanity set up by Mrs. Brad ley. 'f8&
 "who says this defendant is insane?" he asked.
 He epitomized statements of those who talked with her following the tragedy as showing that her actions were those of sane woman. He de- rided the claim of septic insanity, which condition he said, must have lasted but a few moments, which is in contraven- tion of scientific evidenc®arding du- ration of septic insanity.
 MT. Baker contended that the experts produced by the defense did not snow any symptoms that indicated insanity.
 If she was insane. when did she be- come so and when did she cease to be insane? Of course she was disturbed but who wouldn't be? If you can't ind any evidence of insanity up to the time of the shooting and none since then, it is a strong presumption that she was sane at the time charged in the indict- ment. I don't justify one act Of Arthur Browns. I do say that the deeper you put him in the mud the deeper you put her in the mire. If she showea ner love for Brown would not be measured. could she have offered to go back to her lawful husband Bradley in 1902"
 Pitied Mrs. Bradley.
 He said she could have closed the doors in Browns face when first he tempted her and she would not have had to afterwards "bargain with Brown" for her illegitimate children or answer the charge of murder. But, no. he added. there was no rebuff to his advances. There were meetings at un- seemly hours, when the woman listens the victory is half won. pity the de- fendant but this so-styled poor little woman importuned Brown again ana again to divorce his wife and live with her openly breaking up his home.
 Mir. Becker made the point that the crime was conceived at Salt Lake City. When Mrs. Bradley. he said. called at the Ebbitt House in this city TOT her mail, which showed she had ieft di- rections to have her mail forwarded from Salt Lake. and therefore she pur- posed coming here when she made the trip. He said the revolver she carried into Browns hotel room here just De- fore the tragedy was meant Tor Brown" MT. Baker closed at 3:14 D, m. By permission of the court At torney Hoover for the defense replied to the new point regarding the for- warding of Mrs. Bradley's mail to tnls city. Hoover said the evil showed that when she left Salt Lake she had no intention of going to Washington At s:25 D. m. Judge Stafford began his charge to the jury. He pointed ont the circumstances governing the different verdicts which might be rem dered. He asked the jury to first look at the case outside of the question of sanity. He said the jury should de- termine whether she said intelligently and understandingly that she shot him and whether she actually said she was Justified in so doing, as far as any one could be justified. He said there had been no argument that she fired in self defense. that of course when one takes life in self defense, it is justifiable 1T the jury had any reasonable doubt whether the shooting was in self -de- fense, the defendant should be held not guilty. "as there is no direct evi- dence as to how the shooting did oe. cur" said the Judge, T simply call attention to this as possibility that might be considered" Judge Makes ~Suggestion. The court also suggested the con- sideration of the possibility off accir