The Washington times. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1902-1939, 1907-02-05

ably viii be one of the early witnesses
The strong points in the defense win
be the submission OF evidence 10 show
first the threats uttered b. White
against ThaW; second, the astonishing
evidence OF hereditary insanity on bOtn
sides OF the family Of the defendant,
third cOgnent proof that IhaW was sur
fering from Temporary insanity al the
time OF the killing Of Stanford White.
Insanity Experts Testimony.
The nrst witness called by the de-
tense in the trial of Harry X. Thaw was
DIR. Charles H. Wiley. the Thaw wit
ness. He was questioned by Mr. Glea-
son.
Estate what experience you have
had with reference 10 insanity.
Al was assistant superintendent Of
the Pennsylvania state Hospital, and
then for three years, since my resigna-
ton from the hospital, L have had a
large practice In insanity cases
do YOU recognize the defendant as
a person you saw IN lsJo.
o-f can your attention 10 ar occur
renee IN 1865 and ask you where you hrs1
saw him.
A.-On a street car. ,.,-..
Q.-WheTe was that, and what ala you
A.-on a Fifth avenue car, He came
into the car and. apparently without
any purpose in mind. he pulled UP MS
arm and snapped up the BIND ne tilts
Qndicaung). The conductor pulleu II
down, ana he pushed mis- hand up again
This was repeated several times.
Q.-What was his manner after he SAT
down again?
Ale seemed dazed-
Q.-Was his acts rational or IRA
tional?
b.
judge from the facts whether prisoner
Is rational OF not
Allowed 10 aswer. DIT. Wiley said;
''Irra Jional.'
Jerome FOils a Lead.
Q.-Win you tell us II the events that
occurred at the opening Of theatrical
garden when the defendant. after firing
three shots al man, Joined his vile
and calmly walked out with her while
in the custody OF officers and told her,
We'll, dearie, i have probably saved
your life indicate whether mat man
Is sane or insane? You as ali expert
ought 70 know.
District Attorney Jerome objected 10
the question, raising the point hat II
was d hypothetical one.
You are at liberty 10 inquire as 10
any particular Instance the witness may
have knowledge Of said Justice Fltz-
gerald.
Put the question in different form,
and j will allow it, said the justice.
Q.-Are you able 10 express an opinion
on the facts as stated 10 youE
Any opinion-I believe that man
was insane.
Q.-Is the question of hereditary an
important tacIOrf
A.-Ies, sir.
ON referring 10 The question Of
hereditary insanity would you regard
the insanity OF relatives Of The defend
ant, who traced their origin 10 a COM
mon source, as Important
Mir Jerome objected. Hereditary in
nuences have nothing TO do with the
question" he said.
Cross-examined by Mr.. Jerome:
ON case the faint Of insanity was
in the blood OF cousin VINO was porn
after the birth OF the defendant. would
ven say that the insanity of that cousin
indicated an hereditary tendency 10 IN
sanity in the defendant
Al would not
Jerome Grows Sarcastic.
O.-You call hereditary insanity a
legacy-are yoq acquainted with the
form OF mental alteration which the
laws OF this state allow as an excuse
Tor crime?
Al am not fully acquainted with IL.
Q.-NOur opinion Is based on the hypo-
thetical question put 20 you, IS II nOtE
A.-That is all a man can base an
opinion on. ] must explain
You need not explain said Jerome.
simply answer. yes or no.
Q.-And you, an expert a man call
ing yourself an expert
beg your pardon said the witness.
Il do not call myself an expert
O.-BOuL You cali yourself an expert
We don't know you and you must know
whether you are one, Your opinion
was based entirely upon what you one
night observed IN a car in Plttsburg
and upon the facts as presented in-the
hypothetical question just propounded 10
you BY the defendants cOunselr
Axes.
Q.-And you consider yourself an ex-
pert in insanity?
Al believe man who gives an
opinion in a matter OF this kind should
be an expert
Q.-Well. are you an expert?
Al think any physician who has had
the experience have had in certain
cas- IS should be considered an expert.
Q--But 1 ask you again are you or
are you not an expert
A. after much cOnsideration)-Yes
Q--Does the profession consider you
sr expert?
C.-Do you agree with the profession?
A.-Wen, now, / think ! am.
Q.-As an expert, do you believe the
defendant was insane when he killed
stanford. White because OF the meagre
testimony you ofIer OF something that
A.-Aes.
Q--And you mean to say that on
those meagre facts you. as a scientific
man. give your opinion under oath thai
In your opinion, this defendant was in
Saneg
A.-Yes.
Thinks Thaw Guiltless.
Here the redirect examination was
taken up by Lawyer Gleason.
ON your opinion. the defendant. at
the time he committed the act knew
a. was wrong
Al don't think he did.
Il object" shouted Mr.. Jerome; IAN
sWer yes or no."
NO" answered DR. Wiley.
Questioned by Mr.. Jerome:
Q--Now, ] ask YOU II. when You said
the defendant may not have known the
act was wrong
Objection by Mr.. Gleason on the
ground that the witness had not testi-
fed 10 such fact. The objection was
9verruled.