The Washington herald. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1906-1939, 1907-03-03
DEFENSE WINS POINT
No Bebuttal to Prove By
waters Good Intentions.
SANITY EXPERTS ON STAND
DIR. Charles Clark Testifies That the
StrOthers, Under circumstances,
Were Irrational at Time of Killing.
DIR. Drury, for State, says IL Was
Only Anger, Almost to Last Degree.

Culpeper, Va, March Counsel for
the defense and prosecution in the
SuOther trial engaged In a second legal
battle to-day, resulting in an additional
victory for the former through the ex-
clusion of practically all the rebuttal tes-
timOny planned TO be introduced by the
Commonwealth attorneys Through the
ruling Of Judge Harrison, the State has
been limited in precisely the same man
ner that District Attorney Jerome. of
New York, was restricted in the Thaw
case.
The point at issue was the admissibility
OF the testimony of witnesses for the
Commonwealth tending TO attack the
stated belief Of the defendants, that VIII
liam F. Bywaters was about to desert
their sister. whom ne had ruined and had
been forced to marry, when they shot
and killed him. The court ruled that no
testimony was admissible except that
having bearing upon the state OF mind
of the accused, and that it made no diff
ference what Bywaters really intended to
do or what he told people other than the
defendants he intended TO do, unless It
could be shown that these intentions or
statements had been communicated to the
defendants prior 10 the shooting.
Parallel Ruling In Thaw Case.
Judge Harrison laid stress upon the fact
that the testimony Of the defendants and
their witnesses in regard to what were
supposed TO be Bywaters' intentions was
only admissible because of its value as
provocatiCn or in respect TO its bearing
upon the mental state of the accused at
the time OF the homicide. This argument
is identical with that sustained by Judge
Fitzgerald in the Thaw case in regard to
the admissibility Of Evelyn Thaws testl-
mony
Besides the advantage gained by the de-
Tense through the exclusion of the Com
monwealths rebuttal testimony, counsel
bad an excellent day with their insanity
expert and that of the State. Or. Charles
Clark. OF St Elizabeths Asylum at
Washington, stated his belief that the
brothers mentioned in the hypothetical
question prepared yesterday and read to-
Gay were mentally irresponsible az the
time Of the shooting. and no cross-exami-
nation could shake his statements Dr.
W. +. Drury. superintendent OF the Cen
tral State Hospital for the Negro Insane
at Petersburg. Va. who was called by
the State, was not so fortunate. and his
testimony lost considerable weight, in so
far as being favorable to the prosecution
is concerned, after the gruelIing examina-
ton to which Attorney Lee subjected him.
DIR. Drury on Last Degree of Anger.
DR. Drury made the statement early ia
his direct examination that he thought
the act of shooting one Of violent anger.
almost 20 the last degree" This was
bounced upon by Attorney Lee, who de-
manded 10 know what the last degree"
is Or. Drury said it was complete loss
Of mental control Mr.. Lee then wanted
him 90 draw the line between the last
degree and the next TO last degree which
DR. Drury admitted was almost an i'm
possibility. The inference the defense
meant 70 be drawn was that il was inn
possible 90 tell just where sanity ends and
ins2nity begins. Dr. DTurys testimony
helped decidedly TO draw that inference.
The trial dragged on to-day slowly be-
cause Of several delays in the proceedings
caused by legal discussions and the with
drawal Of counsel to consult witnesses
and authorities There was less interest
manifested by the citizens of tire town
ana coJnty than at any other stage OF
the trial, the nature of the proceedings
being somewhat too technically legal for
the delectation OF many of those who
thronged the courtroom during the early
part of the trial.
DIR. Clark on Witness stand.
DR.. Clark was called to the stand i'm
mediately upon the opening Of the morn
ing session. The long hypothetical ques-
ton amended yesterday after much argu-
ment from both sides, was read to him
by Attorney Moore.
Having heard those facts, doctor, how
would you characterize the mental con-
dition of the brothers at the time of the
homicide?" said Mr.. Moore.
Il would characterize it as an irresist-
ible impulse Impulsive insanity il is
called"
rs mental arrangement due to any
one Cause?
The causes are numerous"
What is the principal cause of de-
rangement2"
stress or strain on the mind"
"Can there be a arrangement without
previous disease"
In my opinion there can be-
The expert was then turned over to
Capt Micajah Wood for cross-examina-
ton.
"If these men talked of killing Mr. By
waters after the marriage, and did kill
him. CARRYING out a plan which they
had previously reasoned out and DELHI
Grated over, where is the insanity there?'
asked Capt. Woods.
Attorney Moore objected.
Judge Harrison said the State had
right TO put its theory of the case in
the question
It was answered by Or. Clark, who
said that the act itself was impulsive
do YOU consider the discussion of the
probability OF lis leaving @t index Of
Insanity"
No"
Anger Not Insanity.
do you consider the sending of Philip
to watch him an index of insanity"
ono"
DO you consider the placing of James
hand on his shoulder and the question,
What are you going to do% as an evil
dence OF Insanity"
No"
DO you consider James thinking OF
how Bywaters might escape and run
ming down stairs to intercept him, as an
index OF insanity"
NO"
Isn't temper or anger exhibited by
actions. simply emotions?"
Yes
Now, take a hungry man with a pIs-
tol in his hand. He goes into a bakery,
points the pistol at the baker and says