Deseret evening news. [volume] (Great Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1867-1920, 1908-03-24
Iuvrl,m n. Evans, Foreman Tells
The Story Of the Forty
Eight Hours Debate.
WHY CHAS. DENNEY HELD OUT
He Accepted Every Statement of
Sullivan, But Declined to
Believe Mrs. Belcher.
r,vo Othcr Jurors stood With Him
Abb Question. However, Con-
sumed Most of Two Days.

Although the jury in the Sullivan
murder case had an agreement be-
fween themselves not TO divulge what
Ane proceedings of the jury room were.
statement attributed to Charles
Denney appears in a morning paper to
nc effect that undue influence was
thought to bear upon him to induce
him to change his vote. According 10
the story. nine men on the jury held
OUT for conviction practically from the
first. while three men. headed by Den
new were for verdict OF acquittal;
thu three persisted in holding out. Dem
ney claiming he could not vote for
convictlon on account of the testimony
of Buckley. bartender at the Albany
saloon at the time of the holdup, who
eaid he could not be positive that Sui
Ivan was the man he saw as the two
robbers rushed out of the building. 1t
WAS claimed that Denney said some
Of the Juror threatened to go into court
And charge him with perjury if he did
not vote with the majority for ver-
dc of conviction.
EVANS DENIES IT.
"A representative of the News this
morning queried Hyrum II. Evans,
Foreman of the Sullivan jury, as to the
morning papers statement attributed to
Denney. Mr.. Evans appeared reluctant
% talk in regard TO the matter. as. he
sad the jury had agreed to keep silent
q to their deliberations in the jury
nom. But II seems that the agree
nent has been broken said Foreman
Evans, "and in view of that fact. and
MAJ it has been charged that Juror
penney was threatened and brow-
haten into voting with the majority, /
"a not see why i should longer keep
xjlent.
Il viii say that Mr.. Denney was not
Asked to change his opinion or to vote
Miner than. his firm convictions in the
matter. Some members of the jury be-
3ltyed that Juror Denney had intrench-
ii himself behind ali untenable posi-
don in refusing TO accept the testimony
b witness because they had changed
ib,e statement different now from what
hey did in the preliminary examina-
lion aud refusing TO accept any of said
testimony on the grounds that they had
He'd" said Foreman Evans, but ac-
eepting of every statement made by
D. defendant Sullivan"
Il Mrs. Belcher is the witness referred
Al by Mr.. Evans, the woman testify
ilig In the preliminary hearing that
Sullivan had left her house about
midnight and did not return on the
hight of the murder; but on the trial
~ the case she changed her testimony
Bud said that sullivan and Garcia re-
burned TO her room and remained UNI
Ill between and o'clock in the
porning.
HOW VERDICT WAS REACHED.
'Mr Denney also refused to believe
Mr. Buckeyes statement as to the
identity of sullivan, because he did
fot state positively that he knew sui
liyan was the man whom he saw in
ihe saloon with gun at the time of
Pc holdup, Some Of the jury argued
fhat Buckley's statement was more
credible from the fact that It was not
positive, as the man seen by him had
handkerchief tied over the bridge
of his nose, hiding the most Of his
hce, and the rim of HIS hat was turn
~ down over his eyes: and with the
llght shining on him from above, IL
as a difficult matter to identify the
1nan positively as Sullivan. and they
ihe case, but he was not able to see
that way until half an hour after
PIC report was made. The other iur-
!rs were partial to Dcnney's Views,
4ut When Denney finally said he was
convinced the position of the majority
AS the reasonable one, and Joined
fis vote with theirs. the other two
pen came over and the verdict was
1tached.
Il wish to state emphatically." re-
leated Foreman Evans. that there
as no attempt at intimidation or CO.
trclon used On any lurcr, and no at
tnpt TO get man to vote other than
hat he believed to he according TO
'he evidence In the case.
A.IBI THE POSER.
THE matter Of the alibi which Sui
van attempted To prove, took up IA
tIrat deal Of the two days time the
uiS was out, and at every point
mere his statement could be disprov-
II was disproVed, AZ. for instance.
N statement that he boarded me
ialh at Woods Cross. The only train
lat passed Woods Cross that night
aSsed the station at the rate of %
lles an hour. At every point where
ny evidence could be secured on the
pleet' his claimed abb was eXplOd-
absolutely.
Al Inc points We're thoroughly
sene over by the jury, the fact that
good-byes Were exchanged when
lllVan claimed that he and Garcia
ha owen parted at the depot being
uceable; the jurA being of the
pnllon that three such close friends,
uung for one Of them TO go on a
urheN would at least exchange a
0ou-nSe greeting, nothing of this ma
~ was done, according TO the tos-
7,nnohy Of the defendant himself.
me statement that any member OF
KY was threatened with periury
'"lge " he did not change his vote,
ansolutely untrue said Foreman
.ahs' ~ conclusion. "and | wish TO
sslh repeat that no undue influences
''e used IN the jury room whatever"
WOMEN sYMPATHIzERs.
After the verdict was rendered Yes.
uey attefnoon, when the officers APP
'aehed sullivan 10 handcuf him
w, h"llecd standing just few feet
OF sullivan's chair, two young
Aen. who were standing with irreso-
Steps aH If they would speak with
~ prisoner They had tears IN their
fttl tal.a To- A. "a