The Salt Lake herald. [volume] (Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1870-1909, 1908-01-06
EVELYN MAY NOT
TELL HER STORY.
Pressure Brought to Bear Upon
Jerome to Bar Testimony
of ThaW'S Young Wife.
DEFENSE WILL BE INSANITY
TRIAL BEGINS BEFORE JUSTICE
BOWLING TODAY.

New York. Jan. 5.-On the eve of the
second trial of Harry K. Thaw. which
viii begin tomorrow before Judge Vic
tor Bowling of the superior court, comes
the report that District Attorney Jer
ONE may attempt this time to bar the
testimony of Mrs. Evelyn Nesbit-Thaw,
wife of the accused man. At the first
trial this testimony was allowed to go
before the jury with the consent of the
district attorney, who said that the pre-
cedent set in the case of the State
against Wood seemed to cover the mat
ter. Several criminal lawyers of prom
inence in their profession have argued
the point with Mr.. Jerome since the
close of the first hearing and have urg-
ed him to oppose this line of testimony
at the trial about to begin. These at
toTneys declare a vital principle of law
is involved, and that it should go to the
highest courts for determination.
Jerome's Position Unknown.
Mr.. Jerome has given no definite an
swer to his fellow members of the bar,
and may feel impelled to consent to an
other recital of Mrs. Thaws story to
prevent an appearance of inconsistency
with his course of a year ago. But the
representations made to him as to the
Importance to the community at large
of testing the legality of such testimony
have been unusually strong. and many
of the prosecuting officers closest
friends would not be surprised if he
should rise in his place when Mrs. Thaw
is called as a witness and contend
against the admissibility of her testi-
mOny.
Young Mrs. Thaw was allowed to
testify at the first trial upon the theory
that it was her story, told TO Thaw in
Paris in 1903, two years before their
marriage, that planted the seeds of
temporary insanity in his brain. The
prosecution was not allowed to test the
truth or falsity of the story, the court
rule being that. regardless of its truth,
the issue had to do solely with the ef-
feet upon the defendants mind. Mr.
Jerome offered witnesses who. he de-
clared, would contradict certain of the
girl-wife's statements, but they were
not allowed to be heard. The prosecu-
ton had its only recourse in a severe
cross examinatiOn, but even this was
allowed only on the ground of testing
the cfedibility of the witness in a gen
eral way.
Precedent for Virginia Case.
Already the RUE ldlQ uOWn III the
Thaw case has served as a precedent
in another. A former judge in Virgin
ia recently shot and killed a young man
against whom his daughter had made
charges of having drugged her. The
young woman admitted that she had not
told her father the truth, but he was
acquitted on the ground that her story
true or. false. had the effect of influence /
ing the parents mind to an insane de- /
gree. The presiding judge followed the I!
rule set down in the Thaw case.
The lawyers who have approached Mr.. /
Jerome on the subject are inclined to
the opinion that there are vital diff /
between the Thaw case and /
that of Wood, which served as a pre- /
cedent at the trial before Judge Fitz- /
gerald. The Wood case was one in /
which Woods wife told him that her 1
father had been guilty or improper re-
IatiOns with her before her marriage /
and had recently sought her again |
Wood, in the heat of passion, straight |
way emptied a shotgun into his father
in-law. killing him instantly. The de-
tense was one of insanity, brought on
BY the awful story of the wife. The de-
Tense pointed out is that in the Thaw
ease the killing did not occur until
three years after the recital which is
alleged to have melted the deed. The
awyers say the defense is just as vital
Continued on Page 2.