The Detroit times. [volume] (Detroit, Mich.) 1903-1920, 1908-10-23
FAVOR CONVICTED:
COURT HOLDS UP
SENTENCE
,contiuaed from rase oneJ

tConfinued from fuee onc.)
he said. I'VE don't ask you to throw
out. her testimony because OF the IN
fortunate position she occupies in so
ciety. We want you 10 nnalyze her
statements as you would those OF the
most reputable OF Witnesses.
Murtha made the most OF the contra
dictions In the woman's testimony,
though none or them materially af-
fected the issue. He referred 20
Favor as the messenger boy OF the
man who controlled the precinct
meaning Capt. Newberry. thus leading
up 10 the theory OF the defense that
the only promise made by Favor. under
Annie's own testimony, was u fix
things with the captain So she could
continue the resort. Nothing in this
language could be construed az a
promise. express or implied. not 10
prosecute her, Murtha contended.
Assistant Prosecutor McClear, clos
ing for the people. began by compli'
menting the police department as q
whole, referring TO Favor az one who
mad fallen from grace, Is an exception
to the general run of policemen.
II was not necessary, he contended.
TO show that Favor had promised in so
many words not 10 prosecute Annie
Saith for running resort Such 4
promise to Annie was clearly implied
by his statement TO her at the time sho
presented him with the bookcase, he
argued.
why was it she was giving him
,,ro H-fnq ~
in the precinct, and why did she stop
after he was transferred to another"
pursued McClear. why was she buy
ing presents she was not able to pay
for unless she was compelled to do il?
Annie Smiths testimony stands un-
contradicted here. She says Favor
said to her: Get rue bookcase or
I'll make trouble Wasn't that plain
enough? She got him the bookcase
and he did as he agreed"
Mr.. McClear devoted considerable
time to clearing up the apparent dis
crepancies In Annie's testimony and
succeeded fairly well. Some Of the
contradictions he attributed to Annie's
imperfect knowledge OF the English
language and her lack Of education.
He did not attempt to defend Armies
character, except to insist on her
credibility as witness
Favor was played mercilessly by the
speaker.
MoCiear Flags Favor.
When officers paid by you to up
hold the law will protect felon for
the sake OF a few paltry gifts, there
is no longer any safety for you or me,
for your families or mine," he said.
III police officer Will take money
from a disorderly woman, will he have
any scruples about accepting favors
from murderer. or q highwayman?
VIII he hesitate to stand in the back.
ground with his eyes closed while q
burglar enters your home and despoils
II? A man who would accept presents
from a scarlet woman and give them
10 his wife is more than capable Of
such crime as is charged here. The
woman who conducts a resort in vio-
lation of the law is bad enough, but
there is one person wOrse-the man
who accepts tribute from that woman
to furnish his home and adorn his
wife. The woman makes no secret OF
her nefarious trade; the man poses as
an honest upright citizen and official
while secretly accepting favcrs from
the scarlet woman for allowing her
to violate the law.
IF ever man deserved punish
ment at the hands of jury il is Ed
ward p Favor. A man lost to all
sense OF decency, he is entitled ID
far less respect than the resort keeper
who has testified in this case. The
prosecution Is entitled to a verdict
Of guilty and speedy one"
Judge Phelan's Charge.
Judge Phelan's charge to the Jury
occupied a half hour. He said in
part:
The real question In this case
Is whether you believe beyond q
reasonable doubt that the defend
ant did corruptly receive the book
case offered In evidence In consid-
GRAFTON OF his protection OF An
ME Smith In her plying OF her IL
legal trade excepting house OF
ill-fame) II he did, the defend
ant is guilty, and 1t Is your duty
10 say SO by your verdict; and IL
he did not, or II you have rea-
sonable doubt upon the subject,
Ii Is your duty to acquit him.
The other evidence offered and
received Of other alleged receipts
OF moneys and articles or personal
property Is, as have said before,
competent as part OF the history
OF this transaction of the relar
tionship Of defendant and Annie
Smith, and as explaining how de-
PENDANT came TO get the articles
for which ne is crlminany charged
in this case, and for no other pur-
pose whatsoever. So that. gentle
men, charge you that It Is your
duty to discriminate carefully this
evidence, and only consider the
evidence tending TO prove other
acts as auxiliary and explanatory
OF the act IN this case; and to
throw light upon ii. but not as
proof of offenses for which he
should be or could be convicted
in this case.
Defense OFFERS No Testimony.
Without swearing single witness,
the defense rested it's case, Thursday
afternoon, and Prosecutor Yerkes at
once began his argument to the jury.
Mr.. Yerkes argument consumed
about quarter OF an hour. He re-
counted the evidence briefly. leaving
the main argument for his assistant,
|