The Evening statesman. [volume] (Walla Walla, Wash.) 1903-1910, 1908-06-08

L think that a person might COM
nit murder without being insane" re-
piled Mr.. Upton.
Would you consider it as very
strong evidence that he was insane?"
persisted the court.
There would have to be some proof
showing insanity prior to that time,
or something else to show that he
Was insane" replied Mr. Upton.
Mr.. Upton was passed by both sides
for cause
Henry Jeffries who was next ex-
amined had read the newspapers anC
had formed an opinion as to the guilt
CT innocence of the defendant.
Would that opinion be altered by
reading another newspaper article,
written from a different standpoint?
asked Judge Brents, who from this
time on took a leading part in the
examination of the prospective jurors.
NO sir" replied Mr.. Jeffries.
"A man who would believe one
newspaper article and not the next
one is not qualified to sit as a juror in
any case" remarked the court, and
Mr. Jeffries was excused.
George Files was called to the va
cant place in the jury box.
preston" as to the guilt or innocence
of the defendant but did not think that
this would prevent him from giving the
defendant a fair and impartial trial. He
said that he had never heard the case
mentioned, but had read about it in
the Evening Statesman and Morning
Union In reply to a question by Attor-
ney Cain he said that he would not be
Influenced by public opinion. He was
passed for cause.
Walter Maddux, an eXbutcher and
present farmer, had an opinion which
would require evidence to remove, and
it was during the examination Of this
tallsman that the court took occasion
to criticise the supreme court. Maddux
was excused.
Conrad DIETRICH hadn't read the
newspapers. but had heard the case
discussed in his store. He was passed
for cause.
Had Shaved Barnes.
J. O. Stoneberner, Prescott barber,
was next examined. He said that he
had known the defendant for 10 or IL
years and had shaved him many times.
He said that he had always been on
friendly terms with him. He said that
this acquaintance would not influence
him lin the cause OF Justice" He had
rot seen the defendant for the past
year, and had formed no opinion as to
his guilt or innocence although he had
discussed the case many times. He
was passed for cause.
Hugh Lunry had formed no opinion
and had 20 bias or prejudice and was
likewise passed for cause.
Oscar Grant had heard the case dis
cussed many times and had read an
editorial in the Prescott Spectator,
making lignt of the defense of insanity,
but was influenced neither by the dis
cussion or the reading of the editorial
A. RI Nichols had formed a very
decided opinion as to the guilt or inno-
cence of the defendant and he was dis
missed from further service on the case.
George Lott had read and talked
about the case but had no opinion. He
was passed for cause, as was Frank }.
Kent, who had never read of the case.
A. F. Smitten had known the father
of the defendant and had also known
Mrs. Aldrich but as he had formed no
opinion. he was passed for cause.
Clerk Dorsey NJ Hill then filled the
jury box, drawing the names OF 0. K.
Purdy, NJ A. Clancy and Edgar Holm
O. X Purdy had prejudice against
the defense of insanity and was ex-
cused fer cause
Edgar Holm had formed no opinions
and Was urbiaseA Hs was passed.
| M. A. Clancy had scruples against
| the infiiction of capital punishment
| and was excused.
Clerk Hill then drew the names of j..
F.. Martin and A. J. Sherrod. J. F. Mar
tin. who is special police officer, was
excused because he had formed an
opinion as to the guilt or innocence or
| the defendant, while Mr. Sherrod had
formed no opinion and was passed for
cause.
Jury Box Filled.
D. w. Dorrance, the nineteenth juror
examined, had no opinion more than an
| impression formed from reading the