Los Angeles herald. [microfilm reel] (Los Angeles [Calif.]) 1900-1911, 1909-05-14
EXPFRTSCALLED
BY STATE AVER
MITCHELL SANE
PROSECUTION RESTS CASE IN
MURDER TRIAL
ARGUMENTS WILL BEGIN THIS
MORNING
Physicians Testify Slayer of Thayer
Was Perturbed but Not Neces-
sarly Irrational When He
Fired Fatal Shots

After testimony from medical experts |
as to the sanity of William c. Mitchell, |
slayer of Cecil Thayer, at the time of
the shooting, January l of this year,
the experts being introduced by the
state, the murder trial in Judge Willis |
court reached yesterday the stage
where argument begins.
The state rested it's case after DR.. d. |
C. Barber had finished his testimony. |
He was the fourth medical expert called
by the state. The other three were
Drs George w. Campbell, Granville
MACEDONIAN and James H. Davidson. |
All of them, answering the Hypothetical
questions propounded by the state and
defense, said Mitchell (the Hypothetical
NAM was sane at the time of the shoot |
ing. Arguments will begin this morn
ing.
This question was asked by Assistant
Prosecuting Attorney North
Taking into consideration all of the
facts as set out in the two hypothetical
questions doctor, would you say that
this young man was sane at the time of
the shooting?"
HE was sane" was the answer of
each expert. Then this question was
propounded by Mr.. Dehm for the de
tense:
You have been a professional expert
of the district attorneys office in cases
in which the defense of insanity is put
up, and have you not in every such
case testified that the defendant was
| sane?"
This interrogatory, when propounded
to DIR. Campbell brought forth the an
swer that in more than 80 per cent of
/ the cases examined by him he had pro-
nounced the subjects insane.
| But in every case where you have
| testified in court as to the mental con-
dition of the defendant, at the instance
of the district attorney, haven't you
testified that the defendant was sane?"
| Generally, yes"
Have you ever examined this man
MITCHELL"
Nor examined into his family his
tory?"
mot at ALL"
Defines Unsoundness of Mind
These questions and answers nearly
sum up the expert testimony. Mrs.
Mitchell, mother of the defendant; Mrs.
Carrie Coulter, officer Mckenzie, d. w.
Green, Martin Mari, Earl Hitchcock
and the medical experts were the wit
nesses examined during the day. The
rebuttal testimony did not develop any
thing new or interesting.
DIR. Campbell was asked to define I'M
soundness of mind.
THAT is very indefinite" he an
swered. "Derlirum is unsoundness OF
mind, and it may result from fevers, an
accident or a number of causes. In
sanity is also unsoundness of mind"
Answering the hypothetical question
he said that the moods described were
common symptoms of mental disturb
ance or physical disorders. Failure in
business disappointment in love, grief,
| indigestion, neuresthenia and many
other things would produce these
moods.
IF such condition existed for several
months might he not be insane?" asked
Mr.. Dehm.
mot necessarily" was the reply. He
was asked If it was possible for man,
swayed by frenzy, excitement and some
distinct psychic shock to lose sight of
the difference between right and wrong,
so much so that he would commit an
insane act.
THAT is not insanity" said the
doctor.
"Do you know of a case of man be-
coming insane through mental shock?"
Eyes, SIR but it is always based
| that a man who had sustained a
psychic shock could do insane acts. He
did not recognize transitory or emo
tional insanity. Unless the disease was
there, he said, jealousy, fear or emo
tional irritation would not produce an
insane act.
rs an attack of the blues mental
trouble?"
1T is more frequently Indigestion"
State Rests Case
DIR. Granville MACEDONIAN. a grad
uate of the University of Pennsyl-
vania and a member of the lunacy COM
mission, said that the person described
in the hypothetical questions, in his
opinion, was not insane at the time of
the shooting. He said using insane
act as a descriptive adjective, a man
might do insane acts and not be IN
sane. When the hypothetical question
had been propounded to him, with a
few variations, and he was asked for
an expert opinion as to the actions of
the hypothetical man, his answer was:
His actions are intensely human"
II should very much dislike to admit,
even tacitly, that man worried or de-
pressed or grieved over business, a love
affair, a disgrace or family troubles,
was insane" he added. Il think that
you or 1 might have been in the same
mood, might have done the same in the
same way that the boy did, with the
full knowledge that we would be
punished for it,"
Mr.. Dehm drew from DIR. Davidson
the statement that insanity is not
always a disease of the brain, but he
said that ordinarily it was a disease,
showing inflammatory conditions of the
brain cells.
Dr. James C. Barber, superintendent
of the county hospital, agreed with the
other experts that the hypothetical
man was not insane. However, he did
recognize transitory and emotional in
sanity, saying it must be preceded and
followed by symptoms of insanity or
mental and nervous arrangement.
At the close of DIR. BARRIERS testimony
the state rested it's case, and after a
conference the defense decided to rest
also. Those who expected the defen-
dant to go on the stand were disap-
pointed.
Argument in the case will begin this
morning. Mr.. North, for the prosecu-
ton, will open and close the argument
Mr.. Dehm will be the first to address
the jury on behalf of the defense. He
will be followed by Frank e. Pratt and
Grove e. Walter The case will prob
ably go to the jury late this afternoon
or tonight, If a night session is decided
upon.