Atlanta semi-weekly journal. (Atlanta, Ga.) 1898-1920, 1909-04-23
EVIDENCE JUSTIFIED
COOPERS' VERDICT?
~ Assoeisted Press.l

q
NASHVILLE, Tenn, April 22-The sec
opd. day of arguments In the motion for
a new trial for Duncan b. and Robin J..
Cooper. convicted of the murder Of for
mer United States Senator E. w. Car
mack and sentenced to serve 20 years on
prison, began today. Captain Fitzhugh,
for the state, was the first speaker. ="
THE defense" he said, have assigned
n reasons for new trial. If they had
found one good reason for a new trial
they never would have given these AZ va
rieties. We are not going to review the
case in detail We feel that the evidence
abundantly justihes the verdict
Self Defense Claimed
1.-The defense seems to depend upon
three points. First, that Robin Cooper
shot in self-defense, and therefore was
not guilty; secondly, that d. B. Cooper
did not fire a shot, and his guilt or limo
cence depends upon Robins guilt or limo
cence; thirdly, that the court failed 10
set out this hypothesis in it's charge. Now
we maintain that the evidence shows that
Colonel Cooper crossed the street deliber-
ately for the purpose of bringing on
difficulty which would serve as an ex-
cuse for numbering Senator Carmack
Therefore, Robin went along as. party
to the affair. Robin knew his fathers
intentions, for he knew of the threats,
he knew his father was armed and he
knew all this so we'll that he went out
and armed himself with the most deadly
weapon yet invented.
No Protection Needed?
He says he went over with his father
to protect him. Why, if his father was
going on a peaceful mission, as they both
saw he was. did Robin have to go along
A. Fafh Under a W
this means that Robin went along to
share with his father in the responsibility
Of whatever happened"
But there is a new feature inter-
jected now, which did not appear in ohe
case when on trial Robin, they say
now, acted in his own defense, self-de-
Tense But on the stand, your honor,
Robin swore that he was out in the
street, when Carmack drew his gun and
pointed It at his father, Dp..can B. Coop
err. He swore himself he was out of dan
ger and that he ran into the danger zone
to protect his father. How In the name
of Justice then, can he plead self-defense
when no one was bothering him?
Crux of the Case
This shows plainly, your honor, that
the crux of the case is Colonel Duncan
b. Cooper's intention. He simply took
Robin. along and Robin is bound by his
fathers intent and acts
Captain Fitzhugh next quoted authori-
ties at length to sustain his contention.
Colonel Cooper was not in court this
morning, Judge Anderson saying that he
was suffering from headache. Robin was
| present accompanied as usual, by his Sis
ter, Mrs. Burch.
Robins Own Testimony
1--WE will take Robins own testimony
again" said Fitzhugh. He says I went
along to intervene and protect papa If
could
There is the story. Robin went along
with his father at his peril, If his father
were the aggressor, and he cannot plead
| self-defense If his father cannot. Now,
no one believes for a moment that Col
onel Cooper could plead self-defense,
therefore. Robin cannot avail himself OF
that defense"
'I do not intend to detain the court
longer. These men were convicted by a
Jury of their own selection, after a fair
and impartial trial and the only criticism
which can be passed upon the verdict is
that 1t is too lenient and should have
been murder in the first degree"
Judge Anderson Replies
Judge Anderson replied to Captain Fitz-
hugh. discussing solely the defense's Of
lection to the courts instructions to the
| Jury. ut Is not that we object to what
/ the Judge did say" he argued, but we
think the court should have gone fur
tthsr and shown what is meant by aggres-
/ sion We hold that no matter what Col
onel Cooper did Robin was not an ag-
gressor, he was a peace-maker and fur
1 Their that Colonel Cooper had q right to