The Bemidji daily pioneer. [volume] (Bemidji, Minn.) 1904-1971, 1909-03-22
FATE OF BARNEY NELSON
WILL SOON Be DECIDED
Continued from First Page

story of the stolen pistol as related
by Nelson could not have been true,
and maintained that it not only
could but did occur.
Adjournment was taken for noon
before MIR. Funkley had completed
his address, he not having covered
much more than half the ground he
intended to.
After the noon adjournment, Mr..
Funkley resumed his address to the
jury.
MIR. Funkley for some time after
dinner, and concluded his address
with an eloquent appeal to the
jurors to weigh carefully the nature
OF the testimony given by the
state; bear in mind its improbable
ity as to truth; and to remember.
above all things, that the defend
ant must be proven guilty beyond
a shadow of a doubt, in order TO
bring a verdict of not guilty as
charged by the indictment, which
they never could do, after a care
full consideration Of the evidence
The closing hours of the Nelson
case, on Saturday, were marked
by some sensational testimony on
the part of both the state and the
defense, principally by witnesses
for Nelson, in which there was a
wide discrepancy for each side as
to what had been said relative to
the shooting, at the preliminary
hearing of Nelson, and also at
other times before and since that
time, with especial reference to the
pistol which the state had
attempted to prove was the weapon
used by the murderer in killing
Fuller, and which was the property
of Nelson.
One of the states principal
witnesses, w. E. Hyatt, swore
positively that he did not say at
any time that the "gun" which
he claimed Nelson carried on the
night of the murder was not the
old horse pistol, but new revolver,
with black rubber stock; and
witnesses FOR the defense swore
just as positively that Hyatt had
made such a remark, and in
corroborating the time and place
where Mr.. Hyatt was supposed to
have made the remark there was
much contradictory evidence.
Evidence calculated to impeach
two other of the states principal
witnesses was introduced and left
the jury to determine which was
telling the truth. ~
1.-THE grand Jury was allowed to
report two indictments against
Sam Hayes, one of the defense's
witnesses, while the jury was
in the room, and Hayes was
taken into custody and the indict-
ments read to him while the Jury
sat in their seats and waited tor
the resumption OF the Nelsc II
trial.
The defense was handled very
ably by Mr.. Funkley. He had
his witnesses present when wanted
and they responded promptly, and
they gave their testimony in
sequential manner. This was the
first time that the ex county attor-
ney has handled the defense in
a murder trial, although dur
ing the tenure of his two-year
term he convicted four men OF the
crime of murder in the first degree,
two of them being sentenced to
the penitentiary for life, the other
two being condemned to death and
their sentences afterwards being
committed to life Imprisonment.
His work was good, and he took
advantage Of every opening.
Mr.. Funkley was not allowed to
introduced testimony showing the
violent and quarrelsome character of
the deceased Fuller, although he
argued the question at some length.
Judge Stanton held that there was
no issue of self-defense on the part
of the defendant, and therefore the
evidence was entirely inadmissable.
After the conflicting testimony
had been given by the defense and
in rebuttal by the state, both the
state and the defense rested their
cases.