The Salt Lake tribune. [volume] (Salt Lake City, Utah) 1890-current, 1910-02-06
BOARD Of PARDONS
REVIEWS OLD CASE
Murder of Thomas Sandal by
Nick HawOrth Revived After
Ten Years.
LIFE PRISONER Is NOW
ASKING FOR A PARDON
Grounds Are New Evidence and
Alleged Bias of Davis
County People.

The murder of Thomas Sandal, a
nichtwatchman at the Farmer Union
store at LAYTON the night Of March 2s,
1899. was again reviewed by the board
of pardons in special session Saturday
in the supreme court room, when inc
applcation for pardon of n t.
{" Mickey Haworth. now serving life
sentence for the murder. was heard.
The board was in session all day ana
heard the arguments Of Judge A. 81.
Weber in behalf Of Haworth and 1or-
ncr County Attorney Strecper OF ia
Wis county i'm behalf of the state. NO
notion was takpn in the matter ana y,
Is quito probable that the board WIN
not consider tho application IN exccu-
live session until the regular meeting,
February Is. as the members desire TO
90 over the yoluminous record IN inc
ease before giving Judgment
When the murder was discovered the
morning after, the officers OF DAVIS
county started 10 work on the case ana
uncarthed evidence which pointed to
uaworth as the guilty person. in May
Portland and brought back TO DAVIS
county for trial He was convicted IN
June. 1900. OF murder IN the first de-
gree and was sentenced 10 be executed.
His attorneys appealed tho case TO the
supreme court, but the sentence of the
lower court was affirmed. Another ap-
peal was then taken TO the supreme
court on the ground OF newly discov-
cred evidence. but This was also unsuc-
ccssful and Haworth was agaln sen
fenced TO he executed.
Haworth Escapes.
While i'm The state prison awaiting
~ a. lzr,. L ~ +.
fected hv number of prisoners and
Haworth made his escape. lie WAS cap,
iurcd soon after gaining his liberty and
again landed behind tho prison bars.
Soon after this occurrence an applica.
lion was made to tho state board of
pardons To commute his sentence to
life Imprisonment aud the board, 10y
a unanimous vote, granted the com
mutaiion Several months ago an ap-
plicatiou for pardon was filed and this
has been continued from timc TO time
aud was finally heard Saturday in spc-
cial session.
Tho evidence which convicted Ha
worth WAS based upon confession
made hy him TO Sheriff Abbott of Da-
Wis county and also upon the idenlihca.
ton of a coat found near the scene oil
the murder which. some OF the wit
ncsSes testified. they had seen llawOrth
wear.
II WAS contcnded by the defense that
iIaworth was not Of sound mind when
he made the confession and that pum
her OF material points IN the confes-
sion were absolutely untrue. as was
shown by the testimony Of other wit
ncsScs. Witnesses were also produced
Ia show that lTaworth was in Ogden
The night of the murder MP 10 about
I 30 clock and could not possibly
I,,, | tan nv .TU u
tho crImc was committed.
.Iudgc Weber, in his argument Sat
urday. laid great stress upon tho newly
discovered evidence tcnding to prove an
alib for llaworth. Several witnesses
have been found since the trial who
were with llaworth IN Ogden the night
of The crime aud their statements show
hat no could not possibly have reached
Layton by midnight, the Time of the
murder.
Bias Alleged.
The attorney also argued that some
length upon the prejudice of the people
Of Davis county and upon the unfair
ness of the prosecution III the case IN
presenting the evidence before the
Jury. He had new evidence To show
that II number Of tho witnesses for the
state pcrlmcd themselves IN their tcs-
timony and contcndcd that had the dc
fcnse been able TO secure the evidence
at The trial which 1T now had. Haworth
would never have been convicted.
Former County Attorney Strccpcr
made Il brief argument before The board,
in which he expressed himself as thor
oughly convinced Of the guilt of Ha.
worth and of the fairness Of the trial
given hun.
Justice Frick of tho supreme court OK.
pressed himself emphatically in the
progress of the argument of the attor~
ncy from Davis county as being op.
posed 10 some OF the methods used hy
tho prosecution at the trial in respect
10 the examination OF some of the wit
nosses. He declared that be did not
believe that 1T was the duty Of the
state 10 run u race with the defendant
III order 10 convict bin, and that meth
ods used by the prosecution tended 10
a certain extent to prejudice the minds
OF tho jurors