Aberdeen herald. [volume] (Aberdeen, Chehalis County, W.T.) 1886-1917, 1910-05-26
life IMPRISONMENT
IS SENTENCE 'ASSED ON WILLIAM
GOHL BY JUDGE SHEEKS.
Convicted Murderer Escapes GaIiowS
by Narrow Squeeze, but Receives
what Is Considered by Many as
Greater Punishment. Judge Gives
Reasons for Findings.

Reasons for Findings.
William Gohl, former Sailors union
agent at Aberdeen, was sentenced to
life Imprisonment, by Judge Sheeks
in the superior court Tuesday, for
the murder of Charles Hadberg, his
sailor friend, on December 21, last
Gohl and Mrs. Gohl both smiled
when the court pronounced sentence
and took the ruling in calm, matter
Of fact way.
Judge Sheeks only passed sentence
after Overruling three motions put in
behalf of the convicted man by his
attorneys, A. e. Cross and J. A..
HutchesOn. There motions were for
an acquittal despite the verdict, an
arrest Of judgment and an appeal for
new trial. All were denied and an
appeal to the supreme court is un,
likely, it is said.
! When asked whether he had any
thing to say as to whether sentence
should be passed or not, Gohl made a
statement in which he claimed that
he had not had fair trial and that
his attorneys had not had time to
, prepare his case. He also declared
that witnesses who would have prov
ed an alibi for him had been turned
back from the courtroom door.
Sheek's Decision
Following is the decision of Judge
Sheeks, and the causes that led him
to impose the life sentence
'"The court has given this matter
very careful and serious consideration
and has reduced it's reasons to writ
ing, which it will now give. In the
discretion of the court the law con-
! templates that in certain cases the
extreme punishment ought, and in
others ought not, to be administered.
"This discretion imposed in the
court is legal, not personal dis
cretiOn. 1t is not thus repOsed to en-
able the occupant of the bench to step
aside from the performance Of dis
agreeable duty; not to indulge his in
dividual opinion as to the wisdom or
unwisdOm of capital punishment.
"If this were permissible, the en-
ecutiOn of the law would depend upon
the personal opinion or feeling of the
judge, SO that before one judge all
cases where the verdict Is as here
might receive the extreme sentence
while before another with a different
view all would receive lighter SEN
tence. 1t is evident that such is not
the intent or meaning of the law.
THE nature and circumstances of
the case-Out of these must arise-in
these must be found that which to
guide, control and limit the action
of the court in it's exercise of this
responsible judicial discretion.
Three Points
"Three matters in connection with
the case may be thought Of weight in
inducing the court to inflict the lesser
degree of punishment.
81. The large number of jurors
who at the trial were disqualified on
account of disbelief OF capital pun
ishment. Possibly this ought not to
have any effect on the court, but in
considering what ought to be done
this fact has continually recurred to
the mind of the court.
"2. The recommendation of the
jury that tried the cause. This is en-
titled to and has received, the serious
consideration of the court. While it
does not relieve the court from the
duty and responsibility of exercising
it's own independent judgment the
recommendation of the jury would be
of weight in resolving any doubt in
favor of the defendant.
"3. The fact that the part taken
by you at the time the crime was COM
mitted is known to the court only
| from the lips of the one who admits
that he himself fired the fatal shots.
His testimony was given, it seems,
with knowledge that you had accused
him of the crime. The law justly re-
quires that such testimony shall be
considered with great caution. While
he admits that you did not actually
fire the shots, it is butt reasonable to
suppose, under the circumstances,
that he would, and did, endeavOr to
place upon you as much of the re-
sponsibilty as it appeared to him he
could truthfully do. The fact that his
Interpretation and narration of what
took place at the time is the only
light which the court has on that
matter had led the court to doubt
not of your guilt-but to doubt wheth'
er, under the circumstances the case
~ such, as in a just administration OF
the law, requires the court to infiict
the extreme penalty. And having
such doubt, it is the duty of the court
to resolve that doubt in favor Of life
as against death.
at is therefore considered and ad'
judged by the court that you, VIII
liam, Gohl, are guilty of the crime OF
murder in the first degree, as charged
in the information, and that you be
punished therefor by confinement at
hard labor in the state penitentiary
for life"
i Gohrs attorneys have 90 days in
which to appeal, if the defendant sc
desires, although that course is high
ly improbable, when it is considered
that the rulings of the court are ad
mitted to have been extremely fail
to the defense, and the technical lew
points raised have been decided by
the supreme court in the Newcomt