The Topeka state journal. [volume] (Topeka, Kansas) 1892-1980, 1911-06-28

lord in reading the instruction to the
Jury in the case of Frank H. HenWood
this morning. The. court charged the
jury that there We're but three possible
verdicts in the case; first degree muir
der. second degree murder and acquit-
tai
The jury was also directed that
should its verdict be first degree mur-
der penalty should be fixed. either
life Imprisonment or death. Should the
verdict be second degree murder the
court itself imposes penalty, which, un-
der the Colorado statute is from 10
years to life Imprisonment
The elimination of manslaughter
from the case caused Attorney J. T.
Botto-l, for the defense, to take excep-
tions. He stated to the court that he
believed this should have been in
cluded.
Judge Whitford spent so minutes
reading his instructions. emphasizing
the paragraph defining justifiable
homicide and self defense and murder
GUS intent.
The jury was charged that shot
fired with malice and premeditation
death resulting although the shot was
not directed against the person killed,
constituted a crime of first degree muir
der.
In other words, the accidental killing
of George E. Copeland for which Hen
ffp't@ - RNAAt5 Il lNAls ny n DulleL intend
ed Tor sylvester L. Won Phul justifies
a verdict of first degree murder provid-
ing that HenWoOd intended malicfousIv
and premeditatedly to take Won PhuPs
life.
The court charged the Jury that evil
dence of threats and gun plavs on the
part of Won Phul against Henwood or
previous quarrels between them was
admissible only to show the condition
OF Won Phuls mind at the time the
snoouns occurred; that when Won
Fhul knocked down Henwood in the
par room of the Brown Palace hotel,
which was followed by Henwood firing
the fatal shots, but made no further
attacks, and Henwood then fred. there
was no self defense, and if Henwood
fired deliberately and malfciousIv''
the crime was first degree murder. At
torney Bottom argued against the Ian
Buage or the instructions in several
particulars
Previous to the reading of the in
structtors the court permitted Attor-
ney Bottom to recall Henwood to the
stand for the purpose of Identifying
the so-cailea Mabel letter. supposed to
nave been written by Won Phul from
the Baltimore hotel in Kansas CITY.
The letter was ruled out yesterday and
the court reaffirmed this action.
rms letter contains a reference to
a certain double crosser who was in
thN AtelptO VI NiSlLQg the ranch OF
Springer, husband of the principal wit
ness in the case 1t threatened s'tc
knock his block off" Both attornevs
admitted that Henwood was not meant
by the expression double crosser
and the court held that this being thf
case, the letter could have no bearing
on the case.
Mr.. Springer, it has appeared from
the testimony, was the Only other mar
VINO trequented the Springer ranch.
Argument Is Opened.
Assistant District Attorney Johr
Horne Chiles opened the argument fo1
the prosecution with a denuncfation o
Henwood as the destroyer of ri.
home Of John ". Springer a wealth,
Denver banker
He deprecated the maudlin Dub1i,
sentiment that would turn murderer
loose to prey upon the public and as
serted that the firing upon Won PbuI
which resulted in Won Pbul's an,
Copeland's death. was the work of ;
man fired by jealousy.
HenWood, he said, was acting unde
q spirit of revenge.
He had had illicit relations Will
Mrs. Springer said Mr. ChiIes. san,
he was afraid that Won Phul stoa,
high in the affections of that faf
creature Therefore he declare,
Henwood wanted Won Phul out of III
way.
Mr.. Chiles dwelt upon that phas