The times dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1903-1914, 1911-09-23
Voice Of the People
Fnirness in the Beattie Trial.

10 the Editor of The Times Dispatch.
vonr living iravihg noticed an article in
Wollu convicted the Prisoner First q
leel constrained to express the opin-
ION OF one at least who did not Join
tn me mao rush of the community to
SohV!ct the accused unheard ''Worl 1
convicted the prisoner first" Thar is
.ue whole thing in nutshell The
World World convicted the prisoner Arst, un-
nn,iir' yong before the case was even
mad indicted. the world had convict
60. Why? Because newspaper ac-
t thu sni, were SO worded as to imply
by, morbid, unthinking public ami
echoed parrot-like from lip TO lin. Yes
world convicted prisoner first, which
no NV true IN sense. and upon news
piPcf accounts as evidence
The stampede and rush and turnb-
.ime over one another to proclaim the
prisoner guilty, reminds the writer OF
the newspapers) espies a hole in he
renee, passes through: immediateiv
ore rush by the rest of tho
w ,,Iek , (Which IN are the readers) to see
leader. The writer OF this article was
one old sheep in the bunch"
inc writer OF the article in question
says: The prisoner had a fair trial.
We admit that is true as far as tn.
ludse was concerned. In fact, right
mere we wish to express our adrnira
h lion o. the fairness of Judge Watson.
out there the matter of fairness ends,
as the prisoner had not the ghost Of
a chance from the start. PROSECUTORS
tb,s and jury. ali drawn from
th ls ia" the t a6of. ", who had passed
WIN any fairminded brother arise
IN his place and point out to US
where stsn the fairness comes in. or to go
aict stands? The law, as we under.
sand authorizes an acquittal where
v,o,,fs Is a reasonable doubt and it
raa aSei IN 10 us there was not only
aoduced. but very grave doubt n
aouDt SO strong, indeed, that IL wo,tld
unbiased mind On
IN anotser place, the writer speaks
OF the prisoner proving himself IN.
,!oGeht. Now, as the writer OF this
M. ei , the law, the prisoner is
49, 60, 'sIuired to prove himself inno-
cent, but 1T devolves upon the prose
uution 10 prove him guilty. which, AZ
!1ok upon 1T, was not done sum.
of guilty
II is uncomfortable as to how anv
',ininking person could be led TO be-
tieVe that a man of the intelligence
ana commit crime OF the magni-
tude of this one along the lines laid
u iiewe . by me prosecution. Why. to be-
OF a schooi boy. Such plan wouId he
me work of lunatc or an imbecjie
ana certainly this man is neither
why, ten year-old school boy xyonId
not commission another who stood
ready to do him an injury il the on
portunity offered. to buy him an ia
shotgun. which could be identif,ed
|lth perfect ease, to commit a muir
aer with: then boldly take the sam.
gun back and boldly proclaim il ns
e onlv one he which did the deed. with
was in the hands of another when
me crime was committed
~ would tax the credulity Of Mrs
Credulous" far beyond the limit Yet
upon such belief. based upon cir
c.uIinstantial evidence alone, the YER
dict was rendered
Now II this is fairness we have AL
ways misunderstood the word.
The writer OF this article wishes
TO state emphatically and uneouivo-
cally his belief in the innocence of the
accused, based upon the evidence ana
not of any personal knowledge or ac
auair tanceship of any of the parties
In question. "CITIZE,N :"
Richmond