The Detroit times. [volume] (Detroit, Mich.) 1903-1920, 1911-01-05

that he had decided to permit the
prosecution 70 put in testimony
relative to acts Of August Govare.
husband Of the defendant, prior
to the killing Of Sheriff Matthews.
This decision is considered hard
blow to the defense.
Practically the same point which
caused the prosecution to drop the
conspiracy and embeZZlement charge
against Cameron Currie and Louis h.
Case came up in the trial of Mrs.
Mary GoYare. charged with the muir
der OF Sheriff Joachim Matthews, or
Mt. Clemens, in the Wayne circuit
court. Thursday morning. The point
caused lengthy debate, in the alb
sence of the jury. between Prosecutor
Stone and Attorney :. B. Spiers, for
the defense. and had not been set
tied when court adjourned at noon.
The question AT issue is whether
the prosecution shall be allowed to
introduce testimony bearing on acts Of
August Govare. husband of the de-
PENDANT, prior TO the killing OF Sheriff
Matthews. Attorney Spiers entered
n strong objection TO the proposition,
claiming that such course would be
likely TO jeopardize tie interests OF
Mrs. Govare.
Prosecutor Stone. in explaining the
situation to the court, said that the
prosecution was not disposed 10 take
the explanation OF Mrs. Govare for
the tragedy. namely. that she told her
l4-year-old son, Benny, TO shoot when
Sheriff Matthews. supposed by her.
she says, to be a burglar. came 10
see her husband. He contended that
IL was the duty of the prosecution TO
place before the jury all the facts
leading up 10 the tragedy for the pur-
pose of giving the jurors a correct UNI
Outstanding of the whole matter. The
prosecution. he said was not con
cerned about the decision the jury
might reach, but he thought the jury
ought TO know all about the Govares.
Mr.. Spiers. In beginning his argu-
ment. said that the case had now
reached its turning point, and that the
court might as we'll face ii now as at
any other time He then argued that
the admission OF testimony relating 10
acts OF Mrs. Govare's husband before
the killing of Sheriff Matthews would
be most unfair TO the defendant, Mrs
Govare; that she was on trial for the
killing of the sheriff; that she was In
no way concerned In what trouble her
husband had been in prior 10 the trag-
edy, such az being arrested for being
drunk and alleged cruelty to live stock,
and that the introduction OF such tesu-
mony, as planned by the prosecution.
would be prejudicial 10 Mrs. Goyare
and contrary to the fundamental prin-
ciples OF the law as laid down for the
safeguarding defendants.
"Sheriff Matthew'S said Mr.. Spiers,
made a mistake I'm going to the Co
ware home on the night season. and
the fact that he failed to make an
ante-mortem statement was evidence
of his knowing ne had made an error.
The prosecution assumes that Mrs.
Goyare was aware OF the warrant be-
ing out against her husband for al
legged cruelty to animals, and that she
expected the police were coming TO
take away her husband. but Prose
cutor Stone has no right TO make such
a wicked, cruel assumption. She was
put through the sweatbox the day
after the tragedy and on that occa-
sion said she knew nothing OF the
warrant against her husband. But
that isn't the kind OF statement the
prosecution wants; il wants 10 put in
inferential testimony. | don't ask
sympathy for the Govares; all | want
Is Justice
Mr. Spiers said he regarded the
tragedy in fatalistic sense. believ-
ing that fate had foreordained the
tragic end for the sheriff
Judge Mckay took the question I'M
der advisement when he adjourned
court for lunch
The debate on the point arose
when Chief of. Police William +
Aemke. of Mt Clemens. was on the
stand After the chief had said that
Benny Govare had told him he shot
the sheriff at the instance of his
mother. Prosecutor Stone essayed TO
show that the chief had arrested
August Goyare for being drynk, and
that he had investigated Gibvare in
connection with his ALLEGED cruelty
tU live stock
In the case of Cameron Currie and
Louis H. Case, Judge Connolly de-
cided that the prosecution had no
legal right to introduce testimony
bearing on acts Of the accused. prior
to the date of the offense charged
with the result that the prosecution
was Obliged 10 abandon its case.
During the Thursday morning SEES
sion in the Govare case. the prosecG
ton made what ii claims to be a
strong point when ProseCutor-elect
Bammerich. acting with Mr.. Stone
In the prosecution. testified that he
had made an inspection of the door.
( which Sheriff Matthews is said TO
have forced on trying to gain an er-
trance to the Govare home the night
/ he was shot and found there was no
evidence of any force being used. lie
Troduced photographs OF the door to
bear him out and pictures showed
( no evidence of the door being dis.
! turbed in any way.
As predicted in The Times on
( Wednesday. the defense contends that
/ the shooting OF the sheriff was on
tirely accidental; that Mrs. Govare
/ believed the sheriff was It burglar
when she told her ll-year-old sor,
/ Benny. 10 discharge the shotgun. hop
! ing that the report would cause the
man TO flee.
The hand of the defense was .e-
vcaled by Attorney & b. Spicrs, rep.
/ resenting Mrs Govare. in his opening
/ address "Wednesday afternoon Mr.