Norwich bulletin., 1912-05-24
LAST EFFORT FOR BERTRAM SPENCER
Massachusetts Supreme Court Hears Argument Secure New Trial For Former Lebanon Young Man-Insanity the Chief Defense For Shooting of Martha Blackstone.
"Regarding the failure of spencer's

Regarding the failure of Speneer's wife to take the witness stand. the defense took exception to the utter ance of Attorney General James M. Swift in his argument. The laws of the state do not compel a husband to testify against wife or wife against a husband, and the fact that Mrs. Spencer did not take the witness stand should not have influenced the jury. Attorney General Swift said that she could have told about his sane or insane actions, and to this utterance the defense took exception with the other reference he made to this feature of the case
 "Then the defense took exceptions to the ruling of the court in refusing to permit Horace B. Bailey and Ben iamin F. Carpenter to compare Spen- cer's appearances and actions to those of an insane person. Bailey had been an attendant in an insane asylum and Carpenter had relative and a friend who were insane Both knew the appearances and actions of insane persons, and yet the court ruled that they were not competent to make comparisons. We come now to the presumation of sanity of the prisoner after evidence of his insanity had
 
 court in his charge to the jury ruled ity of the prisoner to the end of the case, and to this charge we took ex- ception."
 Attorney Stapleton then announced that he would not argue on the ex- captions and would rest his case.
 District Attorney Callahan began his argument with reference to the first exception in which the defense ob- 1ected to Judge Crosby's refusal to recommit the prisoner at the opening of the trial.
 Not Adiudged Insane.
 This prisoner was committed to Bridgewater after purely preliminary hearing on the question of his mental condition; he was not adjudged insane when committed, and the fact tha; Chief Justice Aiken ordered his return for trial does not mean that the jus tice had decided the prisoner sane or insane; it simply meant that he was advised the mental condition of the prisoner was such he should be tried l leaving the question of his sanity tC be decided by jury. I see no ground for the exception of the defense tC O sel for the defense to ask those si1 additional questions.
 There is no law in this state per hitting counsel or court to ask jurors any questions in regard to the statu- 1 tory questions. Regarding the excep- | ton of the defense to the court allow l ing Miss Harriet P. Dow to say tha l Miss Blackstone made a remark abou | the time that the clock struck 8, l have only to say that this is unim- i portant, and, furthermore, she simply said that the dead girl made a remark Witness did not give the words of tha remark
 Doctors Not Experts.
 eThe next exception argued wa 1 that in which the court refused to al | low Drs. Danielson and Lamotte [, | testify as experts on insanity. I agTe i that the rule is broad and that in som | cases physicians are permitted to tes l tify as an expert, where it is show | that they have been attending or fam l fly physicians, but I disagree with th! l defense that these two physicians wer in that class.
 ''Dr. Danielson, when he attende, 1 Spencer during the poisoning episode | found him unconscious, and the onl other time he saw prisoner was whel Spencer entered the school. Dr. La ] motto saw him only once. This wa not sufficient in either case to warTan calling these physicians attending 0 family doctors. They were not in position to tell of the constant an l hereditary habits and conduct of tn prisoner. Then, again, the court ma have had another question in his min when he refused to allow them to tes tify as experts, and if such was tn case, it would not be necessary for hiI to explain his action"