The Detroit times., 1912-10-24
CHARGE TO JURY ISN'T
FAVORABLE TO BECKER


station the night of the murder. diff
tered materially from Hawley's.
The court reviewed In detail, al
most minute by minute, the move
ments of Becker on the night Of the
murder as outlined. by the state. He
quoted witnesses who corroborated
these movements, but he told the jury
that they were not to let his telling
Of the story sway, them. as he was
merely reviewing the testimony to re-
fresh their memory
He drew the attention Of the jury
to the fact that the state was seek
ing to prove merely that Becker in
spired the murder.
'If you believe there IL q certainty
Of this" he added, then, gentlemen,
the defendant is guilty az an acces-
sorry before the fact. which under the
common law, makes him a principal
In the crime.
THE main witnesses against Beck
or. are what are called accomphces.
There is no question about their be-
ing accomplices.
There 10 a question about Schepps.
but / charge you that Rose, Webber
and Vallon are accompiices. With re-
gard TO Schepps, I must say that l
am In such doubt that I decline to In
struct you that he Ii an accomplice.
Gentlemen, It is for you to determine
from the fact whether or not Schepps
il an accomplice."
The court declared there was no
direct testimony to convict Schepps
OF being an accomplice. Ills relar
tions with the gamblers, he said. laid
him open to suspicion. But the fact
that he had suspicious OF the ap-
preaching crime, did not OF itself
make him an accomplice.
Merely as point OF law bearing
upon the case, the court instructed
the. jury that one accomplice cannot
corroborate another.
There must be some .difmterested
Witness" he said.
.As to the sufficiency OF evidence
az corroboration, Justice Con told the
Jury that Il was impossible TO lay
down q hard and fast rule. Every
case rested upon its own Bottom.
But remember this" he said, tine
defendant cannot be convicted entire
iy upon the evidence OF accomplices.
There must be other evidence. What
evidence the prosecution onered 10
for the jury to decide"
curing the time Justice Con was
talking on the subject OF accompiices'
Becker appeared unusually interest.
ed: almost eager. He leaned forward
IN his chair and kept his hand behind
his ear In an effort not to lose
single word. His counsel now ana
then looked at each other smiling.
There is no inhibition resting on
You. gentlemen" the court declared,
'.to believe In the truth OF the testi-
mony OF Rose, Webber and WALTON.
Rut there Is no law to prevent you
from believing the testimony OF ac-
and. II you believe It, you
arc bound to return verdict accord
ihsly."
referring to Rose. Justice Con said
that the jury In considering his testi-
mony. was ut liberty to take into con-
sideration his glibness on the stand,
his appearance, his life and the dis
4 ,rted effect OF that life on his mind
The same with the other witnesses.
The liability Of the gamblers
framing up" on Becker to escape the
electric chair was another element
to he considered, the court ruled. IL
Roses story was true I'm the jurys
opiaion, they must 50 consider 1t, he
said. but IL they considered II built
ON lies. then the peoples case falls.
Dealing with motive. the court de-
cinred that proof OF that was not
necessary where proof of the design
or conspiracy was circumstantiated.
"If the verdict In this case ts
against me, shall lose all faith
have In the justice OF Americans" de-
clared Police Lieut.. Charles Becker
as he settled into his seat In the
criminal court today.
m The summing up was over. Becker
had heard himself painted as q stal
wart American officer who had done
oirIv his duty as he saw II, and also
had listened unmoved to the most bit
ter arraignment an accused murderer
eyor received In a. New York court
But the jail officials said he slept well
and today, when he entered court 10
hear the final summing up and inter
probation of the law affecting his case
BY Justice Con, he was as unmoved as
wnens he headed the strcpg arm squad
In the tenderloin district.
The verdict may come today. The
general impression about the court
room was that the jury would reach
an agreement. but there were some
OF the old-tImers who insisted that
ths conflict In the evidence. and the
character OF the summing up, was
such that difference Of opinion
among the IL men was certain to re-
suit.
This is admittedly the best. and At
the same time the most independent
Jury, that has been brought together
In a rnurdcr case In this clty since the
famous Molineux trial, and Il was GER
tain that every man would vote for
the verdict hts conscience dictated,
no matter what action the others
might consider wise. Because Of this
the chances Of 4 disagreement were
excellent IN the opinion OF the old
timers. 49,
The Jury wns brought into court at
f0.30, and the doors locked, 90 that
Justice Con might deliver his charge
without any outside interruption