The Mankato free press. [volume] (Mankato, Blue Earth County, Minn.) 1879-1924, 1912-12-13

penings of the evening OF July 3
, when sue naG accompanied Mr. ant
, Mrs. Bohrer to this city Her testi
mony somewhat conceded with thai
/; of the preceding witnesses. She
said that Pollei'S arm pointed to
ward Hack. The officer slowed
down before he fired. When Pole
passed she saw something in his
hand, that he was holding out il
front of him.
! Characterization, the witness said
that her home is now in this city
She was almost in front Of the
Saulpaugh cafe when Hack ran
rapidly by toward the bridge, and
Pollei ran about to the corner of the
Saulpaugh before shooting. AT the
time of the shooting. oPllei was eight
feet or less in front of the witness
and two and one half feet to the
left. His wrist was straight towards
Hack, but she could not see what
he carried in his hand. Her testi
mony about what he had in his
hand was based on what she sub
sequently learned, she said.
i Mr.. Bohrer was recalled to testify
that he, too, noticed Pollei slow
down at about the time that he saw
the flash of the gun.
DR.. A. C. Liedloff was recalled and
said that the wound in HACKS back
was a little smaller than the bullet
| On cross examination, the witness
said that it was his best Judgment
that the course OF the bullet through
HACKS body was seven and a half
to eight inches. The hole where the
bullet entered was about one-third
of an inch in diameter.
John r. Snow was called to lay
the foundation for Introducing photo
graphs taken yesterday of the por-
ton of the street where the shoot
ing took place. The defense OBJ
jected to the exhibits, and the court
sustained the objection. The defense
maintained that the photographs do
not show the true condition as it
was the night of July 3.
The state rested at shortly before
10 a. m.
Motion to Dismiss Denied.
The defence offered a formal mo-
ton to dismiss, on the ground that
the state had not produced facts
sufficient to constitute public Of
tense as against the defendant. The
court Over-ruled the motion.
Mr.. Laurisch opened the case for
the defense. to the jury. He said
that the relations had hired counsel
to assist the state in prosecuting
this case, and it was proposed to
show that they had hired attorneys
to start a damage suit.
The states attorneys repeatedly
interrupted Mr. Laurisch with OBJ
| jections to his statements which the
! court over-ruled and suggested that
they let the attorney proceed.
Mr.. Laurisch said that it was in
| tended to prove that on three or four
previous occasions Hack had in
suited women on the streets.
Mr.. Schmitt said that this had no
part in the case, but the court
said that the states opening state
ment had referred to the deceased
as never having done any wrong.
and he could not say now that it
| was not part of the case.
Mr.. Schmitt said that no evidence
was offered as to HACKS character
or deeds.
The court advised Mr.. Laurisch to
confine himself, fer the present, to
the facts ra
Mr.. Laurisch, resuming his adj
dress paid his compliments to the
assistant county attorney, and said
that it was not intended by the de-
tense to make any representations
that it did not prove by evidence
1t would be shown that officer Pol
lei went out on his beat in the or
binary performance of his duty as
a police officer He was told by
the two states witnesses that they
had been insulted by drunken
man, who had also Rugged another
woman, who had fought like every
thing to get away from him. 1t
was his duty to apprehend the man
who had violated the law
Mr. Ellsworth objected on the
ground that this was augmentation,
but the court more strongly advis-
ed that the speaker be allowed to
proceed without Interruptions.
Mr. Laurisch, resuming, said that
Pollei had searched for the man,
who he did not then know was
Hack, and found him and took him
to the two women, for Identification,
and then started to take him to the
city hall, when at the Saulpaugh
corner Hack said, "Well, | am up
against it. No police station for
me-, and now for the bridge. 1t
would be shown that Hack was
wanted on a much more serious
charge than insulting women. Pol
lei pursued him and drew his revol-
yer and tried to shoot above him,
and Hack continued to run and there
was no reason at that moment to
think that he had been shot until
he fell. The officer then went to
Hack and got an auto and took
him to the hospital.
Conte ntion of Defense.
The prosecution is not against the
officer alone, but against the effort
OF society to enforce the law. The
attorney gave what he presumed
the court would instruct as to the
duty of officers. A person taking
liberties on the person of a female
commits felony, and when man
who commits a felony tries to es-
cape from an officer the latter is
justified in shooting him. The Off
Ger in this case had every reason
to believe that a felony had been
committed. That which followed was
an accident or misfortune, which, in
doing a iuStifiable act is Dermitted