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


abiding citizen was good
The state rested at 3 p. IN. and
the defense had nothing further to
offer.
County Attorney Schmidt gave the
closing argument for the state. AS
he began, the aged mother of HUI.
bert Haack burst into tears.
Address to the Jury.
Mr.. Schmitt said that this was
an important case to the state as
well as to the defendant. The jury
would be the judges as to what took
place, while the court would Judge
/ the law. The jurors would use their
experience in life in Judging the val
ne to be placed on the testimony of
the various witnesses. Statutes are
made to punish those who commit
crimes, and they should be enforced,
for punishment is the only thing
feared by those who commit crimes.
There is no greater crime than MUIR
der, and that crime is against the
law Of nature and the law of God
as we'll as against the statute of
Minnesota. No more important cases
can be tried than those that involve
Did the defendant give Hubert
Hack the opportunity to prove his
innocence? He gave him about the
same chance as was given to sus-
poets in the dark ages. Law and or.
der and not anarchy is what we are
looking for as American citizens.
This case was not being prosecuted
because an assistant counsel had
been retained, but he was glad and
proud to stand here arguing for the
enforcement of law.
In order to get at the right and
render a just verdict, the essen
tial facts must be sifted from the
immaterial. and friendships or who
are the counsel on one side or the
other should not be allowed to in
terfere. By following the straight
and narrow path a just verdict will
| be rendered. The issue in this case
is, did Hubert Hack commit a fell
Ony on the evening of July 3, or did
he not; did Pollei know that such
felony had been committed, or did
he not; did Pollei shoot Hack, or
did he not?"
What Court Would Do.
The court would probably instruct
that one of five different verdicts
could be rendered. Murder in the
second degree was unjustiiable kill
ing, with the intent at the moment
to effect the victims death, but
without generalization. Murder in
/ the third degree was unjustifiable
killing, without design to effect
death, but intending to commit Il fei-
Mnn ,ln,, ,,I,t in, IL,
gree was unjuStifablc killing by
means of deadly weapon, or while
attempting to commit felony. Mali
slaughter in the second degree was
unjustifiable killing while committing
a trespass. or through culpible neg
ligence. The fifth verdict would be
not guilty. The punishment is grad
ed according to the degrees. That
for manSlaughter in the second de-
gree is one to fifteen years i'm pris-
on, a fine CT $1,000, or both; that
for manslaughter in the first degree
is one to fifteen years; that for muir
der in the third degree is seven to
thirty years; and that for murder
in the second degree is life i'm
prisonment. The jury is not to con.
slider the punishment which is left
to the court and the board of parole.
Mr.. Schmitt said that he did not
for one moment apologize for trying
POllei for murder in the second de.
gree. The intent must be Judged from
the evidence, as there is no way of
revealing the thoughts of the de
PENDANTS mind. 1t is for the jury
to decide what statute has been VIC.
lated.
The evidence is that Hubert Hack,
a laboring man living in North Man.
katO, ate his supper the evening of
July 3, and crossed the river to
Mankato. 1t is regretable that he is
not here now to tell what happened.
Mrs. Liedloff and Miss Wertz say
! man in front of the Rex cigar store,
and that she struggled to get away.
1t was one. of these women who
started the conversation. There was
no evidence that Hack was drunk
The state had brought the witnesses
into court in order that everything
might came out, and that the jury
might Judge whether the two wo-
| men were insulted by the language
used. Hack should not have an
swered them. even if irritated by
their talk. Katie Zeyen, a daughter
! of respectable parents, was there
at the time and place, and knew
him well, and was greeted by Hack
But these two women were not sat
isfied with this, as they are in part
responsible with the defendant for
Hubert HACKS death All there was
! to it was what Katie Zeyen said,
and she was the girl who was there.
Why did the defense not produce
the tall, slender girl in black if
| there was such one. The statement
of the defendant that Hack told him
| he did not know who the other wo-
man was, was false, and the defend
ant was coward to make it.
Hack would not have told him
| that
Defense Took Exception.
The attorneys for the defendant
! took exception to this statement
! Mr. Schmitt continued. Statements
| had been made of few things that
l-Haack had done, but nothing was
said of the thousands of good things
! that he did in his life time He may
have done few things not just
| right but was that any reason why
he should have been killed. Under
/ the evidence POllei had no right to
! arrest or take Hack into custody
| He was accused of no more than q
| minor OffenSe or a miSdemeanOr il