The copper era and Morenci leader., 1914-02-27

| |
 strong physically, and that the gir
 could easily of this fear for her life l The evidence offered by States At
 torney Horton in his attempts to dis prove the plea of self-defense, was il substance as follows:
 l The dying statement of Tifft, made
 to Judge Burns, of Metcalf, and who
 on the stand repeated the statements to the jury, was to the effect that he
 Tifft, never intended any punishment Ito his daughter other than chastise ment, and that this was only be cause of her deliberately disobeying
 him in his efforts to restrain her from conduct that was reprehensible 1;
 that at the time of the attack he only threatened to chastise the girl with the stick, and that she had no reason to believe that he would attempt her great bodily harm; that she suddenly and without warning produced the pistol and shot him.
 In addition to these statements dis proving the plea of self defense, At s.orney Horton also produced c. F. Pascoe and pr. l.. A. w. Burtch, who testified that they, with Attorney Horton, on February 12, eleven days after the shooting, exhumed the re- mains of Tifft, and found that one bullet had entered the back, and that it's course was such that proved the t0 fhA ceased was turned from. his assailant. the attorneys for the de- fense did not attach great importance to this testimony, they referring in their arguments to it as being entirely possible that Mrs. Gould did fire at her fathers back in her great fear and excitement occasioned by his attack, and that she could not be responsible for the place of entrance of the bullets. Attorney Kearney al so in this connection subjected the two witnesses to questions involving a delicate knowledge of all subjects pertaining to the nature of bullet wounds, the indications of powder
  dently anticipating the necessity of later proving that the wound in the chest was caused by the same bullet which caused the wound in the back, as it was proven by the two witness es mentioned that no bullets were found, although probing was institu- ted for the purpose. Kearney int1- mated, however, that the chain Of evidence in favor of self defense was sufficiently strong to enable the jury to completely discard this feature of the evidence.
 Attempts on the part of Attorney Kearney, to introduce evidence Of specific acts of Tifft, in regard to his former relation to members of his family, were met with refsual, al though the Court did not object to the offering of evidence concerning the general nature and disposition or the deceased. In this connection, Kearney was prepared to offer witness es who would have testified to the natural violent disposition, while under the influence of anger, of the deceased. J. L. Turney, of Duncan, was the first and only witness called by Kearney in this respect, ana promised to be formidable in the favor of the defendants freedom, but his evidence was not allowed to go to the jury, who was excused during his testimony. It is understood that other witnesses were to De called by the defense in this connec- tion, but the ruling of the Court pro- hibited any evidence of this nature from reaching the jury.
 All evidence of both sides was ended early on the afternoon of Tues day, and arguments immediately be- gan. Attorney Horton in his speech ably reviewed the evidence submitted, and in this connection mentioned that