Richmond times-dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1914-current, 1917-12-13
ARGUMENT IN means CASE
DELAYS ITS GOING TO JURY
Three Lawyers Speak for Seven
Hours-Ninc Others to
BE Heard.
TALKS MAY END TOMORROW
solicitor Clement Pleads for Yer
dict OF First Degree Murder,
Charging Defendant With Premcd-
itatcd Killing OF Mrs. King.

CONCORD, \. c., December 1.-THE
State and defense having outlined their
contentious. following the completion
B. Means. charged with the murder Of
Mrs. Maude A. King, nearly seven
hours were consumed to-day In tho
argument before the jury by three
members of counsel--one for the State
and two for the defense. Ten addresses
arc yet to be hcard-four for the state
and six for the defense. II is doubtful
tonight that the argument can be com
pletcd tomorrow. even with night
session. and 1t is expected to be Fri:
day noon or later when the case goes
70 the jury.
Opening the argument for the state
In an address OF one hour to-day. So
iicitor Hayden Clement told the jury
that one OF three verdicts must be
brought in-nrst or second degree MUIR
der or mot gUilty'-and that the state
asked for verdict Of first -dcgrec
murder. The States contention as out =
lined by him is that the defendant
Killed Mrs. King with generalization.
the motive lying in the alleged fact
that during the two years he was her
business agent he squandercd and APP
propriatcd a large portion OF her es-
tate. and that the time was approach
ing when he would be called TO ac-
count.
OSBORNE SAYS THERE WAS
NO MOTIVE FOR CRIME
Judge Frank /. Osborne, in an add
dress OF moro than three hours, open
ing the argument for the defense, out
lined the contention that Mrs. King
shot herself accidentally when she, with
pistol In hand. stumbled, fractured 4
bone near the ankle. and in falling
EEasped tho weapon go tina. Il fred.
He briefly touched upon the financial
transactions OF the defendant as Mrs.
Kings business agent, and sought TO
show that all the funds which the
state claims were mlsappropr.ated have
been accounted for He contended that
no motive for the alleged crime had
been proved and devoted large por-
lion OF his argument TO pointing out
10 the Jury alleged conflicts and dis
crepancies between the testimony @,
witnesses for the State and for the
defense. as we'll as conflicts in the re-
suits OF tests and demonstrations In
evidence. He argued that these con-
ficta and variances must necessarily
create at least 4 reasonable doubt in
Tho mind OF the jury, and that under
tho law such doubt must result in an
acqui,tal
lie pointed out that the Law require.
for the basis OF a verdict IN civil ac-
lions only that preponderancc of the
evidence be found on one side. but in
criminal cases the States evidence
must be so strong as to be convincing
OF guilt beyond n reasonable doubt
before verdict OF guilt is reached
CLEMENT CHARGES MEANS
DTSSIPhTED KING; FORTUNE:
II. s. Williams. OF counsel for the
defense. in lengthy address. reviewed
the field OF evidence, pointing out wha,
he referred TO as the little things
which the State had dragged into the
record 20 prejudice the mind OF the
jury in it's alleged extreme effort 10
strengthen the case which he main
tanned the State recognized as weak.
Solicitor Clement, in his argument,
stated that Mrs King in 1906 had in
her name assets OF $4,000. besides n
life interest in a trust fund OF $500. 600
In nine years prior TO the time c.. +.
Means became connected with her af-
fairs she spent only $4,000, though
living In Paris and travelling in Europe
and America. Within ono year after
the defendant began handling her
finances $4,000 disappeared. He as
serted that at the time of her death
she had little more than $4,000 in ad-
dttion to her interest in the 100000