Daily Kennebec journal., 1917-12-21
ARGUMENTS ARE
MADE IN MURDER
CASE THURSDAY
Law Court Hears the
Case of St a tie VS..
Priest-Case of AL
legged Malpractice Is
Argued

NSSN AASsA ~
Argued
The principal matter before the law
court at the Thursday session was the
murder case from Piscataquis county,
State VS.. Willis NJ. Priest, which was ar
gued by Hon. John S. Williams of Gull
ford for the respondent and Attorney
General Guy H. Sturgis for the State.
Priest was convicted in the supreme ju-
dicial court for Piscataquis county for
the murder of George Herbert, recluse,
at his camp at Rand Cove in the planta-
ton of Lake View on July 10. 1916 Her
bert was ~ or 73 years OF age and was
found in his camp lying face downward in
a pool of blood, with his head cut, bruised
and bloody and his skull fractured,
Attorney Williams Argument
Attorney Williams argued that the YER
diet of the jury should be set aside for
three reasons. because the verdict is
against the law, because the verdict is
against the evidence and because the YER
dict is against the weight of the evidence.
".All the states testimony shows self
defense by the respondent" argued At
torney Williams. "and lack of any rarti-
cipation by him in the battery that re-
suited in Herbert's death
"Testimony vas offered by the State
tending to show statements made by the
respondent in the police station at Port-
land to Landry, a State investigator OF
crime and another to the county attor-
ney at Dover. The respondent claims
that such statements were not confessions
in the legal sense and that the" were
the fact that they were obtained from the
respondent upon an inducelhent held out
or threat offered by Landry before they
were made.
During the cross-examnation OF the
respondent, the presiding Justice inter-
rogated him as to the condition in which
Herbert was left and why he and Wood
did not see'- help, which interrogatores,
as the respondent says. were unfair ano
prejudiced the jury against him and his
testimony. The court also at different
periods in the trial nterrogateu him. as
the respondent claims, upon matters and
in a manner. that brought no assistance
to the jury, nor enlightened them upon
ed directly to l as the jury, and rendered
the trial neither fair nor impartial
The respondent excerpts to certain
portions of the charge of the presiding
justice in which while re-statng the
certain testimony of the respondent to
the jury, he used the plural as they and
the indefinite terms one and the other.
in connection with the acts of the re-
spondent in the struggle resulting in Her
bert's death.
The respondent claims that the testi-
mony was clear on these points. and that
his participation and that Of Wood was
certain and unambiguous, but that the
justice confused the positions of the re-
spondent and Wood 10 such a degree that
the jury was misled and confused the
testimony to his prejudice"
Attorney General Sturais
Attorney General Sturgis argued that
the evidence shows that the resnondent
was the instigator, the promoter and the
! leading spirit of this crime, and the state
argued at the trial and contends to this
court that the respondent Is guilty OF
premeditated murder planned and con-
summated with utmost cunning and cold
| hlooded wickedneSs Of heart
The respondent had knowledse OF tha
! place, the man and all the details of the
opportunity that awaited their felony.
said Attorney General Sturgis. He lea
his companion upon this trip He knew
from common report that the old man
Herbert had money and he knew that he
lived alone.
The respondent claimed that he was
choked repeatedly and continually and a.
most INTO uncoRsciousness, out where
were the marks of the chokineo cana
the jury forget when Mr. Cyr. the har.
per shaved and massaged the respondent
ehe next morning at $50 clock, he saw
no bruises. cuts, scratches or discolora-
TONS upon the respondents face and
neck.
! The jury was justified in believing +ba
respondents account oe the struggle and
IN reaching the conclusion that he re-
spondent and his companion, without ius.
, tihcation. killed the deceased.
Ihey fled back through the woods he-
cause they didn't want to be seen, the re-
spondent says, They left the railroad
track and hid in the bushes so thev
wouldn't be seen by the men on the na asa
ing freight train. They boarded the
train at opposite ends and sat apart be-
cause the respondent says he thought II
best they separate. The respondent sent
the larger part of the money that was In
his possession and that had been stolen
from Mr.. Herbert away in a CANDY box
to his boy friend. He told his bov fr,end
Byron Farris, that all troubling him waa
his finger marks upon the curtain where
he had pulled it down, and had forgot.
ten to wear his gloves He told BYRON
Farris that he hit the first blow but not
the fatal blow.
"The verdict was in accordance with
the evidence and the weight Of the evil
dence presented. The law applicable TO
this case was fully and properly present
ed to the jury by the persidng Justice and
in accordance with that law the verdict
was rendered"
Campbell vs.. Peters
The only other case for argument at
| the present term of the law court was
heard during the day. that Of Hannibal
H. Campbell Of Sangerville VS.. DR..
| William c. Peters Of Bangor W. r.
Pattangall Of Augusta argued for the