Martinsburg W Va evening journal. [volume] (Martinsburg, W. Va.) 1913-1920, 1918-02-13
TECH|yCALlTIES IN
MURDERS TRIALS
Bring RehearingS In TWO Not
ed West Va. Cases.

! Charleston Feb. IS. The granting
OF new trials in two murder cases at
a RECEIPT session Of the Supreme Court
OF Appeals was unusual in the history
Of the court The murder cases them.
solves were Of unusual interest and
the grounds Of reversal we're tech
nical in each case, neither Of the de-
fendants denying thar he killed his
man i,
IN the Bell murder ease, David
Snider was convicted Of murder in
the second degree. Bell and Snider
were neighbors, and the murder was
the outcomee OF ,ouhle between the
TWO regarding their eek. Bell hay.
ing been shot by snider, according
to the evidence. while the former was
driving one Of Snider's hogs from his
potato patch Snider was alleged to
have shot Bell in the back, firing the
shot from a latticed window out Of
the Lost Of his barn
The point of error in trial proceed
ure on which the new trial was grant
ed is set forth BY the Supreme Court
as follows:
III, in the progress OF the trial of a
felony case the judge and the attor.
Ineys retire from the court room In
which the trial 10 conducted to an
anteroom, leaving the accused and
the Jury in the court room, and in
such ante'room and IN the absence OF
the accused, an objection 10 the in
PRODUCTION Of evidence is argued by
the attorneys and passed upon by the
judge, the accused is entitled to
new trial. BY reason OF deprivation
of his legal right to be personally
present at every stage OF his trial, A
Hike result flows from such retire
ment by the Judge, attroneys and
witnest and Interrogation OF the
witness. in the absence Of the accus.
ed, after an objection to question
propounded TO him has been sustained
in the presence of the accused"
The Fitzgerald murder occurred in
the restaurant OF the defendant, John
T. White, in the village of Anawalt.
Mcdowell county for which Whites
conviction was in second degree. The
evidence showed that Fitzgerald had
entered the White restaurant and
while being waited upon by Whites
son, became engaged in an alterca-
ton with him
The elder White, it is said, took up
his sons quarrel, and with q revol-
yer in his hand, climbed over the
counter and started after Fitzgerald.
Other persons in the restaurant led
Fitzgerald from the establishment.
About 20 minutes later he returned.
As he approached the counter, Els
hands in his pockets, White faced
him and demanded that he take his
hands from his pockets and deliver a
revolver which he was accused OF
having brought in for the purpose Of
killing White
AS he withdrew his hands from his
pockets. according to the evidence,
White shot and killed him. A search
Of his person later revealed the fact
that he had not been armed. White
contended that he shot in self-de,
Tense.
The trial court admitted evidence
on the cross-examination OF White to
the effect that the accused, at a for
mer term OF the coltt, had been con.
victed Of a violation of the prohibit
tioa statute. This evidence, the SUI
prcme Court declared. was illegal,
was prejuiical against the accused.
and because Of ii the reversal of the
lower court was made and the new
trial allowed.