Arizona republican., 1919-05-11
-erkamp. caused the trouble.

feelings Of revenge BuIard asserted as he reviewed the testimony offered 10 this effect.
 "The state established nothing by proof at all. Il established a few phy- sical facts undenied upon which it has built 8 theory. The court will instruct you that even if true that the deceased was shot in the back it does not mean that the man firing the shot may not have fired in self defense" said Bull lard as he gave a resume of the eX- pert testimony offered by Dr. Win Wyllo who claimed that it was i'm possible for HOCt0r to have been shot after he fell unless the man standing at the distance Newman was from him Was 3S feet tall.
 Explains the Gun Mystery
 He recalled to the jury that there were many good reasons why the gun should not have been found. He enum- crated the various automobiles that had passed the Hector truck long be- fore the arrival of the officers. Es- Chandy, HoctOr's foreman, had said that Hoctor had no gun when he left the first camp. but he went to one more camp before he passed Newman near Nada, where the tragedy oc- cured. It might have been that Es- chandy overlooked the gun, declared Bulard. just as he overlooked the suit case which was in the truck.
 At that time the road was infested with bOOtleggers, said the lawyer, who accounted for the disappearance of the mysterious man and woman who aided Newman in placing HOctor in his car as motorists on their way to the coast who did not wish to be held up in Phoenix for months awaiting a case in which they had no interest. He told of the exhaustive and useless search that had been made for them.
 Bullard said that Newman did not stop to look for the gun, that his sole thought was to get Hector to Glendale where he might save his life. He had no thought of remaining to search for the gun said Bullard, arguing to the jury that Newman was not the cold DloOded man the county attorney stamped him, citing his. reply when first asked if he had cared to send word to his family, to which Newman answered, "Tell Mrs. Hoctor and break it to her gently. I always liked Mrs. Hector and l like the little girl'
 After recalling the reputable men who appeared as character witnesses, BullaTd made an appeal for the man who has lived in the state for more than 40 years and borne an unblem- ished reputation for the pioneers, who with the pioneers, labored for the vel fare of the state and who retained the friendship of those first settlers who demanded fair dealing from their fel- low men. He appealed on behalf of the wife and the daughter of the de- fendaut
 MT. Stoneman followed his associate in the case He emphasized points in the testimony brought out by MT. Bull lard. In direct contrast to the impas- stoned argument by BUllard. he quietly weighed the evidence and asked the Jury for an acquittal. Going carefully from witness to witness, he reviewed the testimony, not missing a point made in favor of the defense.
 "The Flimsy Defense"
 The flimsy defense" said County Attorney Laney in closing for the state as he referred to the self-defense ! theory advanced by counsel. Does ! Marlcopa county approve of homicide ?" he questioned as he urged the jury to consider how HOCtor was shot the way In which he was shot and the unrea- 1 condolences of his shooting with his 1 left hand as claimed by counsel. "I,et ! the wounds speak for themselves" he said as he passed to the jury the pic 1 tures introduced in evidence showing the bullet wounds in the back of Frank l Hector.
 He based his murder motive on the trouble at Cordes. giving all the de- l tails of the incident.
 Laney said that just because New man was able 10 afford the most skillful lawyers in the southwest" would not let him get away with it." He said that he and MT. Johnson were ] young, but that they had sincerely and 1 earnestly gone into the case and had arrived at the facts which he asked the Jury to remember when arriving at their verdict
 He defended his office for reaching 1 cefIaln of the facts by securing a state Inent rom the defendant, holding that ! he would not he worthy of office if not l SeLlng at once at facts in a case of this character.
 ! Leaving the case with "the con- Selence of the county Laney closed his argument.
 Summary of Case
 The case of the State yersus I n l Newman began in Judge Stanford's di- vision of the superior court April 28 Il took two days to secure the jury. the Jurors selected being J. c. Reed. Dean Woodward. Louis Cuber, Charles F. 9lmeks, Olie Barclay, Leo NJ. MadIey '. J. Halderman, R. W. Westover George A. Armstrong. Fred Maier W A. summons and J. 4. Wellington.
 Ninety witnesses were subpoen- aed and although the entire nUmbe7 vas not called, there were more than t9 who testified in the case. The tes- tlmonN in many instances was brief character witnesses taking but a few moments at time, the many legal ob- Jectlons taking up much of the two weeks, While the long waits between questions was also responsible for the many days used in trying the case.
 The tragedy occurred near Nada January 3o, Newman immediatek rushed toward Glendale with Hocror who died enroute. Newman gave him. sen up 10 the officers at once and fol. lowing the inquest before Justice Pat. ters0n he was arrested on the mUrde, charge. He was given his preliminary hearIng before Justice De Souza. anC February l3. after offering no defense was bound over to the superior conr+
 his bond being fixed at s2O.0O0 m,
 bondsmen were D. M Francis c [ Hammond, F. D. Newman and C. II
 Schulz.
 , From the first Newman claimed self