The sun., 1919-06-29
JURY'S PLEA BASIS
OF WILKINS PLEA
Prisoners Counsel Believes IT
Indicates Doubt on Part
of Some.
VERDICT IS "REvERSIBLE,
Wysong Says Prisoners Con-
dition Limits Life Probably
to Year or Two.

---------
The recommendation to mercy made
BY the Jury which convicted DR.. Walter
K wilkins OF the murder of his wife at
Long Beach last February is relied on
by his lawyers as the strongest point
they will have in going to the Court of
Appeals and asking for a new trial.
In their opinion the action Of the Jury
in finding n verdict of first degree MUIR
der and recommending at the same time
that the court extend clemency to the
defendant indicates that there must
have been in the minds of some of the
jurymen a doubt of the guilt of DR..
wilkins. One of the counsel, Charles
whitehouse. said yesterday.
at makes no difference II the doubt
rested in the mind OF only one man Of
the twelve who adjudged DR.. wilkins
guilty of murder. The law requires that
a person accused of crime must have
the benefit of a reasonable doubt and
defines reasonable doubt as one which
remains in the mind after u Juror has
called upon all the resources of his pow
ers Of reason-a doubt in other words
which remains despite the exercise OF
logic to remove II.
There cannot OF course be any ques-
ton but that the 5urymen who had DR..
Wilkins's case used their reasoning pow
ers. They deliberated for twenty-five
hours and argued and reasoned the case
from every possible angle. And then
they came into court and recommended
that DR.. Wilkins be dealt with merci-
S,,11, no
charged them that II they believed DR.
wilkins had committed the crime OF
which he was accused after premeditat-
ing It the law required that his life pay
the forfeit. He cautioned them against
allowing sympathy. or reluctance to inn
pose the death penalty, to deter them
from their duty II they believed DR.. Will
kins guilty.
Their verdict expresses clearly that
at least one of them-I know there was
more than one, but one is sufficient
entertained a doubt of DR.. Vikings
guilt. which makes the verdict reversible
from another angle OF the law, because
the law requires that a verdict must be
unanimous. There can be no unanimity
where any one of twelve men IL not alb
solutely convinced that the man whom
he has adjudged guilty Of murder ac-
tually premeditated that murder"
the case, was greatly disappointed by
the verdict. for he In thoroughly con-
WINGED Of DR.. wilkinss innocence. He
said yesterday that while he did not be-
l!eye that Dr. wilkins would In the or
binary course OF the law ever 60 to the
electric chair. he was certain that the
mans bodily condition would end his
life within a year or two. DR.. Wilkins
has a bad" heart and has suffered from
90 h. 1t fRr W
years.
He had brief spell Of depression yes
terday, but in the main was cheerful.
The tailers who have him in charge hnd
him remarkable person in several re-
spects He appears to have neither
nerves nor imagination. and while the
Jury which was considering his case
wrangled and argued in a room right
above him he read a newspaper, ate a
hearty meal and then composed himself
to sleep. He was the only person In the
court room who showed not a trace of
agitation when the verdict against him
was announced.
The ground upon which, principally.
Or. Wilkins's counsel will ask that the
verdict against him be reversed Is
sharply illustrative Of that axiom OF the
law wrich proclaims that no case Is lost
until it is lost. The words with a rec
words uttered in the case.
Or. wilkins wrote yesterday the fol-
lowing statement:
The verdict the jury rendered GER
ta!uly was unlocked for and stunned
me. I was placed in a room Thursday
night. all night, with a guard that was
relieved every two hours. The room was
directly under the jury room. 1t was
high posted room with an eighteen
FOO: ceiling. The noise of angry voices
that reached Notwithstanding and calling
OF foul names-was plainly heard. The
guards all said that they never before
heard such a riot going on in jury
room. The jumping or falling on the
moor would shake the ceiling.
When the jury returned to the court
room one OF the Jurors addressed Judge
Manning, saying that he wished to re-
port an occurrance in the juryroom. The
Judge said that he did not care to hear
anything that occurred in the juryroom
think this was an error OF judgment
! think this man would have stated tnal
he vas assaulted by another Juror fol
disasreeing with him. 1t was undoubt'
eddy true that physically strong Jurors
we're intimidating weaker Jurors by
hro~beating them and threatening them
Tor d.sagreeing with them.
This violent language that was &c
plainly heard in the room below clearly
indicated this fact The guard called my
attention 10 a window in the corridor way
IN in the south wing. with a lot Of heads
Of soldiers looking up toward the jury
room who were attracted by the loud
hoises coming from the jury.
Considering all the underhand detec'
tive work having been done In this case
Il would seem an error OF judgment &c
allow the jurors TO roam wherever they