Arizona republican., 1919-05-11

man jury had retired for the night
 without having reached a decision.
 After a trial covering a two-week period. the fate of J. D. Newman enarged with the murder of Frank Hector on the desert highway last Jan Iary, was placed in the hands. of the jury at 9:30 o'clock last night
 Closing a long two weeks of testi- mony with day and night sessions marking the final days, counsel for both the state and defense brought all the skill al their command in their final appeal 10 the F men who will de eide whether or not Newman killed Frank Hector in self defense as he claimed
 The courts Instructions, which re- qured nearly an hour in reading, fol- lowed six hours of argument, after which five forms of verdict were read, including first degree murder, fixing the penalty at death; first degree mur- der, fixing the penalty at life impris- oument. second degree murder, man slaughter. and not guilty.
 Few remained in the court room after the two hailiffs were sworn and took the jury in charge it being gen orally ConCedcd that it would be many hours, if not days, before the jury ar rived at verdict. Among those who remained were Mr. and Mrs. Newman and the defendants counsel, George J. Stoneman, George Prdy Bullard and and the defendants counsel; George J. Francis Crable of Flagstaff. Mrs. Newman has not missed a day in court since the case opened and with her during every session has been her I'll 1N was absent for the first time last night. The Hooters, too, have been faithf0- in their attendance at the trial, the two brothers Of the dead man having come from the northwest for the case. Mrs Hector, the widow, has sat behind the county attorney throughout the pro- ceedings. occasionally accompanied by her small daughter Lucille
 The clever plea of the defense coun. sol sn which they pointed out New man had no motive for murdering Hector. was followed by an earnest argument from County Attorney L. M Laney, who repeatedly called to the attention of the jury the restraining influence of the death penalty
 Don't be afraid of whimsical doubt charged the county prosecutor, as he reminded the l2 men that they were ". The purpose of punishment is to de, ter other crimes" he said as he urgeo the jury to do it's duty and make life and liberty safe in Maricopa county.
 Both sides charged the other with slurs and insinuaGons during the course of the trial and both took oc. 1aslon 10 call to the attention of the Jury the fact that such was the case.
 The defense rested at II o'clock yes icrday morning, after calling but one witness for sur-rebuttaL The witness was J. T. Murphy who, the defense stated. was called in answer to the ir. sInuauOns of the state that Murphy had some conversation with Jose Or tega who had previously testified that Hoctor offered him $500 to kill New man. Mr. Murphy testified that the first he heard of the statement made oy Ortega on the stand was when the witness told him d few moments before entering the court room. At that time Murphy advised him to tell AIr Stone man what he had told him. That was all that was said Murphy declared.
 The rebuttai of the state dealt largely WiJh attempted impeachment Of Ortega but in some instances it was shown that the witness had personal Feasons for disIking the Mexican whose testimony created a sensation two days ago.
 Harry Johnson, assistant county at torney. gave the opening argument for the state. Johnson reviewed the tesri- mony from the states viewpoint. To make more dramatic many of the points, Johnson seated hilnsalI m the seat of lIOCtOr's truck which had been used in demonstration by the defense 10 show entrance and exit of the bull let, which was referred to by the at- torney as the ridiculous theory of rhe way HOctor was shot"
 Detense's lmpassioned Argument
 Beginning his two-hour argument which lett many men and women in the crowded court room in tears Mir bullard declared, he could appreciate the weariness of the jury in tho ease which had tried the court and counsel seruons of the county attorney unless harging the jury not to take the as. established by evidence. Mr. Bullart asked the jury to remember that ia c+, are proven in two ways-by the ad- omission of the truth and by failure te rebut the evidence.
 There was only one living witues. TO testify and he has told his story tC you and you have no right to say be. cause he is defendant in the case hi, story IS not true" declared counsel. a, he briefly outlined the testimony give1 4by Newman on the stand.
 The defense counsel then stated h, would analyze the testimony unde Tour heads, the first would be to shov who prior to the killing was the mos flndictive and therefore probably In aSEressor and had the desire to kill
 
 out Newman's testimony; the third evidence as to whether or not Hocto mad a. gun and the fourth. character a bearing on facts in the, case.
 Men do not kill on the hieb,ye, when there is no reason for it.. It mus ne conceded that Newman and Hocfo mad trouble before,' he said as he re 1erred 10 the meeting of the two sheen men m Cordes year ago when tn 'hly blow struck was that by Hocto
 Digs into Cordes Affair
 The Cordes incident was gone in+ py the attorney, who repeated the con Eersation between tn two men who NeWman had asked Hector concer7,in CeIIaln Of his strays and his answe called from 8 remark from Newna ao you mean to call me a liar?" Tn ptoW was struck and Newman wake
 HIS CoI' as, BQllard said, the stat Clalmed to get his gun, although the ltlled 10 call to the stand Mr. Corde. " Ho was with Newman at the time. an who could establish the claim
 Bullard then took up the testir,or Of Judge George II. Crosby to -,ltYl, Tbnr Hoctor said he would find a waZ- | get even if not by law. While finer had been insinuations that testimo1 had been purchased, BuIlard declare that he did not believe even the count atlorney would have the nerve Ia .n