The Washington times., 1920-01-09
Jury FINDS. wan
GUILTY Of KILLING
from First r.se)

(continued from First Pace
that the confession had been extorted
from the Chinese student by torture
and other means costended by the
defense that they ignore II entirely
and take the case as IL stood without
the statement OF admissions
MIR. Laskey also urged the jury to
acquit Wan II IL believed he was not
In the automobile when Tsong Ing
Van, brother OF the defendant went
into the Riggs Bank to attempt TO
have csshed the 5000 check.
The District Attorney pictured the
defendant as man driven toward
financial ruin. and declared hs killed
the three members OF the Chinese
Education Mission. In a desperate ef-
fort to recoup his losses.
80 Desies Third Degree.
Emphatic denial was made by the
prosecuting attorney that undue po-
lice methods were used In getting ad-
missions from the defe ndaLt. ,declar-
Ing that Wan confessed to the triple
slayinEs and forgery, of the check
after he had made many conflicting
statements and lied about his pres
encc and that OF his brother, Van, at
the time the three Chinese educa-
tors were slain.
Had the confession not been true"
declared Mr.. Leskey. why did not
Wan repudiate IL long before he was
brought TO trial? He had twenty-four
hours to thiHk IL over before he sign
ed IT, He had been at the District
morgue at coroner's inquest after
making the confession. He had
plenty OF time to refute II. But he
did not do II.
Failing TO obtain admissions from
the police or to prove other accusa-
tions. other than from the defendant
himself. that Wan had been cruelty
treated by the police. counss! FOR the
defense, as a last resort. attempted to
convince you that Wan was the vie
tim OF suggestive confession--thst
he made the admissions through sug-
gestions by the police.
III the police are not to be allowed
to question persons suspected of
crime, particularly those suspects
who have been trapped in conflicting
statements and lies. you might as
wei lclose up the courthouse. For the
protection OF society they must quiz
those persons suspected of crime and
at whom points the finger of guilt"
Both the defendant and his broth
CT. Van, lied when they were inter
viewed by the police In New York
Van said he had never been to Wash
ington. He persisted In saying Sc
when he was confrcnted by officials
OF the Riggs National Bank where he
attempted TO have cashed the forged
$4,000 check. Wan also told the po
lice his brother had never been 10
Washington.
Calls Evideace Sufficient.
the defendant and his brother have
admitted that they were in Wash
ington 'on January 20 last year; that
they were at the Dewey Hotel, and
Van has admitted that he took the
check to the Riggs Bank. Was tina,
not sufficient evidence for the police
to suspect that they had a hand In
the triple cfme? Was that not suf-
ficient cause that they should be
held in custody and questioned tc
clear up the case?
Van first said that his brother went
to the bank, sat in an auto mobile out
side Of the institution while he (van)
went in and tried to get the money
Both the defendant and Van have
been identified by the chauffeur who
carried them to the bank. Van would
have you believe that he went To
the bank with another Chinese. a mar
he did not know-never saw before
Do you believe him? II you do not
believe Wan was in that automobile
do not want you to bring in "A ver-
dict convicting the defendant"
A bitter arraignment OF the third
degree and the efforts of the Govern
ment to convist ziang Sung Wan of
first degree murder on alleged cir
cunlsta aptial evidence were the out
standing features of the closing arEu-
ments today of the defendants coun-
sci.