Indiana daily times. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1914-1922, 1922-06-03


which removed all doubt.
TIE rardict further shows that Shelby
County stands ready to convict one whom
they believe gni!ty of a crime which in
vaIvcs social duty"
MRS CARTS LAWYERS
ARE SILENT.
Ed * Adams, one % the attorneys for
Mrs CART would make 10 statement re-
ca-sl+ng the future plans Of the de-
Tense
After the verdict which stamped Mrs.
Gar! as d murdFres< Mrs Erickson the
niece, who has been constantly AZ the
side IF her aGnt, broke down and cried
IS she conferred vita Ir. Adams, after
he verdict was read
Judge Blair read the verdict * SD
o'clock this morning. after the jury had
been celebrating since I'll yesterday
afternoon. The verdict was not reached
until about 100 This morning.
Qn tic first ha,lot the Jurors stood 10
t0 for conviction. il was said.
Will SENTENCE
WOMAN LATER
Judge Blair announced that formal
sentence will b. pronounced later.
A close s*rfsIg y tA:, unusual case IN
which the State was allowed to introduce
evidence concerning the alleged death of
AIonz6 Il. Carl by arsenic poisoning for
the rurp"s. ~ showing motive for the
daatI u Frank Carl, shows that Prose
cHtor waldo cling OF Hancock County,
where the otfense was committed, had
T-5 TaroJi ere Of the strongest circum
stanii4I cases in the history II the state
il i thought that the powerful and con-
viu@.ra c1csiae argument ~ Prosecutor
Tassett Of Shelby County aided the Jury
In seeing c.eariy the evidence IN the
case. Mir Eassett talked for nearly rwo
hours and hammered home his argument
10 the jury That tie case contained no
reasonable doubt,
The defense made n strong effort TO
clear the defendant. bat the evidence APP
peard Il b. Je3 convincing
When the jary had been out al night,
ceurs sci Tor the defense began hoping
the verdict might. be cne Of aoauittal.
Sstaa expected that the Jury woG.d dis
agrse- Attorney Adams, Tor Mrs Carl,
viS,0ty showed his disappointment at
the verdiat snieh sends his client TO
prison Tor life.
Prosecutor EasSett in making tae clos
in. arg Im.ut for the STATE asked the
IUry "nat 10 fear iaftcllas the
death Eencftv," II they should
hu Mrs EaI guilty of first de-
gree murder He c5ntendei euly first
da@rt IGur.ier verdict would answer the
charge IL This ease.
J.lGe RIair. In instrue;ing the jury
regarding murder ~ The first degree
said IF yoH believe from the evidence
beyond reasonable doubt that the de-
fendal.t. il Hancock County, Indiana, be-
fore Tie finding II the Indictment in this
case. snvposelg killed Frank Carl. after
reaectiau, with Il wickedness or deprav-
ity uf heart toward he deceased. and
the killing was determined on before
hand-tven moment before the fatal
act WIS GaUe-tuen the defendant Is
guilty If murder in the FIRST degree"
IN discussing prcof Of motive. Judge
Blair said Proof IL motive 70 commit
tie crime IS not Indispensable nor es-
sentiai to conviction While motive
may be shown as circumstance to aid
in aNtag the crime on the defendant, yet
the State Is lot required TO prove Il mo-
tive On the part of the defendant In or
der TO convict, and the jury would be
Justified IN irrerrEns motive from the
commission o. tie crime itself, IL the
commission IL the crime, by the defend
ant. Is proven beyond reasonable doubt
as required by law. However. il you
find, on careful examination Of all the
evidence lit the case. the prosecution has
failed to show any motive On the part
or the accused 70 commit the crime
charged against her, then this is a cir
cuEistauce which the jury ought to con
slider in the gcrused's favor in making
UP your verdict -
The court outlined the following five
points the State must have proven by
the evidence IN tho case beyond a rea-
soaable doubt before the jury would be
warranted in finding the defendant
guilty:
u. The death OF Frank Carl, named
in The indictment.
- His death was caused or FASTENED
By arsenic administered to him.
p The defendant. Clara Carl. felon-
fously administered arsenic 20 said frank
Carl. or that she feieuiously caused
arsenic 70 be administered to him, or
feloniousiy participated in such admin
Istration Of arsenic TO him.
- Said Frank Carl lied within a year
and Il day after said arsenic was ad-
Iainistared 20 him.
-. The arsenic was administered TO
said Frank Carl in Hancock County
Ind. and caused or FASTENED his death
and that his death ensued before the
bringing - the indictment"
Judge Blair specifically instructed the
Jury. "You are Instructed that the de-
fcndant, Clara Carl. IS on trial for the
charge Of murder set out in the In
iictnent; that she Is not being tried on
the charge Of any other oifense what
ever, except the one charged In the In
dictment
''If you and there has been evidence
given In the ease TO the effect that the
defendant. short time before the al
legged murder IF Frank Carl. killed and
murdered AIouz0 + Carl by poison. then
you may consider the admission Of such
other crime. II any, Of the defendant II
ron are satisfied beyond reasonable
doubt. by the evidence, that she did COM
mir ii. for the purpose only Of determiE-
ing whether the said defendant had a mo-
tive IN causing the death OF the said
Frank Carl You have no right TO con
slider such evidence for the purpose of
Furnishing the defendant for the crime
III the Indictment charged.
"You must consider said evidence for
the purpose only that / have stated
and you may give 1t such weight for
such purposes as you think 1t is entitled
But if Won find that the commission OF
such other offense, if any. has not been
proven TO have been committed by the
defendant beyond a reasonable doubt.
then yen should not consider such evil
dence for any purpose Whatsoever"
DISCUSSES EVIDENCE
OF GLASSCOCK RELATIONS
The court IN discussing the evidence
submitted concerning Mrs. Carl aud Ed
Glasscoek. attorney Of Greenfield
said:
The State was permitted to introduce
evidence as 10 the conduct and relations
OF the defendant and one Glasscock al