The Bismarck tribune. [volume] (Bismarck, N.D.) 1916-current, 1923-03-15
GUMMER'S CASE.
Is ARGUED IN
SUPREMEC
Attorneys For Him Declare
Testimony Not Sufficient
For Conviction
S ATE A NSW Err
Green Says Testimony Leaves
No Reasonable, Doubt to
Reasonable Men

Contention of the defense that
much Of the testimony which went
before the jury at Valley City which
convicted William GUNNER, former
Fargo hotel clerk. of the murder of
Marie Wick, found slain in the hotel
in which GUNNER was employed
should not have been permitted to
go to the jury and that other tcs-
timony was not sufficient upon when
to base verdict of guilty, and the
states answer was placed before the
supreme court here yesterday after
noon. The vollnninous record of tes-
timony. in the case, exhibits ant;
briefs filed by both sides were given
the court in additional to oral argu-
ment on Gummer's appeal.
Seth Richardson, Judge II. w.
Swenson and w. H. Barnett appeare; I.
for GUNNER, with William c. Green.
former Cass county states attorney
arguing for the defense.
Counsel for GUNNER particularly
declared that salacious testimony of
GUNNER regarding his actions with
many women should not have bear
permitted to go to the jury. Arguel
that separation of the jury during
the time the trial was halted becau :
OF illness was prejudicial to the de-
PENDANT. and declared that the at
mosphere in Barnes county was al
most as prejudicial as that in Cass
county, because of the wide publicity
given the case.
Mr.. Green contended that, although
considered apart some of the cirou,i-
stances on which the states case was
built might appear not to have great
weight, taken in entirety the testi-
mony adduced by the state left no
doubt of Gummer's guilt of the crime
charged.
The, case was said by both counsel
in legal and general aspects to be
similar to the famous Leo Frank
case of Georgia, which went to the
United States supreme court and re-
suited in Franks lynching after his
sentence was committed.
Testimony Circumstantial.
There is no attempt to minimize
the awfulness of this crime" said
Seth Richardson, counsel for Gum
mcr, in opening the argument, but
the question is whether or not Gum
mer is a victim of circumstances"
The defense's appeal was based, ne
said, on four main grounds: L. That
the circumstantial testimony viewed
as whole does not appear sufficient
to convict the defendants; 2. Undue
limitation was placed on the de-
PENDANT as to Interrogation of the
witness; 3. The state was permitted
by "series of strategical moves" 20
involve Andy Brown as a co-defend-
ant without his being so named, for
the purpose of getting before the
jury remarks between himself and
GUNNER; a. The court erred in par
hitting the laying before the jury of
obscene answers and incidents.
There is not single fact in the
record which could not be 100 per
cent true and yet half dozen per.
sons in that hotel have committed
the crime" Mr.. Richardson said. He
asserted that the case sin it's last
analysis rests upon theory and in
ference" He said it was natural that
the night clerk Of the hotel, who was
GUNNER, should be first suspected,
and that "the populace demanded a
victim"
With regard to the states theory
that there were two attacks made on
Marie Wick-one between about
a. m. in the morning and another
about 4 a. MIR. Richardson de-
clared that ut is theory to fit the
facts and not facts to fit theory"
He said that GUNNER about midnight
had placed a woman guest in the
next room to that in which Marie |
Wick was murdered and that mo |
man not a consummate idiot would |
have gone to room 80 to rape a girl |
only 10 minutes after the woman in
the next room had gone to bed"
GUNNER, he said, was not called an
idiot, but clever, scheming man by |
the state
"When you have circumstantial
case there is a legal standard to
which that evidence must rise and