The Indianapolis times. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1922-1965, 1925-11-04

"YOu thought on April 6, eight
days before she died, Madge would
recover?" asked Eph Inmsn, chief
defense attorney, who cross-ex-
amined the expert.
II did. She was much improved" I"
replied DR.. Warvel.
Inman was visibly elated, as the
defense contends that the girls dy-
ing statement signed on March 2S,
was not a bona fide death state
ment under the law, as Madge had
not given up hope Of recovering.
The death statement is the key
stone of the States case.
Gives Cause of Death
On direct examination, Attorney
Charles L. Cox, assisted by Prose-
cutor William II. Remy, asked DIR.
Warvel the now famous hypothetical
question, which takes fifteen
been asked all the other medical ex-
perts, concerning the cause Of the
death of the young woman under
circumstances described in the dy-
ing statement.
The doctor answered that the
cause was an infection super-imposed
upon the nephritis.
Meanwhile, Remy indicated that
the State will complete its case
Late today or early Thursday.
Defense attorneys will likely
present a motion that the judge
issue peremptory instruction to
the jury to find the defendants not
guilty when the State closes. The
defense, In its motion, probably will
enter the formal charge that the
State failed TO make q case. If the
motion is overruled and the defense
puts on it's own witnesses it will
automatically waive the right to ap.
peal from the denial Of the motion,
under the Indiana law.
DIR. Warvel had followed DIR. r. N.
Harger. assistant professor in
chemistry at Indiana University,
who was recalled to the stand for
cross-examination on testimony he
had given late Tuesday.
DR.. Warvel in answering the long
Hypothetical question evidently
based his reply on specific facts in
the case and not on a hypothetical
basis, because he, Inman and Judge
Will M. Sparks engaged in a three
cornered argument on his answer.
"In making your answer TO the
hypothetical question. you assumed
that all the facts related were true?'
asked Inman.
Witness Alert
"I answered it on my findings in
detailed explanation OF the theory Of
alert young man.
when you answer a hypothetical
question, 1t must be answered pure.
ly on that basis, the same as If you
never heard of this case" Judge
Sparks told the witness.
but his question was based on
this case, Judge" said the young
doctor, turning to Judge Sparks.
The latter then went into more
detailed explanations of the theory
hypothetical questions, pointing out
that such a question Is supposed to
be based on fictitious care and that
II such and such conditions were
thus" and "other conditions were
so" the witness must answer along
that line.
Its over my head" said the
witness.
"That isn't the way you prac-
tice medicine, doctor, but that's
the way we practice law" said the
judge.
Inman then resumed his question
ing.
Doctor, would emphasis like
this In counsel's question, oh,
Dear! Put up the gun! have made
your answer any different than II
the emphasis had been oh! Dear,
put up the gun" Would that have
made any difference in your an
swer?" DIR. Warvel scratched his
head while he looked at the jury
with a quizzical expression on his
face.
81 don't see what difference that
makes in medical testimony"
That's what I'm wondering. too"
said Inman. darting a glance at At
torney Cox, while the crowd, over
joyed at the break In the monotony
Of medical terms and analysis OF
Turn to Page p