Arizona state miner. [volume] (Wickenburg, Ariz.) 1919-1927, 1927-04-09

Arraying the law OF graVltat1on
against the law contained in the writ
ten code, Charles G. Blackburn, SEN
fenced to die for the murder of his
business partner Miguel Bernal, has
returned through his attorneys to the
state supreme court at Phoenix with
the plea that movements credited to
him in the murder violate the law
of physics, and to this plea has pinned
his hope for rehearing that might
enable him to escape the gallows.
The petition for a, rehearing rests
squarely upon the doomed mans
claim that evidence showing the law
of gravitation was violated was ig-
nored in past legal consideration of
the case This petition, filed late
Thursday, March 80, by Judge F. G.
Struckmeyer and L. M Laney, rep
resenting Blackburn, created sensa-
ton among those who learned the
contents of the document.
A recent opinion handed down by
the supreme court affirmed the judg-
ment of the Graham county superior
court in condemning Blackburn to the
gallows. The new petition places the
case back in the hands of the supreme
court, with the claim that some of
the condemning evidence was in vio-
llation of the laws of gravitation as the
central feature to be reviewed before a
final opinion is given by the high
court. 1t is certain that the case will
go to the United States supreme court
on a plea for writ of error if the pc
tition for rehearing is denied
The petition claims that many con-
stitutional provisions, both of the
state and federal constitutions, were
violated in the course of the trail. The
petition claims denial of due process
of law and denial of the equal pro-
lection of the laws, invoking both
state and federal constitutions.
The petition also denies the truth
fulness of the testimony of the In
dian witnesses and requests rehear-
ing for that reason. 1t is claimed that
the Indians testimony is untrue be-
cause affected by the question of WISH
bility and opposed to the law of gravi-
tation. Strong appeal is made by the
attorneys on the question of the guilt
of the defendant.
The petition said, in part:
1.-THE court in the statement OF
the facts, in it's resume of the
evidence, failed to notice the physi-
cal facts appearing in the record as
demonstrative evidence, such demon
strative evidence being two-fold:
,(a) visibility, and CD the law OF
gravitation. While as to the former
this court might have answered, |
though such answer would be falla- |
cious: the jury inspected the prem
Uses; as to the second, no notice
whatever is taken thereof. The evil
denee. in the record, viewed in the |
light of the law of gravitation, is
That the car could not
have been showed off the road in I
the manner testified
to by the Indians was demonstrated |
beyond peradventure. But if the evil
dence of the engineers be questioned !
an independent analysis applying the |
law of gravitation must salts
fly the mind that the story OF the In
dams is untrue. To this analysis, diff
ficult, painstaking and tedious, the de-
PENDANT is entitled ere his life is
snuffed out by the judgment of this
court We say earnestly and insis-
tently without fear of contradiction:
let the story of II as to the movement |
of the car, and the known physical |
facts, be subjected to scientific in
quiry and the falsity of the testimony
of II is proved. Moreover, all the
facts, the position of the
body, Fl feet away from the road
from which it was "toppled" chow i'm
possible), the condition of the cloth !