A jury of 12 men in the Superior Court in session in Elizabeth City this week probably will to-day decide the fate of L.L. Winder, prominent Elizabeth City real estate man, in one of the most sensational cases in which he is the defendant.
The taking of testimony in the case of State vs Winder in which 13-year-old Hattie Puckett is the prosecuting witness, concluded yesterday afternoon and the arguments of counsel began. The lawyers were allotted six hours for their speeches to the jury. Solicitor J.C.B. Ehringhaus for the State is assisted by attorneys W.L. Small and C.R. Pugh. Attorneys for the defense are Meekins & McMullan, Thompson & Wilson, P.G. Sawyer and W.L. Cohoon. But Col. Isaac M. Meekins has not put in (an) appearance at the trial. Col. Meekins has found himself busy with his job in Washington and hasn’t set foot in the old home town this week.
The evidence in the case on trial this week differed but little from the evidence brought out in the Superior Court here in September when a mistrial was ordered because of the illness of a juror. The essential new evidence introduced this week was in the witness E.E. Clark for the State and Dr. Wm. Parker for the defense.
Clark, a typewriter repair man, who occupied offices in the Hinton building close to the offices of L.L. Winder at the time the alleged crime against Hattie Puckett was committed, testified that thru a hole in a door adjoining Winder’s he saw Winder in the carnal act with the Puckett girl. He corroborated in detail the story of the Puckett girl, who had testified that Winder forced himself upon her while she was seated in a rocking chair in his office, Winder getting down on his knees for the act. Clark says he called Dr. Parker to witness the incident, making the outcry because he feared that the uncorroborated evidence of one man would not be believed.
Dr. Parker testified that he saw the Puckett girl and Winder in a close embrace, but Dr. Parker testified that the Puckett girl was sitting astride Winder’s lap. Dr. Parker further testified that he looked thru the same peep hole for a few minutes later and saw the Puckett girl leisurely arranging her clothes.
The verdict of the jury may be largely determined by whether they believe L.L. Winder and Dr. Wm. Parker or Hattie Puckett and E.E. Clark. The evidence of neither the Puckett girl alone nor L.L. Winder alone does not carry conviction to a student of human nature. There is something missing in the testimony of each. Much is left to the imagination of the jury.
Efforts upon the part of the defense to destroy the character of the prosecuting witness by the introduction of character witnesses did not gain much for the defense. They proved nothing specific by all their character witnesses, both white and black.
E.E. Clark for the State made an excellent witness. The State had hesitated to put him on the stand because much had been said about Clark’s character. But in a show down the worst they could dig up about Clark was that he didn’t always pay his bills and some capital was made of the fact that Clark employed Geo. B. Matthews, an artist, to paint a portrait of a 13-year-old girl to whom Clark had been friendly in another town. Clark met these attacks with quiet dignity that wone him the respect of most of the court room crowd.
If Winder is found guilty of the charge of criminal assault on Hattie Puckett, that will probably end the other cases against him. But if acquitted in this case he will be tried on another charge of having had carnal knowledge of Irene Woodard, a girl under 15 years of age. A third charge of prostitution against the defendant is yet to be pressed.
The jurors who have Winder’s fate in hand as this newspaper goes to its subscribers are:
K.R. Winsow (maybe Winslow?), Wilson Sivills, W.M. Pendleton, Willie Jennings, W.H. Hedrick, E.L. Whitehurst, J.C. Combs, W.A. Bandy, Grice Winslow, E.G. Sanderlin, W.D. Dozier and Joe Temple.
From the front page of The Independent, Elizabeth City, N.C., Nov. 11, 1921
-=-
Winder Fights for New Trial. . . Shows No Sign of Weakening Under Sentence of Three Years in “Pen”
Lester L. Winder, sentenced to three years in the penitentiary in the Superior Court here last week, after having been convicted of having had carnal knowledge of a 13-year-old girl, will fight the case thru the Supreme Court. He has given bond in the sum of $3,000 in the case on appeal. He is also under a $750 bond for his appearance at the March term of the Superior Court to answer to a charge of assault with attempt to commit rape upon Irene Woodard, 15-year-old daughter of Capt. W.W. Woodard of this city. L.S. Gordon appears as bondsman for Winder in both cases.
If the Supreme Court sustains the decision of the lower court, the case of State against Winder in which Irene Woodard is the prosecuting witness probably will be dropped. But if the Supreme Court grants the defendant a new trial, the Woodard case will be vigorously prosecuted.
There is also a suggestion that civil actions against Winder are contemplated by the prosecuting witnesses in both cases, who will seek damages. What sums they will sue for is not intimated and such suits, if instituted, will not meet with public approval generally. It is generally conceded that three years in the State Prison is satisfactory punishment and to deprive the defendant of his property would be to take away from his innocent family all that he has left them.
Winder has taken his sentence with the same air of imperturbability which he has maintained thruout the whole long drawn out prosecution. He never winced under the verdict of the jury or the sentence of the Court. He is going about his business in Elizabeth City as usual, holding his head up as if nothing had happened.
The case against Winder took a most unexpected turn when Dr. Wm. Parker, a dentist in the Hinton Building, who was originally subpoenaed as a witness for the State, appeared as a witness for the defense. On the stand in the Superior Court here last week Dr. Parker, one of the peepers who saw Winder with the Puckett girl, corroborated Winder’s version of the affair. Ernest L. Sawyer, who was trial justice of Pasquotank County at the time Winder was arrested, took the stand behind Dr. Parker and told the Court that Dr. Parker’s testimony under oath was not the same story Dr. Parker told Judge Sawyer and the police earlier in the case. Judge Sawyer says that when he interviewed Dr. Parker, Dr. Parker told a story that corroborated the witness E.E. Clark. The effect of Dr. Parker’s testimony is believed to have been utterly destroyed by Judge Sawyer’s statement.
From the front page of The Independent, Elizabeth City, N.C., Friday, Nov. 18, 1921
No comments:
Post a Comment