Jonathan Daniels in Raleigh News and Observer
Rockingham, Oct. 7—By widely separated courses of arguments, attorneys for the State and the defense in trial of W.B. Cole for the murder of W.W. Ormond, made a common plea for “justice” in the Richmond County Superior Court today. “We do not seek revenge. We do not ask for vengeance,” declared Clyde Hoey of the private prosecution, in opening the argument, “but we ask for justice, simple, majestic, even-handed justice.”
“Let the God of justice and love and virtue guide you to a correct verdict,” James H. Pou, leading defense counsel, declared in tones of deep piety as he closed his appeal for Cole with his hands raised in benediction over the jury.
By “justice” the State means that Cole be found guilty of murder in the first degree and the defense that Cole be acquitted and set free.
Cole, the prisoner, sat calmly during the argument to the jury. Apparently, he has faith that he will be acquitted. His family also was calm for the most part although Mrs. Cole broke down in quiet sobbing when Mr. Pou pictured the death penalty which he declared the State was demanding in the case.
The day’s session of the court was consumed by the arguments of Mr. Hoey and Clyde Douglas, for the State, and Mr. Pou for the defense. Judge called the first night session of the trial this afternoon.
Brought Lunch
Crowds as large as those which filled the courtroom during the most sensational testimony offered in the case were equaled by that which packed the courthouse to hear the argument in the case. Many came to the courtroom in the morning with their lunch and remained in their seats throughout the day.
The State painted a picture of Cole as a willful killer who took upon himself all the duties of prosecutor, judge, jury, and executioner. It ridiculed the defense contention that his good character before shows that he was not a man to have killed without justification.
The prosecution contended that Cole was not only a murderer but an “assassin.”
“Every man has a good reputation until he does something to destroy it,” declared Clyde Douglas. “Benedict Arnold was once an American patriot. Judas Iscariot once associated with the Savior and was one of the 12 disciples. The devil himself was once a shining angel of light.”
The defense pictured Cole as a good man driven to kill because Ormond’s slanders drove him to kill to protect his family and himself.
Although the State and defense offered argument to support and oppose the self-defense and insanity pleas of Cole, the argument of the lawyers like the presentation of evidence was fought out primarily on the phase of the “unwritten law,” which is essentially the defense of Cole.
In his argument, Mr. Hoey read the letter of Ormond which stated that the ex-service man and Miss Elizabeth Cole had lived together as man and wife for more than a year. The defense has made this letter the basis of a new “unwritten law” which would justify a killing to hush a slander.
Action for Slander
“Suppose there was a single statement in that letter that was a lie,” declared Hoey, “under the law the punishment is two years on the roads for slander, but Cole acting as prosecutor, judge, jury and executioner, has inflicted the death penalty.”
He declared that Cole was a willful killer who was willing “to throw his splendid daughter in the breach” and say “behold, behold, the sacrifice I am offering for the crime I have committed.”
He declared that the State is not trying the virtue of Miss Elizabeth Cole. Only she and the dead man know whether the letter was a slander or a truth, he said.
“Bill, I love you enough to do anything and we are going to get married soon,” he read from the “slander letter” in which Ormond gave an alleged quotation from Miss Cole.
“Do you think I would do this if I did not love you, Bill?” he quoted again.
Mr. Hoey contended that these quotations were from letters which Miss Cole wrote to Ormond and which were excluded from evidence by Judge Finley. In his argument Mr. Pou declared that the quotations were probably alleged quotations of Miss Cole’s spoken remarks to Ormond.
Ormond Loved Her
“Bill Ormond loved her,” Mr. Hoey said. “The history of the world is filled with great tragedies growing out of love. He loved with all the tenderness of family ties and friendship.”
He quoted Robert Louis Stevenson that “any man who is loved, his life is indispensable.”
He reviewed the evidence in the case and read the law to the jury on murder, insanity and self defense to support his contentions. He declared that the State had not offered any real evidence to justify an acquittal either on the grounds of self-defense or insanity.
He declared that ordinarily in the case of death the relatives and friends gather around the bier to say “The Lor gave, the Lord has taken away, blessed to the name of the Lord.”
“In this instance,” he said, they could only say, the Lord give, W.B. Cole has taken away,” and then with faltering faith, “blessed be the name of the Lord.”
Death Penalty
In his speech Mr. Pou painted a gruesome picture of the death penalty which he declared the State is demanding in the case. As he pictured the death penalty inflicted by the State in the electric chair at the State Prison, Mrs. Cole almost broke down. She covered her eyes with her fingers and wept silently.
Mr. Pou denied that the defense was seeking an acquittal of the “unwritten law,” brainstorm or moral insanity “or any bunk of any kind.” He declared that the defense believed that Cole ought to be acquitted on the grounds of self-defense or insanity, or a combination of both. He said that the law did not require the defendant only to kill to save his life, but to kill if it appeared to him necessary to kill to save his own life. He declared that a man who ahs reason to believe his life is in danger does not have to judge the conduct of his adversary in “golden scales.”
Mr. Pou reviewed the law on insanity “the bloody decisions” which he said prevailed until recent years. He also presented his views on insanity.
Pictures Cole
He painted a glowing picture of Cole as a man who has worked hard and loves his family and lived a quiet, peaceable life. Of Ormond’s “slander letter,” he declared that it was “the most damnable letter ever sent to a father.” He declared that Ormond meant by it “she isn’t the pure virgin you think she is. She is a polluted thing and I’m the man who polluted her. She’s a strumpet. She’s my strumpet and I made her a strumpet.”
He declared that if the letter is not true “we have the even more despicable figure of a man trying to destroy the character of an innocent girl so nobody could marry her but him.”
He answered the charge of the State that Cole had thrown his daughter in the breach to save his life.
“All the powers of hell couldn’t have held that girl back from the defense of her father,” declared Mr. Pou. “There was no throwing her in the breach. She was going to defend her father’s honor and her own virtue.”
Clyde Douglass reminded the jury of the great crime wave which “is being swept by a deadly, steady tidal wave,” and declared that North Carolina and Richmond County are contributing their quota of crime.
He ridiculed Cole’s evidence that a feeling came over him in the midst of prayer about three weeks before the homicide that he had waited long enough.
“He can’t make any sensible North Carolina man believe that God Almighty ever dictated to any man to take the life of another man,” he said. He reminded the jury of that great commandment that has come thundering down through the ages, “Thou Shall Not Kill.”
Of Cole’s insanity plea he declared that Cole “deliberately refused to bridle his passions.”
Sykes Bitter
John C. Sykes, for the defense and W.B. Love for the State, tonight spoke to their Union County neighbors.
Sykes made a bitter speech, denouncing the character and conduct of the dead man. He denounced him as a blackmailer, a slanderer, a worthless, shiftless youth who was trying to marry Miss Cole for her money. His speech was devoted to the letter of Ormond to Cole and Miss Cole and on the basis of them he attempted to strip the man Cole killed of every vestige of honesty and decency.
Sykes sarcastically attacked every kindly statement of Ormond in the letters, and made Cole a martyr forced to do the killing by the conduct of the breast he painted as Ormond.
Attacks Dual Plea
Mr. Love in his speech tonight, attacked Cole’s dual plea of insanity and self-defense.
In his opening remarks, he paid his respects to Mr. Sykes and the type of defense that would “curse out a dead man.”
He defended Ormond and gave a friendly interpretation of the “slander letter.”
“God have mercy on you men who have sons who go wrong and attempt to right the wrong,” he said. “They cry blackmail! It wasn’t dollars, and Cole knew it, that Ormond wanted. It wasn’t dollars that sent Bill Ormond to France to protect Cole’s property. Ormond loved Elizabeth Cole.”
Ozmer L. Henry, of the defense counsel, will make his first speech tomorrow. He will be followed by W.C. Douglass, veteran member of the private prosecution.
While he poured out his invective Rev. A.L. Ormond, the boy’s father, sat calmly but the lines of his face showed his deep indignation. With the dead boy’s father sat his brother and two sisters while Sykes made his unrestrained attack.
During the argument the attorneys made continuous uncomplimentary remarks about the attorney on the opposing sides. Only once however during the argument was there any clash.
The prosecution attorneys objected twice during Mr. Pou’s speech on the grounds that he was stating as evidence facts that were not presented in evidence during the case.
Once Judge Finley told Mr. Pou to stick to the evidence in the case but when the state objected again on the same grounds, he said that it was a matter for the jury.
Mr. Pou made the longest speech of the day.
He spoke from shortly after 11 until 1 o’clock and again after lunch from 2 o’clock until 3:30. Mr. Hoey, who opened the argument, spoke for two hours. The other speeches today were shorter.
Warns Court Room
At the opening of the argument this morning Judge Finley warned the crowd which packed the courtroom against making any demonstration of any kind during the argument.
“Most of you realize that this is a courtroom,” he said, “and not the place for a demonstration of any kind. This case must be tried on the evidence and not on the approval or disapproval of the audience. If you can’t think about it I want the sheriff to have deputies throughout the court room to bring them up so I can make them think about it.”
Numerous flights oratory and humorous witticisms of attorneys passed without applause or laughter in the courtroom as a result of the orders of the judge.
From page 3 of the Concord Daily Tribune, Thursday, Oct. 8, 1925. Attorney’s last name spelled ‘Douglas’ and ‘Douglass’ in newspaper.
newspapers.digitalnc.org/lccn/sn92073201/1925-10-08/ed-1/seq-1/
No comments:
Post a Comment