The Morning Gleaner
&
Sunday Gleaner and Journal
VICTIM OF FIRE IS
ELMER YATES, COUONER REPORTS
Body is identified at
inquest, Two Theories of Death Advanced
SHOT WAS HEARD
The body of Elmer Yates; 22 farmer, charred beyond
recognition with the arms and legs burned to ashes, was discovered Tuesday
morning in the ruins of a two room house on the farm of Zettie Dossett, three
miles from
Yates left his home near
Pistol Shot Heard
At
Early Tuesday morning, Gooch Tapp, while searching for cattle that had strayed from the pasture during the night, stopped at the ruins of the hut. In the debris he found the torso of a man. Flesh had been burned from the head and only the skull remained. Legs and arms had been consumed by the fire.
Coroner
Two theories have been advanced. County officials point to the fact that a bale of hay was scattered about the house, while shingles had been removed from an outhouse, as evidence that the building had been fired, possibly to conceal the murder of Yates.
Mr. Crawley asserted that it was impossible to determine if the man had been shot or beaten to death.
The second theory, held by many residents of the
The body was taken to the home of Mrs. Owen Lancaster, to await burial.
Yates is survived by his wife and a young daughter.
________________________________________________________________________
MURDER THEORY IS
ABANDONED
Sheriff’s Force Not
Working On Foul Play Angle To Yates’ Death
County officials are not investigating the burning to death
of Elmer Yates; 22, whose charred body was found on the farm of Zettie Dossett
near Dixie, Tuesday morning according to Mrs Frances Hall, sheriff of
Funeral services over what remained of the body of Yates
were held at Cedar Grove, about 5 miles from
Theories of foul play were being advanced yesterday, but no definite proof of these could be found to substantiate the odas. General opinion was that it probably never would be known whether Yates death was caused by under-hand methods or came accidently.
________________________________________________________________________
New Light on Murder
Mystery Expected, Clues Are Reported Found
Will some one who knows how Elmer Yates, young farmer, came to his death Monday night, be gathered in toils of the law?
This question was passed around in official circles last night, and while some authorities asserted there were no new developments in the case, others hinted that clues have been uncovered, and followed for the last 48 hours with no material result.
Six days after the charred body of the young man was found
in ruins of a log cabin near
Among those who entertain the murder theory, belief is prevalent that jealousy over a woman caused the death of Yates. A pistol shot heard by some residents of the community a few minutes before the deserted shack burst into flames is taken as evidence that Yates was a victim of foul play.
Authorities were still working on the case last night, and expressed belief that some light will be shed on the mystery in the next 48 hours.
________________________________________________________________________
OFFICALS FIND BULLET
IN ASHES OF YATES’ BODY
Examining Trial of Ed
Powell,
MAY EXHUME BODY
What is believed to be the most conclusive proof that Elmer Yates, young farmer of the Dixie section whose burned body was found on Tuesday morning in the ruins of an old abandoned tenant hut on the Zettie Dossett farm about two miles from Dixie, was murdered, by a lead bullet found by deputy sheriffs in the ashes of the charged body. The officers say that the bullet was fired from a .38 caliber pistol. To prove this fact another weapon of the same caliber will be fired, the two slugs compared and weighed, to establish definite proof of what size pistol was used to bring about Yates’ death.
Discovery of the bullet was not announced until yesterday and it is this important phase of the case that has caused much of the investigation now being carried on. The sheriff’s office, working without out of town aid, is building up a chain of evidence with which to convict the alleged murderer. Several possible theories have been advanced from different sources, but what is gaining more attention than any other is the “eternal triangle” nature of evidence thus far produced.
Yates’ Action Unknown
Howard Taylor, chief deputy sheriff, stated yesterday afternoon that it had been impossible so far to establish the whereabouts of young Yates from 3:00 o’clock Monday afternoon, the day before the body was found until he came home and told his wife he was going to Ed Powell’s home “to ring some hogs.” His actions nor his whereabouts after leaving his home and his wife can be learned. Where he went that night or where he was for the most part of Monday afternoon presents a blank wall to authorities working on the case, but it was stated by one man that as soon as those facts pertaining to Yates’ actions through the two periods of time were found out he would have a confession from the murderer within 24 hours thereafter.
Mention was made of a possible post mortem of what remains of the horribly burned body of Yates to determine whether it shows any signs of a bullet mark on any of the bones that escaped destruction from the devastating flames, which came so close to hiding away forever the fact that Elmer Yates body with the old log cabin. It has not been decided as yet by the authorities whether this will be done. Further developments in the case will more than likely determine their course or that line of action, it was said.
Arraign Powell
Wednesday
Ed Powell, 50, well known farmer of the same vicinity, who was arrested early Sunday morning and charged with willful murder of Elmer Yates, and who is now at liberty on $1,000 bond, will be called into court before Judge R. F. Crafton Wednesday morning for his examining trial, it was announced yesterday afternoon by court officials. The nature of the testimony is not known. F. J. Pentecost is the attorney for the defence with County Attorney Odis Duncan will be in charge of the prosecution. It is rumored that sensational testimony will be given Wednesday morning.
New Clues In Murder
Followed
Attorneys Agree to
Continue Case Originally Set For Hearing Today
“Did Edward Powell slay his employe, Elmer Yates, Monday night, November 29 and try to destroy evidence of the deed by a fire?” That question, uppermost in the minds of those interested in the mysterious circumstance surrounding the death of the young farmer will not be solved today and had been announced, it was learned late last night. An agreement was reached between attorneys representing the prosecution and the defense and the date of the examining trial of Powell was continued and set for hearing on next Wednesday one week from today.
Meanwhile an investigation for new clues will be underway, directed by County Prosecutor Odie Duncan, with the sheriff’s office cooperating in the work. No further developments in the case for publication were given out at the sheriff’s office yesterday. Their part of the investigation is being conducted in the strictest secrecy and it is their hope to have a confession form an alleged murderer within the next few days.
Accomplice Sought
Coming from authoritative source was the “inside” information that already the finger of suspicion was being pointed at one other person thought to either know something of the murder, or to have been an accomplice with the possibility, it was said of sooner or later implicating a “third person”. The commonwealth is working night and day in the attempt to locate those necessary missing links in a chain of evidence that is said to be steadly mounting boding ill for that person or persons guilty of the crime.
The fact that there was a second person connected with the murder has been hinted at for several days, but not until last night was it mentioned by the authorities. No names were given and the other person will probably remain unknown to the public until as arrest is made.
The matter of finding blood spashes leading from edge of the Yates porch into the living room quarters is also gaining ground in importance. The theory has been advanced that Yates was slain in his own home and his body carried to the out-of-the-way tenantless cabin to be burned. Though nothing definite in this line of thought has been brought to the front, the finding of the blood spots is deamed by the sheriff’s office to be an important factor in solving the riddle.
It was stated by County Attorney Odie Duncan yesterday that the blood stained boards and a pan found and brought in by Deputy Sheriff Elmer Vanzandt, would be sent away at once for experts to state whether the blood is that of a human being or that of a rabbit as claimed by Lee Higgs, father of the victim’s wife. It is probable that the planks and pan will be sent to Arthur McCormick, secretary of the state board of heath, who will in turn hand them over to chemistry experts, who will determine the nature of the find. A report on this phase is expected to be received within four or five days.
The continuation of the examining trial of Edward Powell, charged in a warrant with the willful murder of Elmer Yates, until next is expected to provide ample time for both sides to prepare for the coming legal battle, with the edge of the benefit lying with the prosecution in giving them more time to make their case. Deputies headed by Chief Deputy Howard Taylor, will be hard at work day and night, tracing to earth the many rumors and theories deducted from the present evidence.
Attorney F. J. Pentocost is representing the defense and has stated that he did not believe authorities had sufficient evidence against his client for a conviction.
TESTIMONY IN CASE
WILL BE OPENED TODAY
Jury Selected From 63
Men Examined Monday, Both Sides Are Ready
GOTT TESTIFIES TODAY
The Jury
P.C. Vancleve, 30, salesman, Henderson
Ernest Fulkerson, 38, farmer, Henderson R.F.D.
Roy Cheaney, 49, farmer, Hebbardsville
Oliver Pardon, 30, merchant, Henderson
L.B. LaRue, 42, farmer, Hebbardsville
Claude Brown, 42, farmer and ferryman, Henderson
E.C. Farmer, 47, manager Eckert Packing Co., Henderson
Harry Jennings, 44, bus operator, Henderson
J.H. Pirtle, farmer, Spottsville
T.B.W. Crawley, superintendent Henderson Elevator Co.
Aaron Jones, 28, farmer, Hebbardsville
H.A. Sabiston, 36, city employe,
With completion of selection a jury, shortly after
Following a day taken up with the tedious work of examining prospective jurors, both attorneys for the defense and prosecution announced their satisfaction with the twelve men qualifying the prosecution using 3 of its limit of jury peremptory challenges and the defense ten of its fifteen. The jury was completed after 63 of the 120 men forming the special venire, had been questioned, the majority found wanting because conscientious scruples against capital punishment and having already formed an opinion from the newspaper articles and conversions with others about the case.
Jury Gets Detailed
Lecture
The jury was turned over to T.B. Rodman, of this city, who was sworn in as a special deputy to have charge of the men until the trial is over. Before being taken to their room at the Goodrun Hotel, Judge N.B. Hunt admonished them to be extremely careful in their actions, permitting on one to talk with them and not to discuss the case among themselves. Judge Hunt stressed heavily the necessity of the men to keep condition to give the defendants a fair and impartial trial. He advised the men to go to bed early, refraining from sitting up to the early hours of the morning, telling “funny jokes”, saying that this would bake the men sleepy, causing them to “nap” in the jury box when their careful attention must be given to every word said by each witness when on the stand. They were told to leave the court room in a body, marching through the street, three in row, so that people would recognize them as jurors and refrain from making remarks about the case in their presence.
Gott Will Arrive
Today
It was held probable that trial of the case would have
started yesterday afternoon but with failure of Edwin J. Gott, chemist of the
Taylor, First Witness
First duty of the court this morning will be to swear in the jury as this was no done yesterday following their selection, and immediately following this , it is probable that Deputy Sheriff Howard Taylor, will take the stand for the prosecution, as the first witness in the hearing of one of the most sensational murder cases in the history of Kentucky.
That the trial would take four full days to complete testimony and attorney’s arguments, was the prevailing belief in court circles yesterday afternoon. There are 105 witnesses, 60 for the defense and 45 for the commonwealth, the important nature of some individuals’ testimony probably taking over half a day of the court’s time it was claimed.
Surprise Witness
Among the group of witnesses appearing yesterday, was one
who war here for the first time in connection with the case. Fred Tapp, undertaker and landowner of
Tilden, Webster county, who had charge of the funeral and interment of what
remained of Elmer Yates’ burned and charred body, was in court, summoned by
There was not such a large crowd as packed the court house at the recent calling of the case in January 31, when it was continued until March 7, in the city yesterday. Deputies met the crowd at the door, weeding out those who were not either witnesses, members of the special jury venire, relatives, court attaches or newspaper men and keeping them from the court room.
Principals Spend Day
In Court
Shortly after
Once again the pertinent question, “Do you believe in ghosts or spirits communications with living by the dead?” Augured largely in the examination of jurymen by the defense. But the prosecution also entered into the fray with “Would you hold it against any man for entertaining such a belief?” Another question used a great deal by the defense was “Have you ever had any murders or tragedies committed in your family?”
Challenges Liberally
Used
At
Predictions point to a large croud of speciators in
________________________________________________________________________
BLOOD STAINS , BULLET
FIGURE IN TESTIMONY
Ed Erwin May Take
Stand Today, State Asks Death Penalty
LOVE AFFAIR REVEALED
Identificaton of a charred torsol found in ruins of a log cabin on a farm near Dixie as the remains of Elmer Yates, proving that stains on two blocks of wood, taken from the porch of the Yates home were human blood and showing that a lead pellet, found in ashes beneath Yates’ body was a pistol bullet, marked evidence introduced by the prosecution on the second day of the trial of Frances Delma Yates and Ed Powell, accused of first degree murder in connection with Yates’ death.
Science Enters Case
Science had its day in court in this sensational murder
trial with the supernatural scheduled to make its appearance late today when Ed
Erwin star witness for the state, and alleged eye-witness to the mysterious
murder, will take the stand, occupied yesterday by Edwin J Gott, bacteriologist
connected with the
It was the report of Prof. Gott after an analysis of the blood stained planks that led to arrest of Mrs. Frances Yates after she had been released from custody soon after the murder, and yesterday it was testimony of Prof. Gott that labeled the stains as being caused from human blood.
Each inch of ground in the trial is being contested with the life and freedom the objectie of a battery of defense attorneys, and conviction and the electric chair or life imprisonment the result sought by counsel for the commonwealth. Each witness was cross-examined yesterday and detailed information was given in each case. The trial is a battle of superior legal talent and keen wits play an ever present part in the drama enacted in court around a tragic death.
Asks Death Penalty
The state demanded a death sentence of life imprisonment yesterday morning when Talbot Berry, prosecuting attorney in his opening talk to the jury and nine witnesses were arrayed during the day to weave a thread of evidence around the defendants, one a broad shouldered husky man past the half century mark the other a slender, indifferent woman barely of legal age, a mother.
The court room was crowded when Major Berry stood before the jury yesterday morning. A hush fell over the room as the indictments were recited and Mr. Berry asserted that the victim of the murder would be identified, that testimony of Ed Powell before the coroner’s jury proved the slain man was Elmer Yates: that the state would show Yates had been bound by strands of wire: that Powell had boasted at one time he would soon be in control of the Yates home, and that both defendants charged jointly with the crime were equally guilty.
Taylor First Witness
Howard Taylor, chief deputy sheriff was the first witness called to the stand, He introduced a map, showing the home of Elmer Yates, Ed Powell and Ed Erwin and on examination gave distances between the points of interest, placing the distance between the Yates home and a tree form where Erwin said he witnessed the slaying at 1,620 feet and asserting that persons standing on the porch could be recognized without difficulty from the tree, which bids fair to play an important part in the case.
Buggy curtains, one side of them covered with mud were
displayed,
Admission of Mrs. Yates that she and Powell had been on intimate terms was told by Elmer VanZandt, second witness. VanZandt said Mrs. Yates denied having improper relations with Powell, but later admitted the charge and repeated her statement in presence of her alleged paramour.
Bullet Misplaced
A lead pellet found beneath Yates’ body became the center of interest during testimony of Spurgeon Gabhart, who said he discovered the pellet. Asked by N. Powell Taylor, defense attorney, to produce the pellet, he said it had been misplaced. He asserted that it was a .38 calibre pistol bullet, slighty twisted by intense heat, but retaining an imprint made by the shell. In this statement, he was corroborated by Taylor and VanZandt.
The state then shifted its case into the realm of science, producing Prof. Gott and obtaining testimony that the blood stains were made by human blood. Mrs. Yates had asserted that the stains were from blood of a rabbit given her by Powell. On cross examination, Prof. Gott detailed his method of analyzing blood stains and admitted that he had made no test other than for human blood. Rabbit blood might have been present on the specimen analyzed, he said without being detected.
Prof. Gott qualified as a witness after relating that he had been engaged as a bacteriologist since 1913 and that five or six samples similar to those submitted by the prosecution in the Yates case had been analyzed upon request of officials of other counties. The method used in determining whether stains were from human or animal blood is accepted as conclusive evidence, he declared.
Odie Duncan, county attorney, followed Prof. Gott to the
stand, explaining that he mailed the blocks of wood to
Neighbor Takes Stand
Discovery of Yates’ body was recounted by Clarence Tapp, who
resides near the scene of the alleged murder.
He told of seeing flames cover the top of the abandoned building on the
Zettie Dossett farm at
On the morning of November 30, Tapp said, he walked to the ruins of the cabin in search of stock that had strayed from his fields. IN the midst of the charred embers he discovered the torso of what he took to be a human being. Hastily summoning Squire Duncan, Bill Joiner and other neighbors, Tapp returned to the cabin. Coroner J.C. Crawley was called.
Powell Joins Group
Ed Powell, accompanied by his sons, Marshall and Otle,
joined the group of men and when the inquest was begun by Coroner Crawley the
former said Elmer Yates had been missing from his home since
“If that is Elmer Yates,” Tapp quoted Powell as saying, “he has a shucking peg he borrowed from me” Powell identified the peg, the witness claimed.
“Was there any straw or hay in the cabin?” Tapp asked.
“Yes,” he replied, “It seemed like a bale of hay had been opened and there were piles of hay in the room. Ashes of hay were around the body.”
Asked if there were any signs of boards having been taken from an outhouse, Tapp replied that several strips had been torn from the building and that in his opinion they had been freshly removed.
Story Brings Tears
During testimony of Mrs. Laura Joiner, the next witness, tears appeared in eyes of some of the principals in the case for the first time during the trial. Clyde Yates, brother of the slain man, and his father, giving vent to their emotions as Mrs. Joiner told of talking with Mrs. Yates and of seeing the body of Yates in ashes of the cabin.
“I know it’s Elmer Yates,” Mrs. Yates asserted when told of the discovery, according to Mrs. Joiner. “He’ll never turn up again, I know it’s Elmer. He’s been murdered and there is someone in this crowd who knows all about it.”
Mrs. Joiner saw the coroner pickup a shucking peg, she said, and then heard Ed Powell identify it as the one he had given Yates a short time before the tragedy. His sons also identified the peg, she said.
“Did you see any marks on the skull of the dead man?” the prosecution asked.
“Yes,” she replied, “on the left side of the head there was a crack. It looked like as egg shell after it had been dropped by not shattered. The creaks spread out from on point.”
Mother Takes Stand
Mrs. Fronia Yates, mother of Elmer, took the stand late in
the afternoon. Calmly, without apparent
prejudice, she told her simple story.
Elmer would have been 23 years old this month she said. The last time she saw him alive was one month
before the tragedy, for she lived in Muhlenberk county and not often did the
family gather. She identified the body
by the contour of the jaw, the teeth, the general appearance of that portion of
her son’s head not consumed in flames.
She knew it was “her boy.” Mrs.
Yates remained in the court room, taking a seat at the side of her husband and
son.
Miles Crawley, son of Coroner J.C. Crawley, who accompanied
his father to the
Aide in
Identification
Identification of the body was established, he said, by discovery of three overall buttons imbedded in the flesh, strip of an overcoat lapel and a shucking peg. Ed Powell said the peg belonged to him and that he had given it to Yates the witness said.
The witness told the jury that the body was lying face downward, the arms burned off at the elbows and the legs had been cremated to short stumps, extending away from the body in a right angle. He explained that the legs had been burned so short they did not hold the body off the floor because of their position. Judge Hunt interpolated a question into the examination to make this point clear.
Found Piece of Wire
Prosecution counsel brought out the fact through
When defense attorneys took over
Court was then adjourned.
Judge Hunt had the spectators and witnesses file out of the court room
allowing only one section at a time to leave.
A consultation of commonwealth’s witnesses was then called and
proceedings ended for the second day of the trial, to convene again this
morning at
Mrs. Yates Drops Mask
Mrs. Yates, who has assumed a mask of utter indifference in court, abandoned her listless attitude yesterday afternoon conversing with her attorneys, but apparently paying little attention to the testimony. Powell appeared deeply interested in the evidence, following closely the conversation between attorneys and witnesses. Both defendants will be introduced when the stat rests its case, it was reported last night, although court attaches earlier in the case predicted that Mrs. Yates would not take the stand.
Ed Erwin is expected to cap the climax of the state’s case. So far as is known ie is the only witness claiming to have seen the murder. Before the grand jury, he testified he saw Powell enter the Yates home, followed thirty minutes later by Yates. The two men appeared on the porch, and a pistol was fired. Yates dropped to the floor, Erwin previously stated. He also claims to have seen Mrs. Yates and Powell drive to the cabin with what he thought to be the body of Yates in the bottom of the buggy.
STAR WITNESS IS
APPLAUDED DURING STORY
Motion For Jury
Dismissal Filed After Applause
DENIES “SPIRIT”
BELIEF
Ed Erwin, star witness for the commonwealth in the trial of Mrs. Frances Delma Yates and Ed Powell, who are accused of the murder of Elmer Yates, occupied the witness stand the entire time of yesterday afternoon’s session in circuit court.
Erwin related the facts as previously told to the grand jury in straightforward, sincere manor and it was the common belief of those who heard the testimony that his story was unimpeached after hours of grueling cross-examination.
Court Room Cleared
Applause immediately followed a statement made by Erwin in answer to an interrogation by the defense counsel, regarding a remark Erwin had made before the trial caused Judge Hunt to clear the spectators from certain areas from whence the handclapping had come, and defense attorneys at once entered a motion for dismissal of the jury and continuance of the case. After over an hour of aurgument, court was reconveune and testimony of Erwin continued with. Spectators were allowed to come back and will be free to enter the court room today.
Erwin took the stand immediately following the
Heard Sounds of
Struggle
Commonwealth attorneys brought from Erwin the statement
Powell went in the Yates house about
That he saw Yates come out on the porch, walking backward with Powell and Mrs. Yates hitting him and that he heard a gun fire and saw Yates drop was testified by Erwin. He also told when asked that Powell and Mrs. Yates “grabbed” the body and took it into the house, Erwin said he could recognize all three participants.
Told Wife of Crime
Erwin stated that soon after seeing the body taken into the
house, he went directly home, called his wife out by the well and told her what
he had seen. He added that his son was
at home at the time. At
Declaring that he did not see the fire when the old cabin
burned and that he didn’t know anything about it until told by
Claims Powell Made
Boast
Telling of another incident, Erwin said that Powell had been in the home on the last Sunday evening. Erwin was cutting kindling wood and said that he addressed Powell, “I thought you would be in the woods with your woman,” kidding Powell as he claimed he had done for some time. Erwin said that Powell replied “Things are not going the way I would like to have them going. I can’t get my way about it now, but it won’t be long until I do have.” Erwin backed up this statement by saying that Powell repeated the statement later when in the house, in the presence of Erwin.
At this juncture the commonwealth turned the witness over to the defense attorneys for questioning. F.J. Pentecost handled the witness for the defense, and got from Erwin the statement that he told Deputy Sheriff Gabbart he didn’t believe Powell did the killing and that he thought people would be surprised when the truth was known. He denied saying he expected to be arrested. Pentecost drew out the statement by Erwin that he had told officers at the inquiry on Sunday and later Pentecost himself, that he knew nothing of the killing. Here Pentecost asked, “Then that was a lie!” which question was objected by prosecution counsel, and the court sustained the objection. Erwin admitted, under questioning that his statements made before the trial were false, saying, “I told everything but the right thing.” He further stated that he had denied knowledge of the crime to everyone before being “sworn in.”
Mr. Pentecost then stared asking the witness about a conversation held with Mr. Pearson, relative to whether Erwin had told Pearson the he believed Ed Powell did not know anything about the murder.
Takes Issue With
Counsel
Pentecost asked, “Didn’t you also tell him in that conversation that you didn’t believe Ed Powell knew anything about it either? Didn’t you make that statement to Mr. Pearson at Jim Cottingham’s store?”
Erwin answered, “I never told him nothing about that. I have talked to him about that, but not in that way.”
Pentecost asked, “Then you didn’t make this statement to Mr. Pearson, is that it?”
Erwin answered, “No, sir, I told his this – I told him this way: If Mrs. Yates did know nothing about the killing, if they kept her locked up and kept you (Pentecost) and Ed Powell away from her, she would have told the whole thing.”
This statement drew applause from sections of the crowded
court room. Judge Hunt at once ordered
that the space where the noise had come to be cleared of spectators, which
order was immediately carried out by deputy sheriffs serving the court. It was then
Asks Dismissal of
Jury
Defense attorneys jumped to their feet and entered a motion for dismissal of the jury. Commonwealth counsel objected and argument ensued. Defense lawyers held that the demonstration of hand clapping of the spectators might have undue influence on the jury.
At
It was almost an hour later that following a private consultation of attorneys held in an ante room, the defense withdrew their motion and hearing of the trial began once more.
Before allowing defense counsel to continue their interrogation of Erwin, Judge Hunt made the following talk to the jurors:
Courtroom Statement
“Gentlemen of the Jury”: The court and the lawyers engaged in this case, and possibly the jurors, were somewhat disconcerted by the hand-clapping that occurred here awhile ago. The Court regards it as unfortunate that that should have happened, because sometimes that is done maliciously and at other times it is just done before they think what they are doing. I can see how a thing like that would happen and the people who did it be guilty of no bad purpose at all, and before they knew what they were doing, began a hand-clapping at something funny they may think the witness has said, or some “cute” answer they thing a witness has given to a lawyer, or for various other innocent reasons.
“Of course the Court cannot put up with that sort of conduct, because it would disorganize the court. It is not the right frame of mind for people to be in who are trying a case of importance.
“The question has been in the minds of the lawyers and the Court what they should do under there circumstances. The Court is of the opinion and all the lawyers engaged in this case are of the opinion, that this jury would not misinterpret nor give any effect either one way or the other, to that unfortunate demonstration. The lawyer engaged in this case and the Court believe this jury is so upright so determined in its purpose to try this case according to the law and evidence, that it will not be influenced by anything else, and that you will disregard that. And I think, gentlemen, the confidence the lawyers place in you is not misplaced. I think you can b depended upon to disregard that. If you look for the meaning you cannot find it you don’t know whether they are individuals interested in this case or whether they are irresponsible persons who are in the court room and would clap at the statement of some witness like they would an act in the show.
“Counsel in this case have concluded this case ought to proceed and go on to a conclusion and for these reasons the trial will not be suspended at this time, but the case will go on and be finished.”
Questioning Resumed
Pentecost again took over the questioning of Erwin with the
completion of Judge Hunt’s talk. The
attorney asked Erwin if he had made the remark, “Powell took off toward
At times the legal battle between the attorneys representing each side of the case grew heated, with keen wit and careful thinking predominating each movement of counsel. Judge Hunt was forced to admonish the lawyers to refrain from making side remarks on witnesses testimony, following on skirmish.
Pentecost had Erwin tell of hearing the voice of his mother, which Erwin claimed told him to tell all he knew of the alleged murder, through a series of questions. Answering, Erwin told of how his mother had warned him when a small boy that if he ever saw a bad crime committed, he would be just as guilty as the perpetrator if he did not tell about it. Erwin told from the stand, that he was sitting in front of the fire at home when it seemed that he heard the voice of his dead mother calling to him. He said he went to the door and opened it. His mother told him to tell authorities all he knew about the murder of Elmer Yates.
Denies Belief in
Spirits
Erwin vigorously denied believing in “ghosts, spirits or hants as Mr. Powell Taylor (attorney) said” and stated that he did not believe that it was a real voice of a dead person talking to him, but believed it was the working of his conscience, making it “seem” like it was his mother’s voice.
Under cross-examination, Erwin again told of seeing the shooting of Yates’ on the Yates porch, from his viewpoint at the old sawmill, a short distance from the house.
The defense then introduced into the court room the body of the buggy in which Mrs. Yates and Powell are alleged to have carried the body of Elmer Yates to the old cabin. Pentecost asked Erwin if that was the buggy he saw pass in front of his house. Erwin said it looked like the same one, but if he wanted to identify it the whole buggy should be brought in and not just the “skeleton.”
Following this , defense attorneys dropped their
interrogations and court adjourned until this morning at
Tells of Widow’s
Statement
Testimony introduced by Clarence Tapp and Mrs. D.L. Joiner on Tuesday afternoon, was supported by seven of the eleven witnesses who appeared for the prosecution Wednesday morning. Their testimony was in support of a statement said to have been made by Mrs. Yates at the cabin which had burned and all but cremated the body of her husband.
“That is Elmer Yates. He was killed before he was brought here and someone here did it but they wont talk” is the statement attributed to the 19 year old widow who stood, dry eyed at the pyre of her mate. The witnesses also testified to seeing a crack on the left side of Yates’ skull.
Tom Overby, a member of the coroner’s jury which found that Yates came to his death from an “unknown cause” was the first witness. He recited details of the inquest and told of finding a shucking peg beneath the body of Yates.
Did Not Push Inquiry
Mr. and Mrs. Gooch Tapp followed Overby on the witness stand, the former identifying a shucking peg exhibited by N. Powell Taylor as the peg found in the ruins of the log cabin. Mr. Tapp also heard Mrs. Yates declare that the body was that of her husband, but when asked on cross-examination why he did not investigate the statement as a member of the coroner’s jury, said it was his first experience in that capacity and he was not acquainted with his duties. Mrs. Tapp told in substance the same story related by Mrs. Joiner and asserted she heard Mrs. Yates when she identified the body.
Mrs. Belle Ladd told the court she heard a pistol report on the night of November 29 and of seeing the log cabin covered with flames. She, too, heard Mrs. Yates identify the body.
Prentice Tapp, youthful neighbor of the principals in the case, noticed a crack in the skull of the slain man and described the position of the body when it was found.
Tragedy Reenacted
Testimony of
R.L. Duke, deputy sheriff, nalified as a photographer and introduced a photograph of the Yates’ home made on a line between the porch and the tree where Erwin claims to have been when the tragedy occurred.
Marion Duncan another neighbor called the coroner after Yates’ body was found he asserted and notified Ed Powell and his tow sons of the discovery receiving assurance of Powell that he would go at once to the scene of the fire.
The last witness at the morning session was Hez Tapp who said he had seen Powell enter the Yates’ home on many occasions during the last two years. He told on one occasion when he was burning plant beds on the Powell farm, when he saw Powell and Mrs. Yates together in a field. Mrs. Yates concealed herself behind a brush pile when he approached, he said.
PRINCIPALS IN MURDER
TRIAL MAKE DENIALS
Defense Plans to
Impeach Erwin, Show Actions of Defendants
BOTH TAKE STAND
Mrs. Frances Delma Yates and Ed Powell charged by grand jury inductment with the murder of Elmer Yates, November 29, last year, took the stand in their own defense yesterday afternoon, and each made a sweeping denial of any knowledge of the killing.
Bringing to a close a day marked by no sensational developments, Mrs. Yates 18 year old widow of the slain man, corroburated the disclosures made by Powell who had preceded her in the witness chair. She was calm throughout the rigorous cross-examination and told her version of the events leading up to and immediately following the finding of her husband’s body in the emphatic manner, only hesitating when in doube about the meaning of questions asked her.
Married When Child
F.J. Pentecost, attorney for the defense, opened the examination of Mrs. Yates. She gave a brief history of her life, stating that she would be 19 years old, April 15. Mrs. Yates said her mother died when she was but a girl of 7 years. When asked when she married she could not remember, but said it was when she was either 13 or 14 years old. Mrs. Yates stated she helped her husband work on the farm, even “worming and suckering” tobacco.
Pentecost drew from her the statement that her husband was a habitual drinker and had been drinking ever since they were married. Mrs. Yates said that her husband drank so hard that he got “down” many times.
That Elmer Yates left the house at “dusk-dark” Monday night, November 29, saying that he was going to the home of Ed Powell to “ring” some hogs by “lanter light” was the answer given when Mrs. Yates was asked when she last saw her husband. The next morning Mrs. Yates said, she went to a hill top and looked over to the Powell home, seeing Ed Powell and his two sons going toward the tobacco barn. She did not speak to them for they were too far away, she said.
“I Bet It’s Elmer”
Mrs. Yates was asked what she said when told that the old cabin had burned and a body found in the ashes, she stated, “I said, I bet it is Elmer,” and denied saying that she knew it was the body, or that she had helped to put him there. She vehemnantly denied saying to a crowd of people over at the old cabin, that “That’s Elmer’s body and someone in this crowd knows all about it.” At this point Attorney Pentecost introduced as an exhibit, a shucking peg, which was given to Mrs. Yates and she identified it as the one displayed by Powell the day of the coroner’s inquest.
Dropping this part of the testimony, defense counsel took up the matter of blood spots, asking Mrs. Yates about spots on a buggy curtain, purportedly on the curtain at one time. Mrs. Yates held that the spots were large as a quarter and that they were caused by red paint.
Spots found on the front porch of her home and just inside the door, were made by rabbit blood was the belief held by Mrs. Yates, who also said that possibly they could have been made by her bloodshed.
Threw Iron at Husband
Making further denials, Mrs. Yates said she and Powell did not fight with Yates, Monday afternoon, November 29: did not shoot him: and was not in the buggy with Powell that night: and that she didn’t know that the body found was that of Elmer Yates. She was asked about a panel being broken out of her front door. She explained this by saying that Elmer came home drunk one time, and the she threw an iron at him, missing her target, but striking the door. The defense counsel finished with her after one hour and five minutes of interrogations.
Commonwealth’s Attorney G. Talbot
Pentecost Tells Plans
Immediately following resting of the state, shortly after
Pentecost stated that the defense would try to prove that Elmer Yates was a habitual drunkard, and that a witness would testify that he frequently stayed out nights not returning until the small hours of the morning, and then in a drunken condition: that he often went to a certain woman’s house living in the community: that Ed Powell never left his house the night when Elmer Yates was claimed to have been killed: and that Elmer Yates did not go to Ed Powell’s house that night to ring hogs.
He asked the jury to consider the testimony showing that Ed Powell was the first person to supply means of identification of Elmer Yates’ body: and that Mrs. Yates was the second to give information leading to the identification. Pentecost explained that both Mrs. Yates and Powell had admitted their intimacy, and that both were ashamed of it. He entered a plea of not guilty for the defendants and told the jury that they were being tried on a charge of murder and not of their relations with each other. A chemist will be introduced, he said, to report on analysis of blood stains found on the Yates house.
Powell Denies Charge
Ed Powell charged with murdering Elmer Yates, was first to
take the witness stand for the afternoon session. He said that he had charge of 325 acres of
farmland, in explaining his occupation.
Yates was at his home early on the morning of November 29, but left
there in the direction of his home, Powell said. He continued that at
Humphrey Powell and Bill Minton then came to the house,
Powell stated, to see about some hogs.
He said his wife was at home too, and that Minton and Powell went to the
stable and at
Learns of Discovery
Leaving the Yates house, Powell said he attempted to drive
up the mules, but could get only three, and returned home. Following this Powell said, Marion Duncan
came to his home and told of the burned cabin.
Powell went to the cabin at
That afternoon, Powell said, in telling of what he did, he took two rabbits to Mrs. Yates, one of which was bleeding, caused by a dog biting off its head. Powell said that he had never had any trouble with Yates: no fights, that he didn’t shoot him, and that he hadn’t had a pistol for 16 years. He said that Yates had an old shotgun. He said that he had never heard of Yates threatening to kill him, but had heard of it since Elmer’s death through Mrs. Yates. Powell denied having any words with Hobart Darr, who testified during the morning session, and said he did not threaten him. Powell said when officers first told him of Mrs. Yates confession about their intimate relations, he denied it, but when confronted by her, he admitted it. He also admitted buying her “things.” Powell claimed that he told Mrs. Yates if she knew anything about the murder to tell it.
Powell also denied saying that he would soon control the Yates home and stated that he heard Erwin tell Pentecost that he knew nothing of the case and also stated the Erwin was in Pentecost’s office to aid the defense four or five times.
When asked about his relations with Mrs. Yates, Powell said they lasted 18 months, and that he had had no trouble with Elmer as the latter knew nothing of it. Powell stated that Yates became angry one day when Powell was talking to Mrs. Yates and told him (Powell) that he was putting “meaness” into her head.
Bits of Glass
Introduced
Later defense counsel introduced four pieces of glass, stating that they had been picked up at the scene of the old cabin, within one foot of where Yates’ body was found. Powell testified to this fact. He also said that he was near the old cabin on Sunday before the body was found to put out salt for the cattle, and saw some hay lying in the room. He said that he had had the hay put there. He also denied being in a buggy with Mrs. Yates on the night the crime is purported to have been committed.
When the commonwealth took over the witness, John Dorsey, Jr. did the questioning. He brought from Powell the same story he had previously told, also causing him to say the he made three different visits to the Yates home on the day Elmer Yates’ body was found, and the fact that the “things” bought by Powell for Mrs. Yates were clothes. Powell stated the Elmer Yates knew nothing of this.
Dorsey also asked the witness whether he was near the grand jury room before the indictments against he and Mrs. Yates was returned, and if an officer spoke to him about it. Powell denied having done that.
Morning Session
Eight witnesses occupied the stand during the morning session. The case was opened with Ed Erwin still on the stand, and he denied emphatically that a reward was the motive for him telling of the alleged killing. He stated that he met Powell on the steps leading to the grand jury room on the afternoon of January 17 and again on the following morning.
Mrs. Erwin was next to go in the witness chair. She corroborated her husband’s story, also telling of an occasion when Powell was drinking and came to her house singing, “Yes sir, she’s my baby,”and that her husband kidded him about “his woman.” She also said that another time, Powell told her, “ I don’t want her (Delma) talking to anybody, because she is too talkative and could simply ruin me.”
Hubert Darr took the stand and told that Powell threatened to whip him at the home of Owen Langsdon: and said, “You don’t believe I’ll shoot you.” Darr stated that Powell accused him of telling “his woman” something.
Other witnesses, W.C. Cavahaugh, Stella Yates, Bud Erwin,
Court adjourned at
ADDRESSES BY
ATTORNEYS TO TAKE ALL DAY
Defense and State
Rest Late Friday. Jury Not To Visit Scene
TESTIMONY COMFLICTS
Testimony in the trial of Mrs. Frances Delma Yates and Ed
Powell was concluded late yesterday afternoon and at
This morning at
Hearing of testimony ended abruptly following a tedious examination of character witnesses which had taken up most of the afternoon session. The court allowed each side 10 such witnesses. As soon as the commonwealth had completed their evidence, they brought in their rebuttal witnesses, three deputy sheriffs, Elmer Vanzandt, Surgeon Gabbart and Howard Taylor, who told of a conversation they had had with Mrs. Ed Powell on the Sunday a court of inquiry was held in Henderson, in which it was alleged, Mrs. Powell stated that she did not know the whereabouts of her husband on the afternoon of the day the murder purportedly occurred.
Most of yesterday afternoon’s witnesses brought in by the defense testified in substance that Erwin had denied knowing anything about the crime on many occasions at different places. Those to make these statements on the stand were Zeddie Dossett, R. Duncan, Will Whitmore, E. C. Chandler, Louis Meuth, Calvin Duncan, J. M. Cottingham, Irey Sommers, William Pearson, Ivo McCormick and Milo Higgs. Testimony of Bert Gibson and Mr. Talley was given to the records but not to the jurors. Gaston Higgs, James Tapp and Delbert Tapp told the jury that they had held a chicken fry near the old burned cabin previously to its demolition, and that some boards had been pulled from off a building close to the scene. Len Higgs, a boy, told that on the day of Monday, November 29, he had been hunting and that about “dusk-dark” he saw a buggy driving along the road between Ed Powell’s and Ed Erwin’s homes and in the buggy were Mr. and Mrs. Tom Pearcy. He said the buggy was being driven in the direction of the Erwin home, and that he could easily recognize the occupants.
It had been previously asked if Ed Erwin had told certain persons that he stayed at home all day, November 29, the day it is said Elmer Yates was killed. The defense called George McClure to the stand, but McClure, when asked by defense counsel, denied that Erwin had made any such statement to him. Herman Crook, also denied that Erwin had made such a remark.
Erwin Takes Stand
Ed Erwin was called back to the stand where he made denials of having told George McClure that he stayed at home on the day the murder was allegedly committed; the he had not told anyone else that; and that he had not told a certain person “he didn’t believe Ed Powell did it, that he was too good a man.”
The defense then called witnesses to testify to the
character of Ed Erwin, for his general reputation for truth and veracity and good moral character. William Pearson, Luther Sammons, Shirley
Pritchett, Arthur West, Duff Shelton, George Campbell, Neb
Talks to Daughter
Following presentation of the defense character witnesses, Lee Higgs, father of Mrs. Elmer Yates was called to the stand. He quoted Mrs. Yates as saying, when informed about the burned cabin and the finding of a body therein, “Oh, I bet that’s Elmer,” Higgs was asked about the blood spots found on the Yates porch and in the house and in reply stated that Ed Powell had offered Mrs. Yates the rabbits, that she had said she did not want them, but that when Powell offered them to him, he took them. Higgs claimed that Powell threw the rabbits inside the Yates’ front door, the rabbits striking the floor about two feet inside.
Higgs also told of the officers taking the boards from the front porch and a pan, in which he had cleaned the rabbits, from under the porch. He said that there was blood and rabbit hair in the pan.
Mrs. Arthur Petty, official court stenographer followed Lee Higgs on the stand, and under questioning of the defense, told of statements attributed to Ed Erwin, made when a motion was being heard for bond for Powell and Mrs. Yates. After hearing Mrs. Petty’s testimony, court declared a few minutes relaxing period for the jurors.
Defense Rests at
At
Humphrey Powell, brother of Ed Powell, was the first witness to be introduced by the defense attorneys during the morning session, and it was he who testified that Erwin had said, “I am expecting to be arrested any day in connection with this Yates’ murder.”
Ask to Visit Scene
A motion was entered by John Dorsey, Jr. of the presecution
to allow the jury to go to the Yates’ home and to the oak tree, from where
Erwin claims he saw the murder. Though
the defense attorneys agreed to the idea, Judge Hunt would not rule on the
motion. He stated last night that it was
very improbable that he would let the jury go to the scene, because of the
great amount of time it would consume adding that the court would convene at
Mrs. Ed Powell, wife of the accused man, was another witness
to take the stand. Commonwealth
attorneys objected to her testifying in behalf of her husband. Judge Hunt sustained the motion and
admonished the jurors to take her evidence in consideration only in the case of
Mrs. Yates, as under the
Sons Take Stand
Audie Powell, son of Ed Powell told the jury that three weeks previous to the burning of the cabin, he and some other boys carried a bale of hay to the old house to sit on while having a chicken fry. He also corroborated other evidence about where his father was on the night of Yates’ death. Marshall Powell, another son, also corroborated the testimony.
James Dixon, William Bingomer and Will Minton, all testified that they had made a test of the possibly of seeming good enough to recognize anyone from the oak tree where Erwin stood, to the Yates’ front porch, and that it was impossible.
When Humphrey Powell was on the witness stand, he told of a
trip he and another neighbor had made to Ed Powell’s home on the afternoon of
November 29. He claimed that when they
went home about sundown, they saw Elmer Yates enter his home. This was a surprise bit of testimony. The last witness before the
20 Character
Witnesses
What is held the most interesting part of the day’s testimony, was that given by the twenty character witnesses, and some spicy statements were made during their discourse. Arthur West, testifying in behalf of the defendants, brought a titter of laughter from the spectators and even from the solemn faced attorneys and court attendants, when he made the remark that he knew Ed Powell’s reputation was good, ending his testimony that he was released from county jail last Christmas. Court attaches said that West had served a sentence for bootlegging.
Another one of the character witnesses, though for the commonwealth, made the statement that he knew Powell had been intimate with certain women for about 24 years.
In cross examining the State’s charter witness, Attorney Pentecost for the defense, brought out the fact that most of them based their statements that Powell’s moral reputation was bad, on the fact of his “fondness” and “intimacy” with women.
At a consultation of attorneys following adjournment of court yesterday it had not been decided which attorneys would make the argument for the State, though it was announced that F. J. Pentecost and N. Powell Taylor would handle the speeches for the defense. Each side will be allowed three hours.
MRS. YATES, POWELL
FOUND NOT GUILTY
JURY ACQUITS TWO
DEFENDANT’S AFTER BRIEF DELIBERATION
Spectators Make No
Demonstration as “Not Guilty” Verdict is Read
JURY OUT TWO HOURS
Two hours and fifteen minutes after 12 men who had sat thru
out tedious court sessions for six days, filed into the jury room last
night. Mrs. Frances Delma Yates, 19 and
Edward Powell, 55, walked from the
At
At
“Not Guilty”
Handing the verdict to the court the jurors returned to their seats, while deputies procured their coats and hats. Each juror nodded in affirmation as Judge Hunt asked if the verdict had been reached by unanimous vote and Arch Hatchett opened the document.
“We the jury find the defendants Ed Powell and Frances Delma Yates not guilty as charged.”
Silence prevailed in the courtroom, the spectators slowly liking from the room.
In the northeast corner of the room, the table of defense counsel over which a strategic battle was planned and waged a drama was being acted.
Mrs. Yates, Powell,
Thankful
Displaying the first sigh of emotion since the trial opened Mrs. Yates wept. “I can’t express my appreciation,” she sobbed to a Gleaner and Journal reporter.
“I’m mighty glad to hear it,” was the only comment of Ed Powell.
Friends and relatives of Powell and Mrs. Yates gathered
around them to express pleasure over the verdict. A few minutes later, congratulations being
ended, the defendants and members of their families left the court house
together, free to return to their homes near
Sensational Case
Thus ended the Yates-Powell murder trial, which has been the
center attraction not only in
Five attorneys consumed all of Saturday in their addresses
to the jury, three speaking in behalf of the state and two for the
defense. Each side was allowed three
hours to complete its summation and argument, and at
Hunt’s Instructions
Judge Hunt’s instructions to the Jurors were as follows:
“1. If you believe from the evidence beyond a reasonable doubt that in this county and before the 29th day of January, 1927 (the date of the finding of the indictment herein), the defendants, Ed Powell and Frances Delma Yates, or either of them, did unlawfully, willfully, and of their, his or her malice aforethought, with a pistol, a deadly weapon shoot and kill one Elmer Yates, not in the necessary or apparently necessary self-defense of themselves or of one of them: or, did unlawfully, and of their or his or her malice aforethought, make an assault upon the person of said Elmer Yates, and in some way or manner or by some means, weapons or instrument, then and there unlawfully, willfully, and of their or his or her malice aforethought, did so kill the said Elmer Yates, not in the nexessary or apparently necessary self-defense of themselves or of one on them, you should find them or the one of them whom you so believe so killed him, if either did, guilty of willful murder as charged in the indictment and fix their, or her punishment at death or by confinement in the State penitentiary of life, in your discretion.
“2. If you find one of said defendants guilty under instructions No 1 and , if you further believe from the evidence beyond a reasonable doubt that in this county and before the finding of the indictment herein, the other one was then and there present and did then and there unlawfully, willfully, and of his or her malice aforethought, aid, counsel, advise, of encourage the other who did so kill said Yates, if either of them did in the killing, then you should find the one whom you so believe from the evidence so aided, advised, counseled, or encouraged the one who so killed the said Yates, if either did, guilty of willful murder as charged in the indictment and fix his punishment at death or by confinement in the State penitentiary for life, in your discretion.
“The word “willfully,” as used in the indictment herein and in these instructions, means intentionally, not accidentally or involuntarily.
“The word “feloniously,” as used in the indictment herein, means proceeding from an evil heart or purpose done with the deliberate intentions to commit a crime.
“The phrase “with malice aforethought,” as used in the indictment herein and in these instructions,means a predetermination to do the act of killing, without legal excuse, and it is immaterial how recently or suddenly before the killing the predetermination was formed.
“You may find both defendants guilty or not guilty, or one guilty of the killing and the other not guilty, according to the evidence: but, unless you find one of them guilty of the killing under instruction you can not find the other guilty of aiding, abetting, counseling, or encouraging the killing.
“If you have a reasonable doubt of the defendant’s having been proven guilty by the evidence, you should acquit them or the one of them as to whom you entertain such doubt.
At the morning session of court, Odie Duncan, county attorney, made the opening argument for the State, praising members of the jury for the attentiveness since being chosen to sit throughout the trial of what he declared one of the most atrocious crimes, to his knowledge, ever committed in this county.
Mr. Duncan said the defense attempted to raise the question
as to whether the body found in the ruins of an old cabin near
“Let’s refer back to the testimony of his aged mother, who testified she knew him by his teeth. There isn’t a mother in this county who couldn’t identify the corpse of her son, no matter how badly disfigured, by his teeth.”
“Mr. Duncan told the jury he expected the defense to argue that Elmer Yates went to the old cabin, became drunk, and was burned to death while intoxicated.
Stressed Fractured
Skull
In regard to this phase, Mr. Duncan asked the jury to weigh heavily the evidence which the coroner and his son, Miles Crawley, brought out the finding of twisted bailing wire and testimony that indicated the dead man’s skull was crushed. “Every witness at the coroner’s inquest, except members of Ed Powell’s family and his relatives, told you on the witness stand they saw a fractured place on the skull of the body supposed to be that of Elmer Yates,” he added.
In referring to the accusation the defense had made through
their evidence, of Elmer Yates being a drunkard, Mr. Duncan said : “Was it
possible for Elmer Yates to have gotten down drunk from the time Mrs. Yates
said he left home until about
“Did you ever see a more complete chain of evidence than the commonwealth has produced to connect two of the most bloodthirsty criminals ever brought before justice?” Mr. Duncan asked.
“Troublesome Cattle”
Follow me back through the testimony which has been introduced in this case and in almost every instance when you find little Delma Yates you find at her side her confessed paramour, Ed Powell. Gentlemen, I have never seen cattle, hogs and stock give one so much trouble in my life, as every time Powell was found at the Yates home he was looking for some of his stock,” said Mr. Duncan.
In coming to the portion of the case where Ed Powell appeared on the scene, Mr. Duncan recalled briefly Ed Erwin going to the old sawmill site for some timber and while there he saw Ed Powell going toward the Yates home. ‘Ed Erwin knew the immoral mission on which Powell was going to the Yates home, and that he had no business there. Later he saw Elmer Yates going to his home and then heard sounds like horses kicking. Then to his amazement, Elmer Yates came backing from his home with his hands I the air and following him was his wife and Ed Powell, who Erwin tells you were fighting Yates. A shot was fired and Elmer Yates crumpled to the floor, and those bloodthirsty criminals, like hyenas, dragged his lifeless body back into his own home.
Sorry Scene Not
Visited
“I am indeed sorry that it was impossible for the jury to visit this place and view from the oak tree, where Erwin stood, the Yates home, in order that you might determine for yourselves the vision that Ed Erwin had when he saw this deed committed, as he related to you. Only relatives of Powell have told you that the vision was not clear, and why shouldn’t they, being interested in their own kin. On the other hand, there came before you numerous witnesses who, which under, swore and with no prejudice against Ed Powell or Mrs. Yates and with no interest in the case, that the vision was clear and a person could be identified from the tree.”
In discussing spiritualism, brought into the case by the
defense,
“You members of this jury would be astonished if you knew the important people who do believe in spirits, and especially if I were to tell you some of them were lawyers in this court room, he added.
In conclusion, Mr. Duncan asked the jury to do as they had been sworn to do, in arriving at a verdict,
__ the defendants, whom he said had made an attack on public decency, and fix their punishment at death or life imprisonment.
Erwin Assailed
F.J. Pentecost, made the opening address in behalf of the defense declaring he would center his argument around three words, “Adultery, suspicion and Ed Erwin.”
“The commonwealth has taken mighty hot shots at me and made many insinustions, since this trial began,” he said, but members of the jury I am her to tell you the theory of murder which has been advanced in this case was dropped when Dr. Gott, chemist fron the University of Kentucky told you that those blood stains had urinal odor to them.”
Mr. Pentecost, talked briefly on adultery which he said had come through every generation from the “Garden of Eden,” saying suspicion of my clients in this case is based solely on adultery.”
He asked the jury if it showed acts of a guilty man when Ed Powell supplied information to establish identification of Elmer Yates.
If either Ed Powell or Mrs. Yates had been implicated n this murder they would have told the officers something besides giving them information to identify the remains,” he declared.
He dealt for some time on circumstantial evidence, and related cases in which innocent people had been convicted and paid penalties with their lives, and some time later the truths were brought out.
“You men are asked to take the lives of two people on a lie
Ed Erwin has told,” he asserted, saying Erwin told a Mr. Duncan in the
“Hand of God”
“The had of God sent Humphrey Powell and Billie Minton to the home of Ed Powell on the afternoon which this murder is said to have been committed, and these men swore to you they saw Elmer Yates enter his home about 4 o’clock, which contradicts Erwin’s statement, that Yates was killed about 3 o’clock.” Mr. Pentecost contended.
“Gentlemen you had just as will undertake to perfume a pole cat as to try to believe Ed Erwin,” he said.
In concluding, Mr. Pentecost asked the jury to arrive at a verdict which they would want a jury to render if any member of their family should be charged with a crime, in which circumstantial evidence played a part.
Court was adjourned for
John L. Dorsey, Jr. took the floor at
Mr. Dorsey declared no one but relatives of Ed Powell had come before the jury and told that Elmer Yates was a habitual drunkard. “If Ed Erwin were not in this case I believer there would be sufficient evidence to convict these defendants,” he said. “Who else would want to kill Elmer Yates, but Ed Powell. The evidence has given no reason for any body killing him, but Ed Powell.”
Only three witnesses said bottles were lying near Elmer Yates body and they were Ed Powell and his two sons, Audie and Marshall Powell.
An alibi is a refuge for the guilty, especially when it comes from the guilty ones party.”
Mr. Dorsey praised the force of deputy sheriffs in this county and spoke of the Powell and Yates case as the most atrocious crime ever committed in the history of the county.
He said Ed Erwin viewed the tragedy from behind a tree and his statement had been substantiated by eight witnesses who were uninterested and that they testified they could see plainly from the tree to Yates’ porch.
In completing his argument Mr. Dorsey asked the jury to consider the fact that Ed Powell was not under arrest or charged with any crime between the dates of December 11th and January 13th and why he cosulted continuously with his counsel and brought Ed Erwin to them and then Ed Erwin went to the grand jury room Powell followed him, and before he entered told Erwin he wanted to see him when he came out of the room.
In the opening statements of N.P. Taylor for the defense remarks made by John L. Dorsey, Jr. were attacked concerning what Mr. Taylor termed, “Negro superstition,” concerning a statement Mr. Dorsey made that a murderer could not touch a body which they murdered.
Mr. Taylor said, “Gentlemen, on the threshold of this case I want to ask of you, lay aside this matter that she is an adulteress, and he is as adulterer. The court’s instructions tell you to try these people for murder not adultery.”
Mr. Taylor declared, immoralities of aristocratic people are for-told at their guilt from a moral viewpoint, and compared Mrs. Yates’ error to theirs.
Court recessed for five minutes following N. Powell Taylor’s dramatic and masterfully handled argument to the jury and allowed them a period of relaxation.
Commonwealth’s Attorney, G. Talbot
In his opening remarks, Mr.
Telling of the reward feature brought out by the defense, Major Berry said that in nearly every instance where an awful crime has been committed in this country, in a secret manner a reward has been offered for the arrest and conviction of the perpetrators.
Attacking the defense because they questioned the venire of
jurors about their belief in “ghosts, spirits and hants,” Mr.
Major Berry then went into discussion of the actual crime,
he called Ed Powell “that rednecked bull from the
Major Berry followed this statement with a recital of the great cases that had been tried by circumstantial evidence and sent the guilty persons to their deaths, all because of the “voice of conscience” had made them tell too much. He launched into a direct attack on the defendants, saying that when Ed Powell made the statement identifying the body, it was the “voice of conscience,” already making itself apparent. He added that when Mrs. Yates who had not come within ten feet of the body declared, “that’s Elmer and I know it, and someone in this crowd knows all about it, but won’t tell,” it was agin the “voice of conscience making itself felt in her mind.
Major Berry concluded his speech by asking for a fair and impartial verdict and that the jurors should find the defendants guilty as accused.
This is a copy of the hand written
verdict that the jury foreman presented to the judge:
Copyright ©
2001-2014 by
Rick Powell
All Rights Reserved
Commercial use of any information from
My Personal Web Page is
prohibited
This site is best viewed in
Microsoft Internet Explorer
