Albuquerque Morning Journal

VIRGINIA JURY FINDS
KILLING JUSTIFIED

Unwritten Law Believed Responsible for Decision Though Foreman Insists It Is Based on Temporary Insanity.

[By Morning Journal Special Leased Wire.]

Roanoke, Va., June 29.—After being out thirty-five minutes, the jury this evening returned a verdict of not guilty in the case of former Judge William C. Loving, of Nelson, the manager of the Virginia estate of Thomas F. Ryan, who was placed on trial here today for the murder of Theodore Estes, son of Sheriff M. K. Estes. Judge Loving shot young Estes April 2 at Oakridge, following a buggy ride Estes had taken with the Judge's daughter, Miss Elizabeth Loving, who told her father that her escort had drugged and assaulted her.

The jury retired at 4:45, and from that time until the verdict was rendered the defendant remained in the same seat he had occupied since the trial began, surrounded by members of his family, with the exception of his daughter.

At 5:20 o'clock a knock was heard on the door of the jury room, and Judge Barksdale cautioned the crowd not to display their emotion when the decision of the jury was announced.

The verdict was read by Foreman McCraw. Judge Barksdale thanked the jurors and declared that he believed the verdict was in accordance with their conscientious views. After the jury had been excused, Judge Loving, his wife and other relatives shook hands and thanked each juror for the verdict. Tears streamed from the eyes of both the defendant and his wife. Judge Loving was congratulated by many friends, though there was no demonstration.

Foreman McCraw said that when the jurors retired one of them did not understand all of the instructions of the court, which were read to him. McCraw, Judge Barksdale thanked the jury and asked for a vote, instructing all who favored the acquittal of the defendant to hold up their hand. Every hand promptly went up. When asked what the basis of the verdict was, he said insanity.

The day was spent in argument by counsel for the defense, and the closing speech by the prosecution being made this afternoon by Attorney Bouldin.

Attorneys Barksdale, Moore and Lee, for the defense, spoke practically along the same lines. They pleaded for an acquittal on the grounds that Judge Loving was insane, having lost control of himself upon hearing the story of the ruin of his daughter. They dwelt on the testimony of the experts and the excessive drinking of whisky by the defendant some years ago, which, it is claimed, had diseased his brain. The real basis of the argument, however, was the "unwritten law."

Commonwealth's Attorney Wood Bouldin made the closing address for the state contending that Judge Loving was sane at the time of the killing.

At the opening of court today the arguments of the attorneys begun yesterday afternoon were continued. When former State Senator W. P. Barksdale arose to speak for the defense every available seat was occupied. Mr. Barksdale said in part:

"I know that there is a suspicion about the plea of insanity, but the court has directed you not to look at it with that view.

"The evidence in this case is that the defendant was on a continuous drunk for eight years and his brain had been so impaired that it suddenly gave away under great stress.

"No wonder the light of reason fled from his mind. We are not appealing to you upon the 'unwritten law,' but the law that is written upon your hearts and upon the hearts of your forefathers."

The plea of Mr. Barksdale was based almost entirely upon the preservation of the sanctity of the home.

He was followed by Attorney Moore, of the defense. Mr. Moore said:

"It is a supreme to me that the defect in the springs of defendant's mind did not break when he first heard the story of his daughter being brought home drunk and unconscious. But he did restrain himself and waited for his daughter. The majority of men would not have waited, but would have lost their control at once.

"We have preponderance of proof that the defendant was insane at the time of the killing.

"You would not raise the moral standard or elevate the manhood of Virginia by convicting. Don't put the badge of dishonor on him by sending him to the penitentiary. Don't let it get out to the world that a jury of Virginia gentlemen put the felon's stripes on a Virginia gentleman."

Mr. Moore was followed by John L. Lee, of Lynchburg, who appealed strongly to the sympathies of the jury with both words and tears. He said:

"Since from Virginia the homes of the citizens, and what remains of the state. The purity and the dignity of our homes is the sacredst thing in life to Virginia. It is the gift of God. When anyone in false homes they strike society and the body politic the deadliest blow."

JURY BELIEVED STORY
OF WRONGED DAUGHTER

The following statement is given out tonight by counsel for Judge Loving:

Within half an hour after the rendition of the verdict by the jury and the adjournment of court, counsel for Judge Loving were called on by two of the jury who stated that they had been named a committee representing the entire jury to convey to Judge Loving and his wife and daughter the information that while they believed that Miss Loving's statement on the witness stand of what she had told her father was untrue, yet they believed that Judge Loving believed the story his daughter told him, and that he acted under that belief.
mother was a true account of what she had communicated to him. yet not for a moment did the jury entertain the opinion that an actual assault had been committed by the deceased upon the young lady. but on the contrary. they were fully satisfied that no actual assault had been committed. but that there had been an attempted assault. Counsel for Judge Loving being interviewed in this connection. said: The conclusion of the jury that no assault was committed was absolutely correct.