Jurymen Questioned by Defense on Insanity

     District Attorney Penney’s questions to the talesman were invariably the same. His first question had to do with the citizenship of the talesman. The next question drew forth whether or not the talesman believed in this form of government. The District Attorney dwelt with particular stress on the question. He was fearful that someone who had the remotest friendship for anarchy might get into the jury box.
     But the promptness with which the answers came to the question dispelled any possibility as to any person with Anarchist tendencies or sympathies being drawn as a talesman.
     The line of questioning of the counsel for the defense was more labored and long drawn out than had been calculated on. One of the questions which possibly gave an outline of the defense was whether, if a reasonable doubt of insanity had been proved by the defense, the prospective juror would give him the benefit of that doubt. Another question was:
     “Isn’t your mind so fixed that you couldn’t listen to the evidence impartially?”
     Other questions were if the talesman had not talked about the case; if he had not formed an opinion; if he was at the Temple of Music when the shooting took place; if he was at the Pan-American on the day of the shooting.
     One of the most remarkable features of the task of selecting the jury was the prompt replies to questions. It would appear as if every talesman had been schooled to answer the questions in a manner that would be acceptable both to the State and the defense. It was apparent to anyone familiar with court proceedings that it was the ambition of every talesman to serve on this jury.