Mrs. Champney testified at the afternoon session. She made a most
unfavorable impression on the jury. She got very angry at Smilk's
counsel and said such spiteful things to him and about his client
that the jury began to feel sorry for both of them.

Two detectives and three policemen in uniform testified that Smilk
was the picture of health and a desperate-looking character. Now
anybody who has ever served on a jury in a criminal case knows the
effect that the testimony of a police officer has on three fourths--
and frequently four fourths,--of the jurors. For some
unexplained,--though perhaps obvious reason,--the ordinary juror not
only hates a policeman but refuses to believe him on oath unless he
is supported by evidence of the most unassailable nature. The mere
fact that the five officers swore that Smilk was healthy and rugged
no doubt went a long way toward convincing the jury that the poor
fellow was a physical wreck and absolutely unable to defend himself
on the night of the alleged burglary.

Moreover, a skilled mind-reader would have discovered that Mr.
Yollop had not made a good impression on the jury. Almost to a man,
they discredited him because he was fastidious in appearance;
because he was known to be a successful and prosperous business man;
because he was trying to make them believe that he possessed the
unheard-of courage to tackle an armed burglar; and because he was a
milliner. As for Mrs. Champney, she was the embodiment of all that
the average citizen resents: a combination of wealth, refinement,
intelligence, arrogance and widowhood. Especially does he resent
opulent widowhood.