The sun. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1833-1916, 1870-05-11
% irresponsible fjr wnAi be d,d" | so charge

t .t'. I.'. ~. .y. 10 ~, IN, I,.,or 81
II. De-; i.''o "euH.' u.. 10y 90. 'uHd.u ace IS Nhd
STOW rsut' DO, t. ..uI Do Hnd uIcVr.c cd .igut ~ tho
ge,r },f '' n ' nr'Gt or n3 w'q ne snT
BAN ON &c. tine conis or - IN ac' undor uci fucgce
"a i,ri AID eaG'r6a@@f: 6ssSy il I'lfTloae ho /
ne, V %o oe o 1c aSe % 70 charge
Agnu II froln the w.ole cydenS" the Jury believe
oi dougs 80 wis IN Ter tne influence OF u.se re mna
CRIME he Is not IN law guiV OF murder Mhleni
Aa,in III the jury believe tina, nom any rredispos
nP cause the deirndants m,nd Ses mpA,,ed anu a.
tav "p NcS SI q SysrSar himself N Inference
deceased aud at The time OF ms ,o,nsng a, s1 e Vas
OF ary oi,nse whatever Which charge {oI ':r,, ,,s
acting power wilhn him (thc ru"1erl which ne could
to St control nc pa so ion WHEEL prompted &C, com
plaueo OF he IS not rcspoqs BILE WniSn Snssse you;
a. A ss a. A9a iaioas iStates may be
S SSG BY asIS cEarre YOU
Again; "lu order, then. TO constitute crime; man
act he about 20 commit IS wrong 20 remember aud
"c TO nInahment; anJ reason aud wiz to eaablc him
10 compare aud choose between the supposed ,dyan
ge eradication TO bo obtained Oy The criminal act,
and Nc Immunity from unish @ which be WI secure
not elce aud capacity enough to have cfiminal
intent and purrcsc. AMI II MS moral or ilsel ectual
olsc.cuce controlling mental power OF w. through
irSrsi powcr f5F The tne obitira,ed. ne L not re.
6nsbs NO! al agent gu Is not punishable for em'nal
Agen."i II tho Ja,y hcleye nom the evidence ma,
previous, up to- aud al the time of the homicide hqucs
ru, the prisoner Mou4ht OF believed that his " e amt
the deceased, Or cth'r OF then, were or Wa waichng
Ia dest son Percy intending 10 lake LEGAL proceedings
lSpryt nm % tAt sSn me yrs olp2r'Snty that rt.
hm aWtst uclpl,ss t-a such prucrn uugs, and So he
would o,c tat son, taat tiis ws an nnwa,rantcd aud
ust IN. eater. a9d 10 con egne &C thereof a.,
le,u-ion ana disease lnc'cn'ei Ia miyu'lN UNIV
the p.sonGs eee1pS w. AID , iS"'SSa %
rage in vhicn HE power Of di-t suishns whg ger ne
Kim Mas colin it,Sl vlt. In 'ueri q na,yN. -'p. ana
While sdcn power Il ai-uuru,shug wa Gc,t. - - or
sun, ls dtd he Is net r,'nHn.o'e 70 my lr lht a','
lhis trpur~, tri. -,i, ireau-s. al'oigh tp1l N
latj u LJt, ia uy vpoa, connect as al cdiFe .iopo'
ttar; IT the Jury Sieve. from the cy 'enc', tn,
wlle Tue prsnuyt wt- m tuth n'fpAN-n a. II ne.
charge uron IN sic u1c ,n-icU. oeas entirely d..
Weed OF a''.l con -, over ~ se,i,ns, .l LII
or eonscehce "a .isnfe 70 a.. v5sluSJ 50 ~. a, ~
he g "Gs repSI' be esa ,s 2r Of zoe act e,ea
letw.en reht a1d wrong IN reference 10 LIS act
T. Gas il lie Jury bei,,o from the evidence that
| previous, up To. ana At The time Of the AoniEide
hat S Na sS loved SS%SI and woSd no.,
have s . nm sa ~ we ne ,Ps a1 tb
he was wll.s 10 te,usn ant Soni have returned 70
aud ursound delu,ion on ne part oi le psonrF lnat
Lherees sad q cSse. G5nce t5ss9 on ,5d &
IA IicA,Su m ,hy, 10 -rest eagsclss ard WONT
| dsuu- uishiu- WL,th't De- vas commtuns aetiwe or
that toe act charged upon him was comml ed VII ie IN
sucn pIp ana vale SUCH power OF distinguish.
ing wns i0itoyrd % Superseded he Is not responsible
ihG Is relu,cd beeause although good In part IL is
not ~ my Sn1l, eyritC a. a. Sntis nv IN
believe nom thy nee th,t wne the prisoues was
In such aroN su As IL desc bed ~ the last pro- o-l.
tine thereof beng entirely Invested oi All mental
the car acy to exercise viii or conscience IN rciercace
10 hs CONDUCT - lar as the deceased Nas cone eTne
" ior TIE aet even though he ~ At We tame eapso
| posed.
| Again; That to make the prisoner responsible for
es &C. ehaTSa sP9 & 6S lS5 en nSt t G9 Ss
Of dong 5pt that he was not morally insane In tef
to s Ss's % b e s SgS ie s
AssiHf charge you. That TO make the prisoner re-
sponsbc tor the act charged upon him he must nave
tLsi sc.s and the deceased the OF its commits
charge You, again. Fen'lemen, Th., the law hold,
diseased al Inc time OF The sct be without reason
psfIS accused was an Involuntary Instrument Of such
disease, and Incapable Of ren aiming nom the eo~ms
XsSn; Inc seeu.ed must have .ufneisn. mental
70 s &c. " soSS' 20 sSns a.. aps 90 os sSs
I also charge you 80 constitute crime, the nc
|
/ again charge you thsti"T convict person o
| know that tue act he u about TO commit IL wrong
he .cI he wa 6e .sejeet 70 pnn.9%ent and Iss.oI
the supposed advantage OF gadeauon 70 he ootalneS
o. the q ninAl act, and the immunity nom punish
Asan an requested 20 charge ma sD no s0oyei
teiiisenSs. rrsson and Win 10 enable him TO aistn
guish between right and wrong 10 regard 20 the pare
vii be ~ronF, ana that he will deserve punisDmen
I2mfs e6,Ne YOU tsa te proof shows tina
the mnd Of ,he Sceatyd wa In diseased and nnscIn
20 hSG aerse S; Tor the ~, n99 benz q over
TED from an rresstGe ssd aasoaroabe Snass
61, the oySi@niS ssi Of NE body without the
/ now say. geh1iemen, 10 regard TO all the natter
~ ere s they TO Charge
RHETORICAL AMPLIFIcArIoSs
more less CecorGins 20 inherent phases OF theory
eydencel OF the rule oi law Which have lail iown =
or lhissni,y. 'rhs case diners 20, ewhai ON a
sa r Ga au Ghs TR R the Hsr Sns ' &
i.ege' to have been done to his marital relarons =
eo COW OF The alleged xrGTss The eeoee Claim TIA
hs very lapse o. tine eigendeled nlgtoid iancie, an
slate OF nnd casly nnaerccd to frenzy the prdsec,
aud aGeci az iuis rncs in Ihein and 10 Some ey,tl
aie ng Gpoa Them EeSos Only me ~, mt1 ~ o. u
| l think all the cases ciicd are of nN! pun
|
dut d dl0rdnie deiici0 or by recent communication
dshoGor,or " sudden wrongs cal, uated g. detlron
| reason. The only case VI CONVICTION IN the courts
| this state under Analogous circumstances, which ha
reached very authoritative discuss on, rs have bcc
aUle 20 md tIe Sanchez The Court OF Appeal
| IN the
| CASE or SANCHEZ
| C2ld New York r.. p. 40, thus SAYS: Assuming n
theory ol the defence 10 have bceu as the " sone
counsel alleges that tn homicide WAS committed Oy n
prisoner IA an insane frenzy, suPernaucsd by Jealous
awakened in his mind in relation TO his wifes conjug
mfdehtytCAtcA lOia!d reduce The oIeHcs Ir0Ei murd,
| 10 mdHSiGuDAter-And that such theory was q soun
one the inquiry should nave been confined TO the tim
shortly before, that the Court could that the pa
stoDs had not or might not have had time 60 suDsid
The questions to each Of these witnesses related TO
| Indefinite period OF time between the prisoners ma
rage aud the homicide and therefore. for no 9th,
reason. were clearly inadmissiDle" Which lea0s me
| say that (as was IN the minds OF the jury In
| THE COLE CASE,
according 10 their verdict the state OF insanity
the act OF commission must concur In direct potht
time. This ID the converse OF the wellsctled rule
| cAses Of pc IRONS committing murier-that the d.
sign 10 XII may be conceived on the inst ant OF killing
| In Coles case the Jury said:
| We md the PRISONER W have been sane NJ tue mi
meut before and the moment after the killing but vi
The doubt was given TO the prisoner because on Til
instAi hinged the issue,
| You might conversely arrive at the conclusion TIL
| the prisoner may have been IN q state OF insanity
PERIODS PRIOR TO The moment OF knlnF or was IN sta
oi insanity suory afteTw ard, and you might mad hi
| 10 state OF sanity AZ the moment OF u
! aNot-SAeIelsng peTceDton TO recognize the q