The Stark County Democrat. [volume] (Canton, Ohio) 1833-1912, 1875-03-18
@ Aenturrat
CHARGE OF JUDGE FREASE.
INDICTMENT FOR MURDER IN THE
FIRST DEGREE.

aBdlHoI IleaS OF CldrK TO-,
August Cribley. Ohio.
GENTLEMEN OF THE JURY The provis-
ions of the statute, under which the coun-
sci for the State claim a conviction of
the prisoner at the bar, Augustus Cribley,
5 are as follows:
THAT if any person shall purposely,
by administering poison. or causing the
same to be done, kill another, every such
person shall be deemed guilty of murder
in the first degree, and, upon conviction
thereof shall suffer DEATH"
That if any person shall unlawfully
kill another without malice, uninten-
tionally while the slayer is in the com
mission of some unlawful act, every such
person shall be deemed guilty of man.
slaughter, and, upon conviction thereof,
shall be imprisoned in the penitentiary,
and kept at hard labor not more than ten
years, nor less than one year."
will not call your attention to the
provisions of the statute in regard to
murder in the second degree for in this
State that crime, except as included in
murder in the first degree, cannot be
committed by administering poison, or
causing it to be administered. The kill
ing of another by means of poison, if
murder at all, is murder in the first de-
gree.
The indictment in this case, in the first
count, charges in substance that August
Cribley, the prisoner at the bar, jointly
with one Edward Miller on the 18th of
August, 1874, at this ccunty of Stark, pur-
posely and Of deliberate and premedi-
tated malice, and with intent to kill and
murder one Peter Peair, did put, mix and
mingle into and with certain quantity
of beer which the said Peair then and
there intended and was about to drink,
they well knowing that he intended, and
was about 10 drink said beer, a large
quantity Of deadly poison, called lauda-
nun, to-wit one and a half ounces
thereof, they then and there well know
ing the said laudanum to be a deadly
poison. That said Peair then and there
did drink and swallow down a great
quantity, to-wit: one pint of said beer,
with which said laudanum was so mixed,
he not knowing that there was any lauda-
nun or other poison, or hurful ingredi-
ent, mixed and mingled with said beer,
by means whereby he became sick, and
languished until the next day, on which,
to-wit: on the 10Th day Of August, 1874,
at said county, Of the poison aforesaid,
and the sickness and distemper occa-
stoned thereby, he died.
There are two other counts in the in
dictment, but as they are both designed
to cover the same charge, and do, sub
stantially, and without material differ
enCe describe the same crime, it is not
important thai | should further direct
your attention to the last two counts of
the Indictment except to say that in the
I second count it is alleged that the said
poison was mixed and mingled with
certain quantity rpop, and in the third
count it is alleged that the said poison
was mixed and mingled with certain
quantity of water, when so drank and
swallowed by said Peair
othis indictmentthep prisoner, August
Cribey, who alone is now on trial, has
pleaded not guilty, and this issue thus
made, you have been empanneled and
sworn to try, and you are now upon your
oaths to decide.
by the humane policy of our law every
person, charged with crime, IS presumed,
IN the absence OF proof TO be innocent.
Ana, therefore, before you can find the
prisoner gully, his guilt must be eStaD-
hshed to your satisfaction, by the testi-
mony IN the case, beyond the existence
OF reasonable doubt-that is, all the
material allegations OF the indictment
must be established to your satisfaction
beyond a reasonable doubt. The law re-
quTes In criminal, and especially in capi-
tai cases. tul! proof, Evidence which
satisfies the mndsol lhelury OF the truth
of the material tactsaiiegcd in The iudicL-
ment to the entire exclusion OF every
reasonable doubt, constitutes iutl proof,
Absolute mathomatical certainty and
demonstraiGn1s treqlired, and in the
course OF juCtlcia2 IlTe5yiea'ion, Wou.dbe |
ulAattalnabIe' Even the most drecteyi- |
dence can Produc1 no.llng, isoge than
such a high degree Of probability, as
amomts.to moral certainty. From the
highest degree 1t may Cecime, by an IN I
definite number OF gradauousi until il /
produces IN the mind nothing more thau
a preponderence OF assent IN favor Ct the
particular fact. The distinction between
full proof and mere preponderance Of
evidence, is, in its application, very i'm
portant In criminal cases it is essential
to a verdict of guilty in any degree or
grade of crime, that the guilt of the ac-
eused of that degree Or grade of crime
should be fully proved. But, should you
be satisfied Of the defendants guilt, be-
yond reasonable doubt, no captious,
chimerical or carping doubt should avail
the defendant.