The Stark County Democrat. [volume] (Canton, Ohio) 1833-1912, 1876-12-28

made, as tending 10 snow Vhe Prisohor
guilt. ,-
And the same observations are also ap-
plicable to the testimony tending to show
threats on the part of the deceased, to kill,
or iniure the prisoner.
To show motive to impel the prisoner
to the alleged crime, the State introduced
testimony to show that the deceased was
worth, at the time of his death, property
to the value of about S2s, 900, and that the
prisoner had, for sometime prior to the
death of deceased, been alienated in her
affections from him, and had placed them
upon one Jacob Kryer, with whom she
had committed adultery. You are to
judge of the weight of this testimony IN
connection with the other testimony in
the case to show the guilt of the accused.
The State has given testimony tending
to show that the prisoner was cut with a
razor on the neck, and shot in the lett
side with the bullet of revolver, soon
after, or about the time the deceased was
shot,-and also that a sheet Of the bed oc-
cupied by the prisoner, and the deceased
on the night of the death Of the deceased,
has spot fblood upon 1t, received, from
wound in the head of the deceased
about the time he was shot by the prison
Grand also, has given testimony to show
that these wounds on the person OF the
prisoner were inflicted by herself, or if
not by herself, that they were not inflict-
ed by the deceased, and that they were
not received by the prisoner until after
the death of the deceased land that the
position of the sheet had been changed by
the prisoner, after the death Of the de-
ceased in order to tabricate eXculpatory
indications in her favor.
On the other hand, as tending to dis
prove her guilt, and that she acted in self
defense, the prisoner relies, and is entitled
to rely upon, for what you may consider
them worth, her declarations, introduced
by the State, that the deceased, just be-
fore she shot him, inflicted upon her the
said wounds with razor and revolver,
and she also introduced evidence in her
own behalf tending to show that such
wounds we're not self inflicted, but were
inflicted upon her by the deceased just
before she shot him, and that the posi-
tion of said sheet was not changed by her,
after the death of deceased, and that said
spot of blood on the sheet was not pro-
duced by any blood Of the deceased, but
by blood which flowed from her said
wounds upon the neck.
She,also relies, and has right to rely
for what they may be worth in your esti'
nation, in her behalf, upon the fact that
she had these wounds upon her person as
shown by the testimony.
It.is for you to determine from this con-
flicting testimony, what the true state of
the facts was.
Experts, both medical and those who
make the nature and properties of human
blood special study, were examined in
regard to some matters, then in dispute
between the two parties. These experts
were allowed to testify and give their
opinions on account of the special skill
they had acquired from special study and
practice in reference to the particular
points to which their testimony referred. |
their special skill, you
are after all to decide upon the value Of
their testimony, and award to that of each
and all of these experts such weight as
you may think it should be entitled to.
Counsel have read to you from works
on Medical Jurisprudence, and works on
the subject of the use Of microscope in
the examination and discrimination of
human blood. These extracts so read, so
far as,pertinent to the case, counsel were
Untitled to read as illustration on argu-
ment, and as part of The argument it
will be your duty to duly consider them.
But you should not regard such extracts
as testimony.
There is testimony tending to show that
he deceased was jealous of the prisoner,
lis wife, suspecting her Of improper con-
luct with the said Kryer, and also testi-
nony tending to show some attempt to
jettle certain differences which had arisen
the prisoner and the deceased
With a view probably to separation and
division of property, which attempt had
allied. There is also testimony tending
o show acts of personal violence, cruelty
md threats against the prisoner
W the deceased. This testimony should
,e considered by you as tending to show
hat the deceased was the aggressor, his
tate of feeling toward the prisoner and
lis motive to assault and wound the pris-
ner, as it is claimed by her that he did,
nd that the prisoner honestly believed,
nd had reasonable grounds to believe,
hat she was in imminent danger of death
# great bodily harm, and that her only
means Of escape from such danger was to
AXE the life of the deceased.
OF course she had no right to take the
ife of her husband merely because he
vas violent man, or had previously
bused and cruelty treated her, or had
made threats against her, if such were
he facts. The testimony was not admit
ed to show, nor should it be considered
" you to find that he had this right, but
My for the purposes for which 1 have
lready stated that it is competent.
In finding verdict you should be
.uided exclusively by the testimony in
he case, under the charge Of the Court.
t is your peculiar province to determine
he questions of fact existing in the case,
nd that of the Court to determine the
Iuestions of law presented, and it isyour
luty to receive the law as determined by
he Court, and no juror can rightiully
the law as declared by the