Gallipolis journal. [volume] (Gallipolis, Ohio) 1837-1919, 1876-03-23
SELF-DEFENSE.

If you find from the greater weight
of the evidence that the defendant was
ut the time the fatal shot was fired in
the lawful pursuit of his business, and
he was attacked by deceased under cir
cumstances which denote an intention
to take away his life, or to do him some
great bodily harm, he may lawfully kill
the assailant, provided he use all means
in his power otherwise, to save his own
life or to prevent the intended harm :;
such as retreating as far as he can or
disabling his adversary without killing
him, if it be in his power. But if the
attack upon him is so sudden. fierce and
violent that Il retreat would not dimin-
ish but increase his danger, he may kill
his adversary without retreating; and
further, you find from the evidence that
from the character of the attack there
was reasonable ground for the defendant
to believe. and from the evidence, you
find the defendant did honestly believe
that his life was about to be taken, or
he was to suffer great bodily harni, and
that he believed honestly that he would
be in equal danger by retreating, then
would be excused.
Ii NON tlDti Iilc ttluCiicc IllIb Lille
defendant admits that he took the life
of the deceased, and that he claims to
have taken it in self-defence, the burden
of proof in this ease then is shifted TO
the defendant, and he must show YOU
by preponderence of evidence that
what he did was necessary to be done in
order to save his own life, or protect
himself from enormous bodily harm.
A fl.,a TO IL Al.
plea of self-defense, he must show you
by preponderence Of the evidence that
when he fired the fatal shot he was ac-
tuated by fear and apprehension of
death or great bodily harm at the hands
of the deceased, LoLiIs; and moreover
that the defendant had reasonable
grounds, and did entertain such fear
and apprehension, and you will take all
the facts and circumstances into consid-
sideration to settle this question.
Gentlemen, in considering the question
of self-defense, where the defense is
called upon to make out such issue, you
may not only consider the evidence Of
fered by the defendant to make ont his
self-lefense, bat you may look to the
eyidense offered by the State for such
justification; indeed you may look at
all Lie tNlucuCc, dli Tile IdCIS anu all Lne
circumstances to settle this point as well
AS all others in issue in this case.
DEFENSE OF PROPERTY.
If you find from the evidence that the
defendant was in the rightful possession
of the shed at the time the fatal shot
was fired, and that the defendant noti-
fled the deceased not to come under the
shed where defendant was, and the de-
ceased persisted in entering, and had at
the time deadly weapon, the defendant
may use all reasonable and necessary
force to defend his real or personal prop
erty in his actual possession, vet he
cannot inaocently carry this defense to
the extent of killing the aggressor; and
if no way is left but this to maintain his
right, he must yield, retreat and get out
of the way, if he can do so without en-
dangering his life, or suffering great
bodily harm.
= Gentlemen, if you find from the.
evidence that at the time the fatal shot
was fired, the possession and right of pos:
session of the shed was in litigation and
dispute between defendant and deceased,
then, and in that case, neither party can
claim any protection or exemption
under the law, by reason of such claim
OF possession or occupation; but the de-
ceased and defendant stand, and are ac-
conntablein this case as If neither party
had any such right there as would JUS