The weekly Arizona miner., 1878-11-29

compatible with the innocense of the ac- cused, ana incarable of explanation. upon ] any other reasonable hypothesis save that of the guilt of the accused.
 Should you determine, that the circum- stances which you deem proven. tend to es- 1 tablish the accuseds connection with the commission of the homicide, you should then proceed to consider the alleged ad- missions.
 Upon this polnt. you should first ascer- tain what admissions are proven and es- abolished by the evidence. and then com pare such with the other circumstances which you have found Gs proven Tn the case, and determine from the whole, the conclusion of guilt or innocense of The accused.
 These alleged verbal admissions should be received by you with great caution.
 Evidence which consists of the mere re- petition of oral statements. is subject to much imperfection and mistake. Ire party himself either being miSnformed, or TOT having clearly expressed his own meaning, or the witness having misunderstood him It frequently happens also, that the witness by intentionally or unintentiOnaliy, alter ing few of the expressions really used. gives an effect to the statement com pletely at variance with what thc party actually did say.
 In connection with these admissions, you should also take into consideration the mental strength and pecularities of the party making them, and the circumstances by which he is at the time surrounded.
 An individual suspected of the com mission of an offense. may be led to an ad- Ter fl.a sfa purpose of removing the uncertainty and dispeliing the suspense that burdens him. So also mental iclusionS. which often possess the weaker iutcllects, may prompt an admission, or induce the making of statements utterly visionary and entirely false.
 So to morbid vanity or ambition for notoriety, especially when the iGdlvIdual is surrounded by associates of vicious mental tendencies. or possessed of a low order of intellect. may lead him to make false ad missions or sUartlIng or untrue confessions. All these matters must be considered by you, and if you can attribute these ad- missions made by the accused to any of these causes, you should discard them from the consideration of the case.
 But upon the other hand when the ad missions are deliberately made by person of ordinary mind, free from apparent weak ness or disorder, and when such admissions are precisely identified, the evidence they afford Is often of the most satisfactory nature. For when an individual is tree to control his own conduct and speech, un trammclled by the dread of punishment nor tempted by the promises or hope of immunity, 1t would indeed be strange that he should say, declare or admit that which would endanger his liberty or his life.
 When SCch confessions are therefor made by an individual. voluntarily, deliberately, without offered inducement on the part of any one, ami are precisely related by the witness to whom they were made, and by them minutely identified, such admissions and confessions, may be treated ny you as satisfactory evidence of the facts admitted And upon that evidence supported by other circumstances that tent to cOrroborate the the admissions and connect the accused with the commission of the crime, you may De justified III finding him guilty as charged.
 The circumstances of the killing are such. that in the consideration of the case. and before you can find the defendant guilty, you must tiud as a fact that the accused was
 
 time of its occurrence. This fact however. like the general question Of guilt or inno- cence. may be found by you from the cir cumstances and admissions detailed, and without any direct evidence proving his ! presence upon the fatal spot. But this ! fact of defendants presence at the place of the killing must be found by you, either | as the natural deduction and presumption | rom the circumstances proven, or from di- rect evidence ot the fact
 By way of defense evidence on behalf of ! the defendant has beeh offered tending to i prove an alibi, that is, that he Was not present at the place of the killing at the time of the occurrence of the homicide. but was at that time in another and different place.
 When satisfactory evidence of the d:fen- dant'S presence at the place oG the killing has been offered by the prosecution. the bur len of proving an alibi is upon the deten- liant and it is for him to overcome the effect oi the prosecutions proof, to the extent. at east, Of creating in your minds, by such evidence, a reasonable doubt as to delcn- tants presence at the place of the killing It the time Of the occurrence of the homi- 'ide. Should therefore the evidence offer 'd create m your minds a reasonable doubt Is To defendants presence at the place of l he killing at the time the homicide occur d you must find the defendant not guilty. :
 Upon every material fact Of thIs oficnse he burden of proof Is upon the prosecu ( ion aud every such fact must be established [ 'eyond reasonable doubt. | This burden attaches to every part and a very stage of tbe case, to the whole chain i f circumstances claimed by the prosecu- t lon to exist, a1d to every material link of ' l tEat chain, and If the prosecution failed l' establish every such fact beyond a rea- e 1nable doubt you must acquit the defendant. il By reasonable dOuut is meant doubt 0 lat IS acted and Substantiated not farciful i' or speculative; for everything relating to a lman affairs anu depending upon moral | 'idence Is subject to some possible or imag a ary doubt. o By reasonable doubt Is meant that state o' the case which after the entire compar W on and consideration of all the evidence te ayes your minds in that condition that p' 'u cannot say that you feel an abiding g' nvlctlon to moral certainty of tine truth ''' the charge. gr Under the proofs of this case you must Se d the defendant guilty as charged that 'i' ot murter of the first degree. There is evidence showing any lesser offensc. The form of your verdict should be; "We jury find the defendant guilty of mur- nm m the first degree;' or, We the jury cI. Il