The Newtown bee., 1879-08-06
CircumStantiaI Evidence.

The Methodist, discussing the uncertain character of circumstantial evidence. says: -z.-f
 In the Hull case, the detectives had forged chain in this way: 1. Matches burned in the room of the murdered woman were like those used in Dr. Hull's room. ?. The doctor was out of bed at an hour near that of the murder. 5. The knots in the fastenings by which the victim was bound had some re- semblance or analogies to a practice the doctor had of knotting his bedclothes. There were other circumstances. but they were all like these. Each was capa- ble of an innocent explanation; but the detectives are said to have believed that though neither was link, yet they alto gether made a chain. The cumulative idea has no business in such case, and the employment of it is one of the absurdlties of detective logic. 1Eaas
 Even when the link seems perfect, and, more, when there are several of them, great danger arises from setting aside the rule that any other possible explana- tlon of the circumstances must be ac- SNPNSa' ~h DllbiSll U1Ill0g 1 | company of strangers, had a narrow escape in the following way: A gentle man took out coin and declared that no one present had seen one like it. The coin passed around the table. and came at last to the British officer. All the rest. declared that they had never seen such coin. When it reached this off, cer he was busy with conversation. and taking the com in his hand and look ing at 1t carelessly, remarked: ssI have seen one like it," and, laying it down, resumed his conversation. At the end ot the dinner the coin could not be found. To discover the thief all were searched until they came last to this officer. He refused to he searched, and said he would die first Just as they were about to proceed to extremities With him, servant rushed forward With the lost coin, which he had just found in a napkin. All apologized to the officer for the suspicion, very strong moment before, that he had secreted the coin. He replied: '' Gentlemen, per- init me to explain why refused to be searched,' and he drew from his pocket an ex act .fac sinite of the rare coin With this in my pocket. a stranger, as l am, Iwould have been judged guilty by you all; therefore I resolved to defend my honor with my ife.'' .z Here were several circumstances. |. The coin was last seen in the officers hands. ?. All agreed that they had never seen such coin; it was, there 1 fore, very rare. 3. He had refused to be searched. But all the facts were ex- plained by his having like coin in his possession. If, however, probability or cumulation had been admitted in the case (the coin lost not having been found), the officer would have been judged guilty. The case shows how un- 1 safe it is to allow either probability or emulation to exclude the possible inno- cent explanation. Hevery circumstance may be innocentlv explained, tlere is no rational force in any one of them or in the whole of them.
 We cheerfully admit that circum- stances may expose persons to just sus- i picion, and that the suspected persons must furnish the explanations that show them innocent. It is often Impossible for innocent persons to do this and the safety of society justiies the detention and Imprisonment of persons who may be innocent. But hanging people who may be innocent is so horrible a thing that any other possible explanation of the accusing circumstances should be preferred before the theory of guilt.
 |