The Stark County Democrat. [volume] (Canton, Ohio) 1833-1912, 1880-03-11
JUDGE MEYERS CHARGE


by Geo. e. Baldwin and TuIene Meyer, who
plead earnestly for the defense, VIM. R. Day
made the closing argument for the State on Sat.
urdRy. The court house was crowded in the at.
ternoon and the most respectful attention was
paid to the impressive charge Of the Judge, which
was as follows
Gentlemen Of the Jury;-The defendant,
John Sammet, stands charged by the
Grand Jury, of having committed one Of
the gravest crimes made punishable by
the criminal laws Of our State. 1t is,
substantially, that he, on the 25th day Of
November, 1879, stithe county of Stark
did purposely and Of deliberate and pres
meditated malice, kill and murder one
Christopher Spuhler, by shooting him
with pistol, loaded with powder and
leaden ball, thereby producing mortal
wound through vital parts of his body,
whereby he there instantly died. The
charge is, therefore, that of murder in the
first degree.
10 this charge the prisoner pleads, mot
Guilty." and this raises the issue between
the State and the accused, which you
have been chosen and sworn to try. It
will be your solemn duty to determine
this momentous issue, upon the facts
established by the proof, and the law as
charged by the court. The trust conided
to you is as honorable as 1t Is important,
and the duties assigned to you of char
acter most serious and responsible, hence
solemn and arduous. Conscious of the
gravity ofthe situation, and the solemn du-
ties devolving upon you, trust you will
not fail to discharge these duties faithfully,
conscientiously, and to the best of your
ability and judgment. The loyal observ-
ance and strict enforcement of the law, by
the courts and juriss, 1t is self-evident,
must be of the highest Importance to the
State and to the people; for obedience to
the law is the fundamental principle
upon which civilized society reposes.
Deprived of this foundation, or If this
foundation becomes shaken and begins 10
give way, it also must decay and degen~
crate into state of anarchy and barbar-
ism. The honest Observance, and faiths
full and fearless Enforcement Of the law,
are the great safeguards against such de-
generation and decadence; the strict en-
forcement of our criminal laws, the best,
If not the only, means to repress crime,
which of late has become 30 alarmingly
prevalent in our country, once so noted
as the country of law and order. Hence, /
repeat, conscious Of the importance of the
duties assigned to you, you will, 1 trpst,
perform the same faithfully, conscien"
tiously. and impartially. To assist you in
doing so, 1t becomes the duty of the court
to call your attention to those principles
of criminal law, which are to serve as
your guide in your deliberations to deter
mine the issue so frsught with conse-
quences; to pronounce judicially the
guilt or innocence Of the accused, Of the
the appalling crime Of which he stands
charged.
First. you will understand, and bear in
| bllhJ bDO dCCuSOO 10 PAOoulAAOA Wy
the law to be innocent, until his guilt
is established by the proof. 1t is incum~
bent on the State, before itcan ask his con-
viction, to prove his guilt. Until his
guilt be so established by the proof, the
accused Is not called upon TO prove his
innocence, as that is presumed, as have
stated, until he is proven guilty.
Next, the guilt Of the accused must be
proven beyond the existence of reason
able doubt before the jury can find him
guilty. OF course, every ingredient
or element of the crime charged,
must be proven with that same
degree Of certainty of proof. 1 should
observe that in the trial of criminal
causes, absolute or mathematical certain
ty can never be attained, and hence cam
not be and is not required. All that the
law can and does requires is that the guilt
of the accused be established by that de4
gree of certainty which we call moral
certainty and is expressed by the legal
axiom that the guilt of the accused must
be proven beyond the existence of rea-
sonable doubt. It does not mean proof
beyond all or all manner of doubt, but all
reasonable doubt only. II means not
Captious doubt which, perchance, might
be unreasonably clung to, to avoid the
discharge of an unpleasant duty. 1t
means such reasonable doubt as might
perhaps remain in the honest, enquiring
mind Of juror after faithfully and con-
scientiously considering and weighing all
the facts and circumstances developed
and established by the proof.
In this connection, may further OBJ
serve as to proof of guilt beyond reason
able doubt, and what evidence is requirr
ed 10 establish such proof that it can be
proven by circumstantial evidence as we'll
ss by direct evidence. Crimes, espe~
clally those of q heinous character, such
AZ murder, being usually committed in
secrecy, often in the darkness Of the
night, and seldom in the presence Of wits
nesses, direct evidence to prove guilt is not
often attainable, and were 1t not that cir
cumstantiai eveidence could be resorted
to, to prove guilt, most, and the worst OF
criminals must go unwhipt' Of justice.
Circumstantial evidence has, therefore,
always been deemed proper and sufi-
oient to establish guilt and convict Of
crime; and this, perhaps, not so much
because of the necessity Of the thing, but
rather because Of its reliable character
and marked excellence. Human exper-
ience has shown that when crime has
been committed though unwitnessed by
man, the criminal has left traces point
ing to him as the guilty party, and he
finds himself encircled by a web of
circumstances often marking his
guilt with unerring certainty. A chain
of circumstances, II established {, by
| satiafaptOrv aUidanna NAV nftau nrOva