The daily gazette., 1882-05-26
REDDEN'S JUST DUE.
THE FOUL ODESSA FIEND
FOUND GUILTY.
A VERDICT JUST BEFORE NOON
A Positive Charge From the Court That
There Is No Ground for Supposed
Attempted Rape Does the Work.

After being out for nearly 10 weary hours
the jury in the Redden case came into tbe
court room at 1870 o'clock TODAY. and
everybody thought they had arrived at !
verdict. The IL men did not look worried
or weary and two or three of the younger
ones smiled familiarly at their friends a.
they took their seats.
Thee were many rumors during the
morning as to how the jury stood. Some
said the jury stood six to six. Others thai
nine favored conviction and three acquittal
and still Others had it that Juror Carly, the
colored member was hanging out alone for
acquittal or conviction Of a mere assault.
All this was probably incorrect.
When the jury was seated the Chief jus.
tice said
"Gentlemcn of the jury-last evening Q
paper was sent to me signed "A Juror ask.
ing public explanation of the nature of an
assault. Is it the wish of the jury to have
that explanation now Y'
Each man of the IL nodded his head, and
one juror arose and said "We have been
balloting on that and concluded that we
would like fuller explanation of an
assault as it applies to the case given u.s."
NO ASSAULT IN THE CASE.
The Chief Justice then said: Gas | stated
yesterday in my charge to you the statute on
lelones prescribes that when felony itself
is not proved but an attempt has been made
to commit felony u conviction for an ATTEMPT
may he rendered. We were at that time
divided in our opinion but since then a
majority of the court have come to different
conclusion and we have decided that the
statute is binding.
But in this case great judgment should be
used. 1t is not intended for jury to take
refuge behind provision of this kind when
fhni In 1attt IL s,il l11,
An assault is an injury to another. For in
stance, we have assault with intent to com
init murder. If murder is not committed,
the law then provides that conviction f0T
the attempt may be made. So with an at
tempt to commit rape. If there is an assault
on female with 1elonious intent, and the
intent IL not carried out, that is an assault
with intent to commit rape.
In this case the testimony shows that there
was connection. There is no room for any
doubt on this point. Everything shows that
there was sexual neutrality-suspicious. by
force or consent is left for you to say. But
there is no escape from that fact.
Now it was either with the child's consent
or by force. 1t is for you to say whether
you have any evidence that it was by any
thing but violence. 1t must have been done
by violence or by her consent. If it was by
her consent it cannot be an assault. If it
was by violence it was a rape. But when
there is no evidence offered TO show the Jury
that the woman consented and there are
marks of violence there is but one eonclu-
sion to come to and leave that to you.
This is not woman, remember. 1t is a
little child, IL or II years old and not devel
oped and in the absence of any proof OF
consent on her part is there any room for the
belief that she consented to sexual inter.
course with that man. ! can add nothing
more Is there anything else the jury
wishes explained
The jury having no further questions to
ask retired again at 10.35.
VERDICT OF GUILTY.
At l1.4S the jury came into court and
rendered verdict of ''Guilty."