The Emporia weekly news. [volume] (Emporia, Kan.) 1881-1889, 1882-11-09

10 e1aDtS yOu 10 more cioarly UNDER
stand all the elements Of muder in the
first degIee. which is the crime charged
IN the information, will give you the
legal meaning of some of the principal
words used IN the definition / have
given Of murder at the common law.
Malice aforethought used IL the def
milton OF murder does not mean hatred,
spite or malevolence toward the de-
ceased merely, but when SO used it is
understood TO mean that reckless and
wicked disregard Of the lives and per-
sonal safety of others manifested by
those who Intentionally and wantonly
act wrongfully without any just cause
or excuse.
Malice aforelhought is either ex-
pressed or implied Express malice is
that malicious condition of the mind
which is manifested by outward acts, az,
for example, where, when q person has
been killed, the surrounding circum-
stances attending and characteriZing the
act OF killing, such as antecedent threats,
the use of poisons or other deadly
means, shows the prior existence OF 3
pfemeditated and deliberately formed
design on the part of the slayer TO do
such killing.
Implied malice is that condition of
mind which the law pres1mes or infers
10 exist from the taking of human life
without present provocation, by any will
full, deliberate, premeditated and cruel
act evincing such design.
You will now understand what con-
stitutes murder in the first degree, the
offense with which the defendant in this
case stands charged.
If you believe from the evidence that
the defendant at the time and place men,
toned in the information Wilfully,
knowingly and with malice aforethought
administered poison to Lorraine II. Keiger
with the intent then and thereby to
cause the death of the said Lorraine n.
KeigeF, and you further believe that the
said Lorraine NJ. Keiger died from and
because Of the effects of, such poison so
administered, you will find the defend
ant guilty as charged, otherwise you
will find her not guilty.
In the investigation which il is your
duty to make, to ascertain whether or
not the defendant is guilty of the Of
tense charged, you will constantly bear
in mind and be guided by the following
fixed and long established rules:
1. The burden of the proof rests upon
the prosecution and does not change OF
shift to the defendant in any view or
phase of the case.
2. The defendant is presumed 10 be
innocent of the charge made against
her; innocent Of every act alleged to
have been done, and innocent of the
guilty intent, and this presumption re-
mains and abides with her and furnishes
her with complete protection until her
guilt and every fact, element and ingre-
dent OF the crime with which she stands
charged has been established beyond q
reasonable doubt by the evidence in the
case
3. Before the guilt of defendant can
be said to be proven, beyond a reasona-
BILE doubt, all the facts proven must be
consistent with such guilt and incon-
sistent with any other reasonable con-
clusion.
4. The gentlemen of the jury are the
exclusive judges of the evidence, of its
weight and ofthe credibility of the wit
nesses. The law you will take from
these instructions.
In determining the credibility of the
witness you may consider the interest
such witness has in the result of the
suit, the bias of prejudice of such wit
nesses, if any, for or against the party
for whom such witness testifies the in
telligence, memories and powers of OBJ,
servation of such witness, his or her
manner of testifying, his or her appear
ance, and demeanor of the witness on
the stand and the general reasonable
ness and consistency of such witnesses
statement.
5. When any witness has testified
wilfully, cOrruptly and falsely to any
material fact the jury may disregard the
whole of such witnesses testimony or
any part thereof believing only so much
thereof, as may In the sight of all the
circumstances of the case seen to be
true.
The law presumes every adult person
| to be sane, and to intend the natural
and ordinary consequences of his or her
voluntary act.
1t is sometimes necessary TO resort to
circumstantial evidence in criminal
cases, and this kind of evidence is COM
petent and legal; and when it is of such
character to exclude every reasonable
conclusion other than the defendants
guilt it is entitled To as much weight
| as direct and positive proof. But few
facts, or a multitude of facts, even If
all consistent with the defendants guilt,
may not be sufficient.
The rule requires the jury to br sat
isf1ed of the defendants guilt beyond
reasonable doubt before a conviction
can be had, does not mean that every
link in the chain of circumstances
relied upon shall be established beyond
a reasonable doubt, but if, taking the
whole evidence together, the jury are
satisfied beyond a reasonable doubt
that the defendant is guilty beyond a
reasonable doubt, this will be sufficient.
If you believe from the evidence that
the diseased, Lorraine NJ. Keiger, died
from the effect of poison, and that such
Cd Sufa hry
hand, then you will find the defendant
not guilty. And, il upon full, fair and
conscientious consideration of all the
evidence in the case, you entertain a
reasonable doubt as to whether such
poison was administered by the defend
ant, or by the deceased, Lorraine NJ.
Keiger, you will find the defendant not
guilty.
By reasonable doubt is not meant a
mere fanciful or captious doubt. But
by it is meant doubt, founded on reason
and arising from the evidence. A doubt
such as leaves the mind of the juror,
after full, fair and conscientious con-
sideratIon and examination of all the
evidence in the case, in such a condition
of uncertainty that he cannot say that
his conscientious reason and judgment
is fully satisfied of the defendants guilt.
listen to the argument of counsel, who
will endeavor to aid you in reaching a
proper verdict by refreshing in your
minds the evidence and showing its ap-
plication to the law in the case, but in
your elaboration you will constantly
bear in mind that whatever counsel may
say, it is your duty to be governed by
the evidence as you understand it, and
by the law as given in these instruc-
tions. And in the performance of the
responsible duties devolving upon you
in this case you will exercise your most
| careful and conscientious judgment and
intelligence and render such a verdict
as you will hereafter be satisfied with.
If the evidence in this case satisfies
you beyond a reasonable doubt of the
defendants guilt, no considerations of
sympathy should deter you from so find
| ing, but unless you are 80 satisfied you
should without hesitation return yer.
dict of acquittal.
G. B. GRAVES, Judge.
The argument was then begun on the
prosecution by L. B. Kellogg, who spoke
until nearly six O'Clock. when the court
adjourned till seven O'Clock, it having
been agreed to hold
NIGHT SESSION.
Court was called to order before q
large audience of ladies and gentlemen,
and w. A. Randolph began the argu-
ment on the part of the defense, speak.
ing till half past 8. He was followed by
1. E. Lambert, also for the defense. al
the close of whose address court ad.
journed till
SATURDAY MORNING.
Late yesterday afternoon an order was
issued to Jailer Beers to confine the de-
PENDANT, Mrs. Martin, in a cell. Here
tofore she had been under watch and al
lowed to be with the family of the jail
CT. The defendant begged piteously to
be spared the close conine-
ment. This morning Mrs. Martin