Wood River times. [volume] (Hailey, Idaho) 1882-1915, 1882-10-25
THE LAW OF MURDER.
III Is DEFINED BY HIS HONOR
JUDGE PRICKETT.

the Ease Against GeOrge PiersOn, for
killing Johnny Behind. the, Rocks
what Constitutes Murder, What Man.
slaughter.-The Verdict.
The trial of George Pierson, the
husband Of Banjo Nell, for killing
John Hall, better known as johnny
Behind-the- Rocks, was concluded
yesterday, by the return of verdict
OF murder in the first degree, the jury
having been out only fifteen min
utes. The evidence in the case was
positive, three witnesses testifying
that Person fired the fatal shot at
Hall while the latter was running
away.
Following were the instructions Of
the Court:
If you find from the evidence that
the defendant killed the deceased in
necessary self-defensc, or in the neces-
sary defense of his hahitation while
the deceased was manifestly endea-
voring or.intending to commit IA felony,
or that he killed the deceased while
he was manifestly intending aud en-
deavoring in a violent, riotous or tu-
multuous manner to enter the habta-
ton OF defendant for the purpose of
assaultlng or Offering personal violence
to any person dwelling or being there
in, the killing was justitiable, and you
should acquit; but bare fear that the
deceased was about to commit anv Of
the oflenses above named, is not sufl-
Gent to justify the killing. 1t must
appear that the circumstances were
sufficient to excite the fears of rea-
sonable person, and that the defend
ant really acted under the influence of
those fears, and not in a spirit of re-
venge.
If you find from the evidence that
the defendant was the assailant, and
that he killed the deceased in revenge
for acts previously done by the de-
ceased, he is guilty of murder, and if
the killing was so done. with delibera-
ton, reconciliation and malice afore-
thought, he is guilty of murder in the
J first degree.
If you find from the evidence that
+ the defendant was justified under the
rules Of law given above, in firing the
first shot, but that after such shot had
been fired by defendant the deceased
Hail retreatcd, and all danger from
i him was over; and that while the de-
ceased was so retreatlng, and all dan
ger from him being over, the defend
ant pursued him and fired upon him.
thereby iniilcting the mortal wound
then the defendant is guilty.
! Evidence of threats made by the
> deceased against the life of the de-
PENDANT, not communicated, is not al
t mitted for the purpose of proving OIL
e showing a right in the defendant te
:, attack and kill the deceased, withou,
any hostile demonstration by the de.
= ceased; but if there is any question ir
: the minds Of the jury as to which par
ty, i'll an encounter, was the assailant
5 then, i'll determining that question
n the jury may properly consider eyi.
4 dence OF threats made by the deceased
although not communicated to the de.
! tenGant.
;, Threats made by the de.
fendant-if you find any to have beer
/ NADIA gainst the life Of the deceased
may also be considered for the same
e purpose.
: Murder is the unlawful killing of 8
y human being, with malice aforethought
+ The malice may be either expressed
or implied. Expressed malice is that
5 deliberate intention to take away the
e life of fellow.ereature, which is man
:, Tested by external circumstances ca
:, pable of proof, and malice is always te
be implied, when all the circumstance.
I OF the killing show an abandoned anl
1 malignant heart.
T. There cah be no murder withou
q malice aforethought. 1t is therefore
Of primary Importance for the jury t.
determine whether the killing wa
Il done maliciously, and whether or no
= the fatal act was done under the in
d fluence Of that malice.
1t If the killing was done Intentionally
Q and was not justi6able or excusable
: it was maliciously done within tn
: meaning of the law.
. If you find, from the evidence, tina
st the deceased was killed by the defend
n ant, and that such killing was dom
re with malice aforethought, and deliber
y " ately, with generalization, he is guilt.
=" of murder in the first degree.
Under the indictment in this case
you can find the defendant guilty .
murder in the first degree, murder il
If the second degree, or of manslaughter
y, and in case you find him guilty, yo'
will snecifY the deoree in which yol