Daily Los Angeles herald., 1882-04-21
THE COUCH CASE.
The Question Of Insanity TO bs Tried by a
Jury.

By reference to our report of the
Superior Court proceedings yester.
day it will be seen that Judgs Sc
pulveda, in the case Of the People
vs.. Nicholas Couch, convicted of
manslaughter for killing Smith
Crabtree, denied the motion of de-
feudaDt for new trial. The Judge,
however, as one of the grounds
upon which the application was
made is the insanity of Couch, or.
dered venre to iseue for forty
Jurors 10 Try him OH that point.
Should the defendant be found to
be sane, he will be sentenced forth
with for mansiaughter. But,
should the jury pronounce him liz
sane, he will be com mitted 10 the
Napa Asylum and when cured he
will be brought back to this Court
for sentence to the State Prisor.
Either result will, we should
think, be rather embarrassing to
Couch. Below we publish the af.
fidavit upon which the allegation
of insanity is founded.
In superior Court of Los Angeles
County, California.
Dr,nrN OE SnInn on CATN
IFoRNIA vs..
NICHOLAS COUCH.
STATE OF CALIFORNIA. GO
County OF Los Angeles, ! Do
H. B. Latbfop being duly sworn
says: am and for the past ten
years have been practicing ply
sician, aud am graduate of Long
leland College Hospital, Brooklyn,
New York know the defendant,
Nicholas Couch; l was converslng
with Il. B, Brown, Esq /, District
Attorney of Los Angeles county,
before or during the trial Of said
Couch, on April 10, 1882, and he
said to me, II wish you would see
Nicholas Couch, now in jail" l
afterwards went TO the Superior
Court of Los Angeles county, Cali
fornia, during the said trial and
| heard the testimony of some OF the
witnesses in the case, and heard all
the evidence OF defendant himself;
| listened with the greatest atten-
ton to what was said by defend.
ant, l noticed his peculiar appear
ance, and more peculiar manner;
the constant motion of his hands
aud body, his department and ap.
parent indifference to his situs-
ton often indicative OF an un-
sound mind, AID from all that
saw there and then | was led to
the conclusion that the defendant
was then laboripg from some kind
OF mental disease. Since the said
trial / have visited and converssd
with defendant in the jail of Los
Angeles county, and the belief
heretofore mentioned was strength
ened by said interview. there.
fore unhesitatiDgly state it as my
belief, founded on what [ have
seen and heard, that Nicholas
Couch was, on the 4th day Of Jan.
uary, 1882. and ever since has been
and now Is, of unsound mind and
su ffsriDg from certain mental dis
order called dementia. [ have
never communicated to defendant
the above named matters, and
only communicated the same Oh
any part thereof to the attorneys
of defendant after the said trial
and this I did voluntarily without
having had any opinion previous
ly asked by said attorneys; l made
this affidavit, as l made the sale
Statement to defendants attorneys
in the interests OF common hu.
mainly and because do not wist
to zee man Of upsoupd mind pun,
ished for crime for which he II
not, in my opinion, morally Oh
legally responsible. L have giver
special attention to the subject o
insanity; | have read all the i'm
pOrtant works on that subject
have been frequently called upon
in different courts, in various
cases, to testify as an expert ii
matters Of insanity, and from my
experience, study and observation
l know That am qualified to tes'
tify as an expert on all question
touching insanity.
HENRY B. LATHRoP.
Sworn and subscribed before me
this 18th day Of April, 1882
w. ID. STEPHENSON,
Notarv Public.