The Stark County Democrat. [volume] (Canton, Ohio) 1833-1912, 1883-03-07

slaughter.
DID the defendant take the life of
Augustine McMillenp That Is the first
question for you TO determine. We
have been many days investigating, but
you are to-day 10 take such testimony
as has been permitted to go to you.
That becomes your material to deter
mine the grave question involved in
this case. 1t would uot be proper, even
II desired to do so, to express any
opinion with regard TO the guilt or in
nUcence of this defendant. The Lestt-
mony presented to you in this case is
entirely at your disposal You are to
look AT it and see what Important and
material facts there are affecting the
life of this individual. need not urge
on you the Importance of the grave
questions involved in this case. need
not speak here, or review this testimony
except, perhaps, to Call your attention
10 some of the features OF 1t for the
purpose OF arousing your attention and
challenging your obsel walton.
have said to you that the burden OF
proof rests, In this case, npou the
State, and that burden remains
with the State until its hnRl close,
until your duties have been discharged,
when your verdict i5 returned. nave
already said 1t iS necessary that you
find that Augustine McMll en- was kill
ed. 1t is alleged in The indictment that
she was killed with a pistol shot, with
q leaden bullet. 1t is said that she was
in her usual health at the time, You
hre to look at that. Was that pistol
shot the cause of her deathp You
have heard the testimony and from the
proof yon are to hnd If the pistol shot
was the cause of death, because if she
died in some other manner, If she died
with some disease, If she died In any
other way, as jurors in tins case you
could not find him guilty of producing
her death. These matters are for you
to hnd, and you must find them from
the proof, If you tind them at all. Did
she come to her death by that pistol
shot, and who fred that pistol shot
Much has been said to you, gentle
men, in regard TO the matter of circunn-
stantial evidence, both on the part OF
the defense and on the part of the State,
and 1t is intimated on the part of
the defense that circumstantial
evidence Is 10 entirely unreliable and
unsafe that il would be unsafe to find
q person guilty charged with the COM
mission OF the high ofense of
murder upon circumBtalItihl evil
dence.- Egloence which Is recOs
Direct, is called direct. where the wit
nesses see or hear or know OF their own
senses as TO q fact or act being done,
Fhls is called direct evidence. Circam-
sCantial evidence t5 that which
may exclude the eye witness
and noWledge of hearing or
touching or any of the means OF
direct evidence and goes to the circum-
stances. Experiences has shown that
circumStAntiAl evidence may be Of
cred in such u case; that sis,
that body of facts may
be proved OF as conclusive q character
to warrant u firm belief Of the fact,
quite as strong and certain aB that on
which dlscrete men are accustomt d to-
ACT In relation to their most important
concerns. What took place is ascer-
tanned by looking at all the circum,
stances: what was said, what was acted,
inga serve for the purpose OF determin-
ing the circumstsnLlaI proof.
And ! will say to you that under our
laws, clrcumstantial evidence Is as
often and perhaps oftener relied upon
for the purpose of arriving at y just
and safe conclusion as direct testimony.
1t Ii just as obligatory upon you to OBJ
serve and weigh that class OF testimony
us direct testimony in any given case.
Was this " imam shot by v pistol shot
and with q leaden bulletp Was that
OOA4AoAOA
by the state that the defendant did this
act. 1t Is not claimed that anybody
saw him do 1t. / will here call your
attention TO this. that nearly all Of the
grave offenses committed are committed
In secret. They are done 80 with the
vi " OF avoiding and eludin@d detection,
which would be another reason why
circumstantial evidence should be re-
sorted TO, and IL thiB kind OF evidence
k,sal cd lor ouT. .eff g
the great criminalB, and those charged
with grave offensee, would escape pun.
ishment.
Now, what are the circumstances in
this case, as claimed by the State. 1t is
claimed by the State that in the night
tune, in the neighborhood of one or two
o'clock, the defendant and his wife
were up stairs with those three little
children. 1t is claimed by the State,
that the defendant went to that room
with his wife. will ask you to look
at that testimony and see whether any
other person, in the light OF the proof,
was in that room, at twelve, one or two
o'clock. Were any there except the
defendant and his wife and the three
little ones, previous to thia homicide ?
call your attention to the proof on
that subject, and you should see II there
is any proof showing that any other
peT8Ou W6ub luIO buAI IOOnus IL LnSE6 10
any proof upon that part of the case,
you are TO be the judges Of 1t. It'is
claimed by the State that while the wife
lay sleeping, the defendant discharged
his pistol into her brain that afterwards
he went from the house. It is claimed
ny the State that for the pupOse Of elud-
ing detection and misleading obserVa-
tion, he imposed q self-inflicted wound.
Now, IL you find in the testimony that
no other person went into that room,
except the defendant, wife and little
children, and II you should find that he
fred that shot and left the room, and
imposed that self-inflicted wound, seri-
Ous consequences may follow. will say
to you, and all can say to you, Is that
the law recognizes the fact where i'm
mediately following the commission Of
a crime, when lf-Infiicted wounds are
made and false outcry Is made with the
view ofcasting suspicion Of the offence
upon others. 1t Is a badge OF crime, and
1t should be so regarded by you.
I 1t Is claimed on the part Of the de-
fense that this injury was not inflicted
by this defendant upon himself; that he
did not discharge that pistol into che
brain Of that sleeping wife. but instead
| the defense claims that all they know
/ ahouf that Ia firat that aOfnahodv ann