Butler citizen. [volume] (Butler, Pa.) 1877-1922, 1884-01-30

While it was our duty to declare
| whether or not these so-called expert
witnesses showed themselves by their
calling or studies within the line OF
competency. this must not be taken as
a declaration on the part of the Court
that they were all or any to be relied
upon by the jury as to the justnese
of their conclusions.
The weight to be given to the testi
mony of these witnesses is question
solely for the jury There is no rule
of law which requires you to surren-
der your judgments implicitly to or
even to give controlling influence to
the opinions of scientific witnesses
however learned or accomplished they
may be- Their testimony is to be tried
by the same tests, and receive just 80
much weight and credit as you NAV
deem it entitled to, when viewed in
connection with all the circumstances
in evidence 1t is allowed for
the purpose of enlightening your
minds ind not for the purpose
of controlling your judgments
AS upon you rests the responsibility, of
rendering correct verdict, if the testi-
mony of these experts is opposed to
your own conviction of the truth, it is
your right to disregard their opinions.
In any case you should take into con-
sideration the experts means of knowl-
edge and the reasons he assigns for the
opinion he has given, and give or with
hold credence to the testimony as you
may find his qualifications and his rea-
sons satisfactory or otherwise. The
value of an opinion does not depend
upon the skill and knowledge which he
may profess, but upon the skill and
knowledge he actually possesses, and
of the accuracy of that knowledge the
jury must judge. 1t has been said
with great force and truth, that as a
general rule the evidence of witnesses
who are brought upon the stand to sup
port a theory by their opinions is just
ly exposed to certain degree of sus-
picion. They are produced not to
swear to facts observed by them, but
to express their judgment as to the ef-
feet of those detailed by others, and
they are selected on account of their
ability to express favorable opinion,
which there is reason to believe in
many instances is the result OF employ
ment alone and the bias arising out of
it. Such evidence should be cautious
ly accepted as the foundation of ver-
dict
SANITY PRESUMED IN ALL CASES.
The law presumes sanity in all cases
and therefore when the defense of in
sanity is set up as an answer to that
which would otherwise be criminal
offense, the defendant must establish
the fact by competent evidence. We
all know that the worst passions incl
sumo to certain extent the same form
manifested in certain phas of insanity
and that the actual line between pas
sion and insanity is by no means to be
clearly defined Yet it is the duty of
the Court and jury to determine in each
case as it may arise the tact of the re-.
sponsibility of the particular person on
trial, dependent upon the fact of insan-
ity, as best they can. You have al
ready heard an d seen enough in this
case to show you that this inquiry is a
most serious and difficult business for
us to engage in, but you and / must
meet it as best We can, using all proper
care uDder the circumstances to come
to correct and honest conclusion.
And now, gentlemen, having laid
down the law to you in regard to the
issues involved in this case 80 far as
the same seems to me necessary to
euable you properly to decide it, the
matter is to be left in your hands.
You must not forget that from first
to last that the law does not under any
circumstances justify private citizen
in taking it into his own hands by way
of punishment or revenge. No wrongs,
however great or aggravating, of .
character such as those alleged to have
been heaped upon the prisoner, bis
father, or the members of his family,
can operate as any legal excuse for the
killing of Dukes. And you must not
lose sight of the fact that all the evil
dence upon this point has been given
you solely for the purpose of throwing
light upon the condition of the prisoners
mind in regard to sanity at the time of
the shooting, and not directly nor indi-
rectly to establish legal justification of
the act And the jury must be careful
to discriminate between acts of mere
passion or revenge superinduced by
real or supposed wrongs and acts indi-
eating insanity, which they sometimes
80 closely resemble.
| You must not overlook the fact that
nothing short of diseased condition of
mind, which places the act of the
prisoner beyond his control, or his
power to resist its unlawful inclination
or impulse, will constitute defense to
that which would be an unlawful
killing.
Assuming the fact of the killing of
Dukes in this case, as shown by the
evidence, this is the controlling and
sole question, and to it you are bound
to give your solemn consideration, for
upon its determination depends the
conclusion as to the legal guilt or inno-
cence of the prisoner, and in case you
should acquit him you must state in
your verdict that you do so upon the
ground of insanity.
If James Mutt has not, under the
evidence, shown by the fair weight of
the testimony that at the time he shot
Dukes and thus brought aboat his
death he was legally irresponsible, by
reason OF insanity, he should be con-
victed of some degree of criminal homi-
eide.
But if you should think, in view of
all the evidence adduced before you,
that it fairly predominates in favor Of
;nson;ty. in otbar words fairly lasds