Omaha daily bee., 1885-07-09
DOOMED TO Die,
Thomas Ballard Found Guilty Of Nor
der in The First Degree.
Judge Neville's Charge to the jury
How the Verdict was Received
by Rehabilitation for
a New Trial.

/ Wdb Whhb REG0bCu AiODuho DaAioAu . Ohh
yesterday afternoon, when the jury re.
turned, after having been out thre
hours celebrating on his case. Such
verdict under the laws Of Nebrssk,
means death to the guilty patty, unles
1t can be set aside. And yesterday wa
the first time that "guilty Of murder Ii
the first degree" had ever been heard t.
ring through the rooms, halls and corri
doris Of the new temple.
Court wss convened at $50 o'clock
and District Attorney Estelle proceeded
to make the closing speech of the argu
ment. He talked about one hour and
half. Those who heard him say that hi
effort was a grand n and reflects grea
credit on him ss a pleader and an orator
AT the conclusion of bis remarks Judge
Neville gave the jury their instructions
He said:
The defendant is indicted and charged
thereby. with the crime of murder In the
first degree by shooting n Henry III.
Verpoorten.
Then the statutory provisions under
which murder In the frat degree, MUIR
der In the second degre and granddaughter
are prosecuted, were read. After that,
his honor continued In substance as
follows:
You are instructed that the defendant
In o criminal prosecution is presumed to
be innocent until proven guilty beyond q
.s..~zL1o Io,,Lk n-I LoFa,o A. .l.lz
can Justly claim q conviction the state
mu.t satisfy you beyond a reasonable
doubt of the truth of each material allie
CATION In the indictment by competent
evidence aud circumstances In the case.
Murder In the first degree Is defined
by our statute which l have given you In
my second instruction and the definition
there given by our ~law.maklpg power Is
so plain and concise that l fear confusion
In attempting further definition than o
short repetition: Should you find that
Henry M. Verpoorten was alive in
Douglas county on the 10Th day of
March, 1885, that sald Verpoorten is now
dead, that he died from an injury from
the hands of some one other than him.
self, that he came to his death by a
wound in the left side inflicted by a
bullet discharged from q pistol, that the
defendant discharged the pistol and
Inflicted the wound of which said
Verpoorten died, If you are
satisfied of the truth of all the above
stated facts beyond a reasonable doubt,
then 1t becomes your duty from the evil.
dence to hunt for a motive and design on
the part of the defendant; and If you,
from the evidence, beyond o reasonable
doubt. find that the defendant purposely,
with elaboration and generalization, and
with malice deliberate and premeditated,
did the killing, then you should find de-
PENDANT guilty of murder In the frat
degree.
To do an act purposely Is to do 1t do.
slgnedly, Intentionally and with a will.
To premeditate Is to mediate before
hand upon the intended act, and In this
element the crime of murder, like that of
deliberatlop, no considerable time Is
necessary for generalization.
There is one additional element for
you to consider, and which element must
be present In the defendants mind and
act, before you can find murder Ia the
first degree, and that Is malice. Malice
Is hatred. 1t Is manifested In the mind
by ill-will and a desire to injure another.
Where the fact of the killing is astab-
lished without any explanatory clrcum-
stance, malice Is presumed, and 1t would
be murder In the second degree, but If
the evidence established the fact of DELHI.
crate and premeditsted malice, then the
offense Is murder in the first degree If the
killing was Intentionally, purpogely and
unlawfully done.
When the defense Is insanity the de-
PENDANT must In the first instance produce
some evidence of such insanity and If
any evidence tending to show insanity
is produced by the defendant then the
burthen of showing sanity of defendant
at the time of killing is upon the state.
You are instructed that If you are sat.
is6ed from the evidence that the defen-
dant was at the time of the killing insane
aside from being under the influence of
liquor then you should acqult the defen-
dant of all three of the grades of crimi-
nal homicide and turn him loose. If he
was at the time Insane he can't be con-
sldered of any otfense whatever.
The defendant says he was Insane at
the time of the killing and claims that
excuse from the crime, the crime in all
Its grades, which he Is entitled to if he
was insane, Lunatics are not punished
by the law for their conduct however in
furious huce acts may be to others. But
where the test of criminal responsibility
where insanity is made a defense. is, |
''did the accused at the time of the kill |
Ing of Verpooten have mental capacity
or reason sufficient to enabla him to dis
tingulsh between right and wrong and to
know that the act with which he is
charged was wrong and had he sufficient
mental power to enable him to avoid
committing the act of killing
II, after a careful consideration of the
defense of insauisy, you shall conclude
beyond a reasonable doubt that defend
ant was sane at the time Of the killing,
or that he conld distinguish between
right and wrong as to said act of killing,
and desist from the same, then you
should turn your attention to the defense
Of intoxication.
Voluntary intoxlcation Is no excuse
for crime, but on the trial of one charged
with the crime of murder In the frat de-
gree, the jury may consider the intoxlca-
ton with other evidence In ascerrainlng
whether the killing wss deliberate and
p~remeditated.
If the defendant, with deliberate and
premeditated malice, purposely and In.