Butte semi-weekly miner. [volume] (Butte, Mont.) 1886-1890, 1888-11-17

had testified that when Reardon was
knocked down he fell on his side and was
leaning on his elbow looking up in Martins
face when Martin shot. One Of them said
he shot down, while another swore that
he put the revolver under Reardon's head
| and shot up. If Reardon were leaning on
his elbow and looking up in Martins face,
Mr.. Mcbride pointed out, it was impossible
for Martin to have shot him so that the
| ball entered the back of Reardon's head.
He theu adverted to the testimony OF
Drs. Lesser and Snyder proving the loca-
| ton of the bullet hole and the course OF the
| bullet in the brain which they located an
| inch from the median line lodging between
| the eyes. From this he argued it more
reasonable to believe that the bullet-ho!e
| was made in the manner described by Mar
| tin than in the way the prosecutions wit
nesses testiiei. He made a point on the
testimony OF one OF the witnesses for the
prosecution who, after describing the deed
as one of the most cold-blooded and in
human ever committed, said he left Rear
don to 60 and see if Martin gave himself
up. The idea of supposing that a man who
had committed such a deed would give
himself up when he would most naturally
endeavor to escape justice, was enlarged
upon and the testimony of this witness dis
credited by his own admission.
Mr. McBride reminded the jury that no
witnesses had been introduced to testify
to Reardon's good character. A cloud of
witnesses had been brought. forward to
prove Martins character. Mr.. Mcbride
dwelt strongly on these considerations,
and that Martin supported his family and
his aged mother, aud was a good member
of society up to the time OF this occur
renee, and concluded by saying it would
not only be a loss to these parties, but a
loss to society to bring in a verdict against
him.
Mr.. Haldorn followed closing for the de-
fence in g good speech in which he dwelt
more on the sympathetic features OF the
case and made Il strong appeal to the feel
ings OF the jTry.
Mr.. Durfee closed for the prosecution. He
called attention to thefact that the mur',e r
had been seen and testified to by six I'M
Improbable witnesses. The only con-
Trajectory evidence was that OF the defend.
ant and that itself c~ontradicted the defense.
keep an occurrence, such as the
defense alleged between her and Rear
don, from her husband over a
night and then tell him next morning.
Martin himself testified that he was not
excited in his interview with Reardon.
Mr.. Durfee pointed out the inconsistency
and unreasonableness Of %supposing that a
man so excitable as Martin was described
to be, after being told by his wife of the
assault, should 60 and, as Martin himself
described it, calmly call out ReardOn from
the saloon and then, seeing his condition,
propose to take him home and put him in
bed. This in the lace OF a circumstance
calculated to arouse any insanity in his
nature. He commented on the evidence
showing the weakness of the temporary in
sanity theory. On the contrary, Martins
own evidence showed that he was cool and
calm.
Judge De Wolfe then read his instructions
to the jury, Of which only a synopsis can
be given.
THE INSTRUCTIONS
directed the jury first to satisfy themselves
to the facts in the case and then went on
to define the meaning of the term murder
and what acts were essential to constitute
it. II the Jury found that the killing was
done unlawfully and with Fermentation
and malice a~forethought, then they had to
determine what degree of murder it was.
The usual instructions followed as to this
and the jury advised as to how they should |
a conclusion as to the degree of MUIR
de-. Instructions as to ~manslaughter fol- |
together with all the weight the jury
were to give to doubt. The jury were also
instructed as to iustifiable homicide.
Instructions on the subject of sanity fol- |
Every man is presumed sane until
the contrary is shown. The evidence must |
show that the defendant was |
insane before he can be acquitted on that
The
DEFINITION CT INSANITY
which was very full and liberal to |
the prisoner. The Judge told the jury that
they must determine from all the evidence
whether the defendant was insane and if so
whether that insanity caused him to kill
Patrick Reardon if he. did kill him. But
+ they found beyond a reasonable doubt
that the defendant was sane and that he
became angry with t1e deceased for some
'eal or imaginary injury anu killed the de-
willfully, deliberately, premedit-
ttedly and maliclousiy to avenge such in
ury, then he is guilty Of murder in the first
legree and the jury should 80 find him by
heir verdict.
CHAhACIEhs
The Judge, in speaking OF character,
aid: "Some evidence has been offered as
the character of the deceased Patrick
as a man of violence and quar-
character. This evidenc, was
ompetent and admissible, and should he
AIKEN into consideration by you in deter
niping whether at the time of killing (f
'ou find he was killed) Reardon was the
of defendant and made an 8s-
ault on him with a deadly weapon suffi-
lent to produce in his mind as d reasona-
lie man fear OF losing his life or danger of
reat bodily harm, and the defendant act.
ng as a reasonable man in view of the
anger or apparent danger in which he was
killed the deceased. but the char
,cter OF the deceased, whether peaceable
r otherwise, does not find
ANY EXCUSE OR JUSTIFICATION
Dr. the defendant in killing him (f you find
eyond a reasonable doubt that he did
i'll him) unless su:h killing was done in ;
ecessary self-defense as defined in these
lstructions." ,
Evidence as to good character was not
to overcome positive evidence of
he defendants guilt. l
The jury were then instructed as to the +
enlistment attaching to the various /
egrees OF crime. The prosecution had +
instructions. /
The defense gave twenty Instructions !
aging most stress On the insanity theory !
lacing it in every pc -sible light before tire /
by which they should give the defend /
Mt the benefit Of the evidence introduced. ,
homicide was thea enlarged upon =
every light favorable to the defendant. +
the jury hau 7
REASONABLE DOUBT {
s to whether the death Of Reardon was .
lused by the bullet wound they were to r
cquit him, and also il they thought the J
.ound was produced accidentally it was C
leir duty to acquit him. That a man is {
OF required to wait until his adversary is =
sady to fire at him, but he should fore g