The prison mirror. [volume] (Stillwater, Minn.) 1887-1894, 1889-09-26
Circumstantfal Evidence in Murder
Cases.

Circumstantial Evidence in Murder
Cases.
One of the most remarkable instances of
unjust conviction of crime by force of cir
cumstantial evidence is that furnished in
the case of Timothy O'Grady, which is re-
ported as having just been discovered at
Chicago.
With the single excepting circumstance
that the bullet found in the dead pol ce-
mans body was much larger than that
carried by O'Grady's pistol. everything
went to justify the evidence of conviction.
The line of proof in the case, briefly
stated. is as follows: The policeman who
lost his life was in pursuit of prisoner
through an alley-way when he was killed
by a shot from a pistol. The prisoner was
arrested and a pistol found in his posses
sion. He was brought before the dying
policeman and identified as the man who
did the shooting. The dead mans cOmpan-
iOn-alsO police Otficer-testiied at the
trial to the prisoners guilt. The prisoner
totally denied the shooting and refused to
plead self defense. Conviction was inevi.
table, Notwithstanding the circumstance of
was sentenced to seventeen years imprisOn-
ment for manSlaughter.
Had the attorneys who represented
O'Grady on the trial not pursued their in
vestigatiOns into his guilt or innocence, it
is without doubt that he would have spent
the period of his sentence in Jail. He had
barely escaped hanging. The man who
really committed the murder is hardened
criminal to whom the fate of an innocent
man is as nothing. He would never have
voluntarily confessed his guilt.
A good deal of disagreement exists as to
the force to be attached to circumstaptial
evidence. Within few days in Chicago a
judge on the bench declared his entire con-
currence in the statement that the same
force ought to be given to circumstantial
evidence that would be given to positive
evidence. even in case involving human
life. Very many intelligent persons will
disagree with this view. Each successive
murder trial discovers numbers of intelli-
gent men who are disqualified for service
as jurors because they are unwilling to con-
vict any man on circumstantial evidence
alone.
1t is hard to draw the line. In the very
nature of the crime of murder the proof of
guilt must be largely if not entirely circum-
Stantial. But the chain of circumstances
ought to be complete and ought to be utterly
inconsistent with the innocence of the pris-
oner. No one will now deny that the fail
ure of proof in this case, represented by
the defect in the link which should bind
the prisoners pistol and the bullet in the
dead mans body, was fatal one. and that
the Jury'S verdict was unwarranted by the
facts. But where the overwhelming pre-
pOnderance of circumstances 60 to leave no
doubt whatever of guilt it is hard for the
average mind to sanction what may be a
failure of justice simple because a single
circumstance possible OF explanation al
though unexplained. is not satisfactorily
established.
In such cases the working out of justice
ought to be as much the work of the court
and prosecuting attorney as for the defend
ants counsel. Too much credence should
not be put in the testimony of police
officers in such cases. Professional zeal
and the feeling often of personal injury
naturally carry the officer beyond the limit
of disinterestedness. If the prosecuting
officer who is not himself satisfied of guilt
or of the sufficiency of proof. would in such
cases refuse to ask conviction, or if the
court. having its own doubts, were not
often over scrupulous in the expression of
them. many of the unjust Convictions OF
crime which we hear about would be i'm
! possible. st. Paul Daily Dispatch.