The Stark County Democrat. [volume] (Canton, Ohio) 1833-1912, 1892-12-22
NO ELEMENTS
OF SELF DEFENSE IN THE oBERNEsssR
CASE,

ragged by Verdict Of Lesser Degree Of
Crime.
The Obernesser case, which came TO
close at 8 o'clock Thursday evening by tue
bringing In of verdict against tue pris-
oner for murder in the second degree.
was one of the shortest murder trials ever
held in the Stark coun'y court house.
The case did not begin until Moudsy
afternoon but everything had been made
ready by Prosecutor Bow and there was
no delay after the machinery OF justice
had been started. The states witnesses
were examined by IL o'clock wednesday
morning and the testimony in the defense
consumed only about an hour. The adv
dresses to the jury took up about seven
hours' time but the jury was not long IN
settling the matter of the verdict. The
case was given Ii at ten minutes before
o'clock and at seven minute1 betore
o'clock q rap upon the Jury room door tolu
that an agreement had been reached.
The prisoner was brought toto court aud
the Jury tn came in and the foreman,
Charles Bertolett, handed the Verdict 70
Clerk Coxen who read the decree that Will
send Robert Obernesser to the peniten'
tiary for life. os,.
The verdict was reached upon the hIth
ballot. Tho flrst ballot stood hve Tor
guilty of murder in the first degree and
seven for murder in the second degree.
The second, third and fourth ballots stood
ten for murder in the second degree aad
two for murder in the first degree. Upon
the fifth ballot the two came over ana
twelve votes were cast for the verdict
rendered.
When the clerk read the result of the
jury's work Obernesser never moved
muscle but mauifested the same spirit OF
unconcern he has maintained throughout
the trial, as If hs did not care anything
about tbe case anyhow. The judge thank
n ~. T.. H.. ~ nd of nj n
work and discharged ii from further
work.
The verdict was upon all hands consid-
cred to be Just one in the light OF Tie
facts in the case and everybody seemed to
be satisfied. Prosecutor Bow put up an
excellent case for the state and Messrs
Harter and Rice defended their client
with ability and good judgment.
This is the last of the fifteen cases IN
which indictments were returned by the
grand juries Tor this term OF courS. La
every case the defendant either pleaded
guilty or was convicted upon trial. stark
county SENDS fourteen convicts TO Coium-
bus as the result OF this term OF court
with sentences ranging from one year TO
life Imprisonment, there beng TWO OF the
latter kind.
oBERNESSER'S STATEMENT.
At 1915 o'clock this morping Robert
Obernesser was brought into court for
beuttuCts UuORb LdyAOt was " e-lNLA uESAi
the bench, and Attorneys Harter and Rice
and Prosecutor Bow were present.
The cou issl for the defense were sntis'
fled WITH the verdict, and did not desire
to file a motion for new trial, so Prose
cutor Bow at once asked that the court
p IS sentence. The prosecutor had noto-
ing additional to ray on behalf OF the
Ptate, and Mr.. Harter for the defense re-
fsrred only to Ene fact that the law lett
no discretionary power with the court Ia
passing sentence. The judge then re-
quesled Oberness7r to stand up, and
asked him If he had anything to sa! why
the sentence of the law should not be
pronounced upon hlm.
For the first time since the beginning OF
the trial did the young uuuruerer now
show any feeling or any degree OF interest
or concern in the proceedings. lie Is
suffering from q severe cold aud with
wrists manaCled with handouts be arose
and walk Il up to the table III front OF TIE
Judges bench so that he could be heard,
ne placed his hands upon the table 10
front of him, looked up into the eyes OF
the court aud said: ~ have been con-
victed OF murder. l am guilty OF taking
humaa bein2's life out do not believe |
deserve punishment for murder IN thH
second degree. l believe l was in such
condition at that time that dId not know
what l was doing and was not responsible
for my acts. l have nothing further to
say"
NO PATIENCE WITH SELF DEFENSE.
Judge Taylor then proceeded to pass
sentence. la alludinS to the case he con
suTed the conduct of all who were III the
Greub saloon at the time tue murder was
done, for being in suCn drunken resort
at such an untlmely hour, ana ne hoped
that this case would be lesson to all
young men 20 beware OF such Il mode OF
life, as il inevitably lsada to ruin. He sold
the trial had been fair, the prosecutor
gentlernanIy and kind in his prosecution,
and able counsel had been assigned tho
defendant who ably defended him. But
the testimony showed guilt and the jury
could not but find a verdict OF guilty.
Under the law and the facts they
found the lowest verdict they could
and had they done leGs IL would have been
an outrage upon society. The judge said
that the court had endeavored 10 be fair
in his charge but that he had no patience
with the theory Of self defense, that he
did not believe there was an element OF
self, defense in the case and that the jury
so found. he said that IL was possible,
however, that everybody who wos in that
saloon YVES so drunk that they could not
tell exactly what did happen. he hoped
that should the prisoner ever Ge psrioned
he would lead a very different life and
giving him the benefit Of what little disc
cretionary power he had the jGdgo asid he
need not be placed in solitary contine'
ment, but sbuuid be Imprisoned ia the
penitentisry and Kept at pard labor during
the period of his natural life.
MR.. HARTER's NOVEL DOCTRINE.
The Cleveland Press of Dec. Is ssys OF
the attorneys for the defenso ia the OoeET
nesser case:
James A. Rice for the defense made
feryent appeal to the jury's humanity.
Henry Harter in closing tor the defense,
it is said by we'll Informed barristers,
made the greatest argument, solely upon
the points OF The law in the case, that has
been made ia this county at a murder trial
for years.
lei may be Of interest to add that Mr..
Harter urged an entirely novel doctrine
of criminal Law, which tho court, after
an examin alton OF the authorities, chaTg-
ed as requested. The following isthe re-
quest:
Where the defendant claims that bis
alleged unlawful act was done IN self de-
fense, the burden is on the defendant 10
prove that what he did wac done in self
defense In all cases where he so elaine,
vet when the evidence on both sides Is
closed, he 10 entitled to verdict or not
guilty of murder in the fret degree; N,
having gone into said defense, he has Of
fered proof enough to cast reasonable
doubt on the averments Of premeditation
and deliheration, although he may not
have offered sufficient proof to satisfy the
jury that he did act In self defense.