The great West. [volume] (St. Paul, Minn.) 1889-18??, 1893-11-03

would have consdarahle weight with me selected Is juror
opinion possess like every
guilty; don't know
papers, Now feeling take very positive
think guilty. should acqu thm that
the evidence would permit Probably
take the testimony alone" = Il
O. you say positive
fore you could them not guilty.
A. Yes I should want strong evidence.
O. Well that evidence their introduce
ed, then want to convict them OF course?
A Certainly
He was then challenged ground being prdcd
nterogate and finally that he
fairly the evidence alone then the challenge
was
importer testified that preudioed; formed
expressed opinions and still held them He challenged
proceeded him LENGTH and finally
O. you your evidence
proved failed will be all affected what anybody
said wrote about the matter before?
/ A. believe they would.
hearing other yet e1amned exclaimed
cit incomprehensible The
history the world present debauched udge?
FmH.]
B. Ames dealer in hats CAPS stated that was prudced
grounds
to saw that could without regard his pre
dice persisted saying questions
that he could
that alone make up his mind as to the guilt or the
Thereupon presence jurors
examined lectured him follows:
Why not What to prevent your listening to the evidence and
It'll Why listen to the evidence
your mind on itT
Bogardus,
Haymark trouble had formed opinion
guilt the defendants
don't believe that could them fair
proof would strong proof
hardly think that could bring proof enough change
opinion" challenged on the ground of prejudice
Then took him in hand and after lengthy examination
him &c" think can fairly and mpartay render verdict this
case accordance with the law and the evidence"
l Then the challenge overruled.
for defendants then asked the juror further questions
replied II would pretty strong testimony
opinion present time STILL think could independent my
OF would have to strong to change opinion
think the defendants for what occurred at the Haymar
meeting preponderah thevdnce would
of the defendants innocence with me-
challenge renewed when the
in the Of UT Every fairly intelligent and
when question originally for him
upon OF information will in opn
instead harsay that he heard before
The then proceeded again the and
saying did believe he could the
fair trial, finally discharged.
These examinations specimens
cusivey Ryce
Nearly called stated that he had
the
expressed opinion the guilt
pudd against them that that
require prejudice
great many they pointed by en-
poyers Many stated frankly that they
ved the be guilty
by strong poofs having
examined the
saw that he would the fairly the evidence produced
court and whenever brought point
competent juror defendants obliged exhaust their
eng declared court that they preudced
/ believed the defendants to be guilty
THE TWELVE WHO TRIED THE CASE.
jurors finally accept
of them stated canddy that
pudd could the fairly but each when xam
that he believed
that produced
Example:
Theodore Denker shipping Henry
the
opinion to the guilt innocence the
Indictment believe
and heard, still entertain that opinion"
c. opinion such from rendering
under testimony
law?
Il A.
challenged prejudice Then
him finally
could fairly the law the evidence