The Pacific commercial advertiser. [volume] (Honolulu, Hawaiian Islands) 1885-1921, 1894-07-28

| alleged offense of having opium un-
lawfully in possession, they had no
/ right TO kill defendant if he resisted
| unless in their own self defense.
The 9Th, 7th and oCh | refuse.
9Th. II you find there was an as
sault made by defendant upon hau-
hane, it Is Unsuitable if the defendant
had reasonable grounds 10 believe and
did honestly believe that ii was neceS-
| sarv 10 preserve his life or 10 prevent
great bodily injury. II the act was
committed under a reasonable fear
bv defendant of great bodily harm, or
if il appeared TO defendant that he
might be III danger OF great bodily
harm, the killing was justitiable, but
not so if the means used were out OF
proportion TO the force used upon him.
The 10th, Eth, 18th, 18th and 18th
are refused.
18th. Not only must the jury be
satisfied beyond a reasonable doubt
that defendant killed kauhane with
| malice aforethought aud not in self
| defense, but the jury must also be sat
iSfied beyond reasonable doubt that
the cause of death was the cut inflicted
| by the defendant, and this cut must
| have been the immediate and not the
| remote cause of death.
| 18th. The uucontrajicted evidence
! is that the wound was not necessarily
| mortal, but that on the other hand, was
| a wound most unlikely 10 cause death.
! 1t is therefore necessary for you TO
| trace with more than ordinary care
| the cause of death. 1t is not sufficient
| that you cannot discover the cause OF
| death. You must be satisfied beyond
| a reasonable doubt that death resulted
| in consequence of the wound inflicted
| by the defendant or you must acIuit.
18th. y man is only answerable
for the natural and probable results of
his acts; therefore if you find that
Kauhane's death was not naturally
and probably the result Of defeudaut's
acts you must acquit.
18th. The prosecution must prove
that the cut kauhane received was in
tentionally inflicted by the defendant
and not the result OF accident Unless
this has been satisfactorily proved to
you beyond any reasonable doubt you
must acquit.
18th. You must eliminate all refer
ence of whatever assault defendant
NAV have made on kaouli, as defend
ant is not on trial for that assault; he
is answerable for that in another
manner, except so far as ii Is evidence
OF the circumstances under hlch the
act was done.
~ L
supported by the evidence, which i
consistent with the defendants limo
cence, either as to the cause OF kau-
hane's death or as to whether the kill
ing was excusable or justitiable, or
on any other ground, you m4St acqult.
Gentlemen, L now leave the case in
your hands.
The following instructions were re-
fused:
18th. You must be satisfied that de
PENDANT formed the design to Kill
kauhane and not any person in gem
eral before you can convict him of
murder in the End degree.
eth. You cannot consider what de-
PENDANT intended TO do, you cannot
assume that he came ashore armed
with a knife to kill, if necessary, any
one interfering with or attempting TO
arrest him, this would Obige him to
prove affirmatiyely that he did not
intend to kill or injure anyone. The
law does not throw this burden upon
the defendant. What he actually did
affords no guide in determining what
he would have done had the officers
disclosed their official character and
their mission.
Sth. IF the defendant had the knife
in his possession as he says 10 take
home, this is what he, or any other
private citizen, has 4 right to do, but
it is entirely immaterlal whether he
had the knife in his possession or not,
so long as he used ii only TO repel an
attack, he had the right TO resist to
any extent to protect himself from as
Sault.
10th. Even though defendant was
in the act OF committing an Offense, il
the acts of the officers could have led
- H1yaz-lv- ~ haIfny-a that his life
was in danger, he was justified in US
ing the knife to defend himself as he
Is alleged TO have done.
The danger may not have been real;
it may have been only apparent. And
this apparent danger was 10 be judged
OF by the defendant.
18th. The officers, by not declaring
that they were such, anu by not Civ
ing the defendant clearly 10 under |
stand for what cause they undertook
10 make the arrest, acted unlaWfuuy,
ana defendant was justified IN resist /
:ng, and If the officers pressed defend +
ant - hard S. 10 make it necessary 10 /
choose between submission and Kill I
ling. aud under such circumstances !
defendant did In1iict the wound of +
which IEauhaue died you must ac4uit. /
18th. Not only i il essential 10 the +.
rights OF the citizen that he snail be /
required % submit OlIy when the oils.
cfaI character OF the demand i made +.
known To him, but II i essential I'd F.
the dignity Of the Government that +
It's servants shall be sheltered by their +.
official prero-a-ivr- only when they f.
are acting Legally and give notice that /.
they 50 set.
18th. The testimony Is uncoutra- f.
dicted that 30 word was spoken - In +.
dictate that the officers or either OF f.
them were policemen, or that they /
were IN the act OF aITe-Ciug defendant, /.
nor i there any evidence bringing I
home 70 defeudantin any way kDowI- /
edge that they were policemen, there T
fore defendant Is in the same position /
aud had the right 20 resist TO the same I
extent IS though he had been attacked /
by any private citizen, sud unless you /
I'D tnar ne uSAE excessive force. Won !