Richmond dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1884-1903, 1894-11-30
GAUL GETS FIVE, TOO.
The DanYllle Jury Gin, RcNamee'S Ac-
complics the Same That He Got.
EVERY MAN FOR CONVICTION.
Tia Lenr.b of tho Term the Only Qucs-
tion with Them-uiGhIy Compii-
mentcd by the Judge.


Tho trial concluded in the Hastings
Court last evening 1T o'clock. and the
jury were just an hour ana quarter
reaching their conclusion. The case had
occupiod the attention OF the Court TOT
two days. nearly the whole Of yesterday
bein, consumed with the argument
Although the verdict returned was
surprise in view Of the very light punish
ment awarded McNamee, who ala inc
shooting, IL was not wholly unexpected
The general belief was that there wouid
be a conviction. and while the jury were
out IL was stated in the courtroom 'hat
they were unanimous Tor conviction, ana
that the only question involved was the
length Of sentence.
The result was shocking surprise TO
the prisoner and his lady relatives VINO
were I'm an antc-room, and were COM
pleteIy overcome with grief Inc usuai
motions were made, looking 10 'ahihs
nm appeal to the higher courts.
INSTRUCTIONS TO THE JURY.
When court opened yesterday morning
All of those connected with the trlal
were in their accustomed places. Two
sisters of the accused occupied seats
TO the left OF the defendant. Frequently
these ladies were moved 10 tears by the
references made by the lawyers IN their
argument
When the tribunal was raped to order
by City-Sergeant Epps. counsel Tor the
accused stated that they would intro
duce no other witnesses. The Com
monwealth not desiring 10 Introduce any
evidence In rebuttal, counsel on both SIDES
submitted their Instructions, ana Judge
witt allowed the following:
- -. cor, co,,,Ict tho prisoner
Of homicide in this case they must be sat
is0co from the evidence beyond rea-
sonable doubt that at the time OF the iatai
shot was fired
First. That the prisoner was present
in a position. and with purpose 10 give
aid to McNamee.
Second. That he was aiding ana aoet-
ting McNamee in the killing.
Third That McNamee had formed the
intention to Kill the deceased or cause him
serious bodily harm and that this inttn-
ton WAS known to the prisoner Gaul,
and the burden of proof to prove each and
all of these facts beyond reasonable
doubt is on the Commonwealth.
In order 10 convict the prisoner in this
case. he must not only have helped Nc
Nance to commit the crime. but must
have done so with the knowledge of
AlcNamee's purpose to commit crime
at the time he gave such aid, and the
Is clearly and distinctly proved BY the
evidence beyond reasonable doubt that
the prisoner both rendered such and had
al the time such knowledge, they should
find him not guilty.
II is not enough TO show that the prison.
er helped McNamee to Kill Atwell, but it
must also be shown. In order TO convict
him In this case. that he had howl, dye
OF the intention of McNamee TO Kill or
do some bodily harm to Atwell at the
time such help was given, and unless
both of these propositions are clearly
proved by the evidence beyond reason
able doubt they should find the prisoner
not guilty.
The Court instructs the jury that the
going of the prisoner to the door of the
shanty TO call out Atwell and the calling
him out at the request Of McNamee was
not such aiding and abetting in the
killing Of the deceased will make the
prisoner guilty in this case. unless they
are satisfied from the evidence beyond a
reasonable doubt that tho intention to
kill or inAict serious bodily harm on
Atwell Their existed in McNamee's mind
and that the prisoner knew of the said
intention.
The holding or striking of Atwell by
the prisoner before the fatal shot was
fired. even If the jury are satisfied be
yond a reasonable doubt that such hold
ing or striking took place are not OF
Themselves sufficient to Justly n verdict
of manslaughter in this case. unless they
are further satisfied from the evidence
beyond a reasonable doubt that such
holding or striking was done by the
prisoner for the purpose of aiding Nc
Nance in killing or infcting some seri-
Gus injury on Atwell.
The Court instructs the jury that the
law presumes the defendant TO be inno-
cent until he is clearly and conclusvely
proved guilty beyond all reasonable doubt,
and if there is upon the minds Of the
jury any reasonable doubt of the defend
ants guilt. the law makes IL their duty
To acquit him-that even II there was sus-
picion or probability of his guilt. however
strong. such suspicion or probability
would not be sufficient TO convict, nor
would II be sufficient If the greater weight
or preponderance Of evidence supported
the charge in the indictment: nor that
upon the doctrine of chances II were
more probable that the defendant Is
guilty but to warrant his conviction his
guilt must be proved so clearly and con-
clusively that there is no reasonable the
DRY upon which he can be innocent for
the policy of our law deems ii better that
many guilty persons should escape rather
than that one innocent person should be
convicted.
\ reasonable doubt IS that state Of
mind which. after n full comparison and
consideration of all the evidence, both
for the State and the defence. leaves the
minds OF the jury in that condition that
they cannot say that they feel an abd
ing faith amounting TO q moral certainty,
from the evidence in the case that the
defendant IS guilty Of the charge as laid
In the Indictment. If you have such
doubt. If your conviction of the defend
ants guilt. as laid in the indictmers5
does not amount to moral certainty from
the evidence In the case. then the Court
instruc;s you that you must acquit the
defendant.
Although the jury may find from the
evidence that Thomas n. McNamee fired
Ne balls from the pistol which caused
i'e death of Robert Lee Atwell. yet II
hc jury shall believe from the evidence
1evond q reasonable doubt that the ac-
used and McNnmee went TO the place OF
tSe fatal encounter under a mutual agree
mont 10 commit a feonious assault upon
Atwcll and do him more serious bodily
injury. and TO stand by and assist each
other i'm such unlawful acts, and II they
shall further believe from the evidence,
beyond q reasonable doubt that in the
execution OF such unlawful purpose Geul
went at night To the house In which the
deceased was eating his supper. called
him out and across the street to where
NcNsmee was waiting for him. that Gaul
then struck Atwell and was assaulting
UT nplulilS atWtll ~ iie tlfile MCNalnte
fired at him with the pistol. or that Gaul
was present and otherwise aiding and
abetting in the commission of the crime.
and that In the execution 81 such unlaw-
full purpose Robert Lee Atwell was killed
by pistol balls fired by Thomas ~ Nc
Nance. then the jury may find the ac-
cused guilty under this Indictment.
THE ARGUMENT.
The argument was opened by Mr..
Marion j.. Dawson. for the Common
wealth. He made II vigorous appeal for
maintenance OF law and order In the
Commonwealth and argued that IL trials
by Juries were not what they should be
the people would soon take Justice into
their own hands and mete 1t out to evil
doors.
Mr.. Smith made the opening speech for
the defence. and for three quarters of
an hour spoke with all his fervor and
lmpresslveness. He laid much stress upon
the testimony OF McNamee which. he
said. stood uncontradicted. concerning
the visit to the railroad yard.
Mr.. HIN Carter. the other member Of
the prisoners counsel. argued the case