Staunton vindicator. [volume] (Staunton, Va.) 1860-1896, 1894-08-24

| peculiar province to pass upon the weight Of
the evidence and the credibility of the wit
nesses; and that where there is a conflict il
the testimony of witnesses the interest of an,
particular witness may be considered affect
ing his credibility to the extent of their reject
ing and disbeleving said testimony in whole
or in part, and that this rule of law applies tt
the accused, as we'll as all other witnesses
when he is introduced as witness in his OWE
| behalf
II. The Court instructs the jury that mar
| Is not justifiable in shooting another when
there is mele apprehension of immediate dan
ger, no matter how sincere such apprehension
may be; but there must be an honest and
reasonable belief of such danger-that is to
say, the act done OF circumstances existing
must be of such character as to afford reas.
enable ground for believing there is design
to commit a felony or to do some serious bod
| lv harm, and that there is iminent danger of
UGH design being carried into immediate ex.
! ecution; and there must be an overt act indi
cative of such design.
| INSTRUCTIONS OF THE DEFENCE.
Mr.. Parish read the instructions asked fol
by the defence, which, after being amended
10y the Court, read as follows:
] /. That the law presumes every person
| charged with crime to DO innocent until his
guilt is established by the Commonwealth be-
You'd reasonable doubt. and this presump
| ton of innocence goes with the prisone,
through the entire case, and applies at ever,
| stage thereof; and they are instructed that al
though they might have believed when the
Commonwealth til closed its case that the pris
oner at the bar was guilty beyond reasona
bic doubt, yet it, ter having heard the eyi.
dence introduced on behalf of the prisoner
they have reasonable doubt as to his guilt
upon the whole case, or as to any fact essen
tial to prove the charges made against him on
the Indictment, it is their duty to give the
prisoner the benefit of the doubt, and to find
him not guilty.
2. That upon the trial of this case, if a reas
enable doubt of any fact necessary to estab
lish the prisoners guilt, as charged in the
Indictment, be raised by the evidence. such
doubt is decisive, and the jury must acquit the
prisoner, since verdict of not guilty means
no more than that the guilt of the accused has
not been demonstrated on the precise, specific
and narrow forms prescribed by the law.
5. That If, upon the whole evidence in the
case, there is any rational hypothesis consis-
tent with the conclusion that the killing OF
Parsons was excusable or justifiable, they
must find the prisoner not guilty.
4. Ii the jury believe, from the evidence
that the prisoner upon sudden and violent
provocation, without malice, and in a trans
port of passion, killed the deceased, they are
further instructed that they cannot find the
prisoner guilty of any greater offence than
voluntary manslaughter.
5. That if the jury believe from the evil
dence that the prisoner. provoked by previ-
Gus insult Or charge contained in an unsgn-
ell letter, took a copy of said letter to H. c.
Parsons, without any previously formed de-
sign of committing felony by killing said
Parsons, Or infiicting upon him some serious
bodily injury, stating in substance to said
Parsons that said letter contained false
charges that were insulting to him and his
family, and asked said Parsons ii he was the
author of said letter, and if he was the author
that he should retract said charges, and that
said Parsons refused to retract said charges.
and said in substance to the prisoner that he
and his family would not be considered, and
attempted to pass the prisoner standing about
or in the doorway at Gladys Inn, and that
the prisoner put his hand on the shoulder or
breast of Parsons reiterated his demand that
Parsons retract said charges, and that Par
sons threw his hand in the direction of his
hip-pocket, making motion as if to draw
weapon, and that the accused shot and killed
SAID Parsons, honestly and reasonably be
lieving at the time of the killing that he was
in imminent and immediate danger of losing
his own life, OF of suffering serious bodily
harm (and these matters depend upon the
circumstances as they appeared to the accus-
ed), then he cannot be convicted of Any nsfone g
whatever, although they may believe from
the evidence that the prisoner was not in inn
minent and immediate danger of losing his
own life or suffering serious bodily harm, the
Court instructing the jury that if the prisoner
acted from honest and reasonable apprehen-
sion OF imminent and immediate danger, he
must Judge for himself of the extent of the
danger that threatened him. Provided, the
necessity, real OF apparent, relied On to jus
tify the killing must not have arisen out ot
the prisoners own misconduct; unless the
Jul lAlt UCAlCfb HUH liz CfluGuCC LudI
although the necessity did thus arise out Of
the prisoners own misconduct, the accused
before firing the fatal shot OF Shots fairly de
ciined an encounter between himself and the
said Parsons by retrea ing as far as he could
and then firing in self-defence.
g. The Court further instructs the jury that
if they shall believe from the evidence that
the prisoner, under the circumstances stated
in the fifth Instruction, killed Ii. e. Parsons
under an honest and reasonable apprehension
that his own life was in imminent and imme
date danger Of serious bodily injury, he was
justified in so doing, though such dagger was
not real; the question for the jury in this case
is not whether the taking of the life of the
deceased might have been safely avoided but
whether tile defendant, under the circunistal~
ces in which he was placed, might reasonably
have believed it NECESSARY to use the defell
sive action which resulted in the death of tlb
deceased either to save his own life or H
avoid serious bodily harm to himself, PRO
vided the necessity, real OF apparent reliee
on to justify the killing must not have arisel
out OF the prisoners own misconduct; unlesI
the jury further believe from the evidence
that although the necessity did thus arise oui
Of the prisoners own misconduct, the accuS
ed, before firing the fatal shots, fairly decln
ed an encounter between himself and the sail
Parsons by retreatng as far as he could, and
then firing in selfdefence.
T. If the jury believe from the evidence
that the prisoner provoked by previous ils
suit OF charge contained in an unsigned LET
ter, took copy of said letter to H. C. Par
sons, and asked him if he was the author d
said letter, and that if he was the author hi
would retract the charge or charges contain.
ed therein, without an intention to commit a
felony by killing him or by inficting serious
bodily injury upon him; and if they further
believe from the evidence that the prisoner,
from the demonstrations or conduct of said
Parsons, Immediately before and at the time
the shots were fired, reasonably and honestly
holt, HAITI