The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1895-11-05
THE CASE OF JUROR SURBER
WORDS ATTRIBUTED TO HIM INCON-
sIsTENT WITH HIS CHARACTER.
The Verdict Wholly Sustained by the
Evidence-The Wife Murderer to
BE Sentenced This Week.
Special to the indianapolis journal.

preme Court There was a large crowd in
the court room. but there was no demon
stration whatever. Mr.. Hinshaw will not
be sentenced until later in the week. He
was followed out of the court room by
large number of his friends, men and
women. Judge Hadley, in his rulings, said
in substance:
''The first complaint is on the court adj
mitting DR.. Gels to testify on the stains
upon a certain block of wood cut from the
sill in the defendants woodhouse. AS
branch of the, States theory. it was con-
tended that the defendant leaned on the
wood-sill and threw articles into the street
therefrom and thus stained the sill by his
own blood. The insistence of the defense
is that to give this evidence any weight
the jury must infer that the stains were
made the night of the tragedy. and further
infer that they were made by the defen1-
ants blood and that this was improp
first, because the time OF the discovery
of the stains was too remote from the
homicide, and second, because it would be
piling inference upon inference. 1t should
be borne in mind that the question is to
the competency OF the evidence and not to
its weight Blood stains have been received
by courts as indicative of homicide from
time immemoral and subject to proof by
the same manner and by the same class
OF evidence as any other fact. Ii is said
in People VS.. Fernandez 35th New York"
that 1.-The proof of the character and -ap-
pearance OF stains by those who saw them
has always been regarded by the courts as
inal proof and In no sense secondary in Its
character The degree of force to which
1t is entitled may depend upon a variety
of circums .ances, 10 be considered and
weighed by the jury in each particular case.
but its competency is too well settled to be
questioned in court Of law. If these
stains had been discovered the next morn
ing after the homicide and had then fresh
appearance, there would hardly have been
any question raised as TO the competency OF
the evidence. Lapse of time has then in
validated It IL invalid at ALL
EXPERT TESTIMONY.
cdr. Gels is an expert witness-a witness
skilled i'm analytical chemistry, and had
verified the stains by the application Of
scientific tests. Courts Will judicially know
that the character of blood stains may thus
be determined at seven months as well as
seven hours after made. probably not with
the same degree of certainty. but with
sufficient accuracy to make it acceptable to
men of science as scientific fact. 1t is
said in Lindsey vs. People, 63d New York,
that so far as lapse OF time detracts from
the force OF the evidence is for the con-
siieration of the jury.
question could be determined at the time
of discovery. that is, they were MADE by
human blood. nothing more could have been
determined by them II discovered the next
morning after the tragedy. To give force
to the evidence at one time or the other
the jury must have inferred that they were
made on the night of and as q sequence TO
the homicide and that they were made by
the defendants blood. Standing alone at
either time, the stains would prove moth
ing but themselves, and unassisted by other
correlative facts. could give rise to no
inculpatory inference.
"A legitimate inference is not necessarily
confined to single fact proved. but may
number of established facts. Indeed. it is
the association of a number of facts, all
logically and coherently pointing the same
produces the strongest and most trust
worthy evidence. And viewing the other
inference facts in the case centering about
the proposition Of effort to conceal guilt
legitimately to be considered by the jury,
and from the body Of which 1t was COM
petent for them to draw any logical and
natural presumption. in no sense can 1t be
said that to give force to the testimony
the Jury must necessarily or even might
link inference to inference
''The refusal of the court to strike out
He testified that the stains were old and
made by the blood of mammal. not the
blood of an OK, pig. nor OF sheep. but
it was consistent with human blood From
this 1t was urged that to give weight to
the testimony the jury must presume it was
human blood and that the stains were made
on the night OF the tragfdy an, ana with de.
with any great certainty that IL was human
blood, but it was consistent with human
blood. How much weight should be given
the doctors testimony, whether any at all,
was for the jury to determine, and think
il was competent.
some degree of inference must always
accompany human testimony. 1t must be
Inferred that the witness spoke the
truth and that he had accurate knowledge
of the subject; he had not been deceived
ing. and no more was required of the jury
in weighing his evidence.
'It is alleged that the court erred in
block SCK'f Of wood Voc upon which the stains were
found. The question arising upon this as
signmeut is the same that arising upon
the admissibility of the testimony of the
doctor.
NO HARM TO DEFENDANT.
.It is insisted that the court erred in
giving instructions Nos. 10. 12 and 26. and in
refusing to give Nos. 10. IL, IA, 16. 1872 19A
and 22S1k, requested by the defendant /
have carefully reviewed the instructions
and have failed to discover what seems
to me any commission omission pre-
judicial to the defendant. The last clause
of No. u is: 1T is su sufficient if he create
in the minds of the jury reasonable doubt
OF the existence of such fact 1t is con-
tended that by the language used the jury
was informed that the onus was upon the
defendant to create reasonable doubt
ates neither doubt nor certainty. 1t is the
evidence or the want OF evidence that
creates the one or the other, 1t would
have been more apt, in stating the PROPOSE
tion, to have said ii Is sufficient IL the
evidence creates in the minds, etc. but ii
would hardly have conveyed a different
meaning TO the jury. Viewing the instruc-
tions as a whole, 1t is not apparent that the
Jury could have been mislead by them
..it is claimed the court erred in allow
ing George Duncan. a grand juror. to test-
fy as to what the defendant told the grand
Jury. Only part of what defendant said be-
fore the grand jury was reduced TO writ
ing 1t Is urged that this is the best evil
dence of what defendant says. Counsel in
argument said they based their contention
upon no statute, but upon common law
PRINCIPLES and insisted that the law gov
erning testimony OF witnesses before the
coroner and dying declarations was appli-
cable We cannot agree that the rule is so
broad as contended, for the law compels the
grand jury to select a clerk who shall make
a minute of their proceedings which shall
be preserved for the prosecutor. This did
not strengthen the position taken. but Ii is
claimed that the clerk put In writing all
the defendant said. The clerk will be pre-
sumed to have done only what the law
requires, make a minute of what was
said, the Legislature intended nothing more
and II seems novel sort of construction
TO hold that because the clerk proceeded
as the law directs, purposely avoiding a
complete record that all further judicial