The Scranton tribune. [volume] (Scranton, Pa.) 1891-1910, 1896-06-26
MURDER CASE IS IN
THE JURY'S HANDS
An Evening Session Of Court Was
Held.
MUCH SPECULATION ON VERDICT
Judge Gunster's Charge Was De.
Iivered in the Evening..The Day
Was Taken Up with the Argument
decentralization Martin Spoke
-Four Hours. Gases in Quarter Scs.
siOns Court.

-Four Hours. Gases in Quarter Scs.
siOns Court.
1t now rests with the jury what the
fate of murderer Samuel Toni will be;
the case was given into their hands at
$40 o'clock last evening, which was
the time that Judge Gunster concluded
his charge, and although there Is no
telling what the verdict will be, there
are many who incline to the opinion
that it will mean death to the defend
ant, while a greater number think that
it will no. rise higher than second de-
gree.
Judge Gunster impressed upon the
jury that the case is important to the
community as well as to the defendant,
and that the evidence should be con-
sidered with care. patience, recollection,
impartiality, and fearlessness. They
must cast aside fear favor, sympathy,
or prejudice. Cases of this kind depend
upon the law and fact. The fact de-
pends on the evidsnc 1t is the duty
of the jury to harmoniZe the evidence
in favor of the defendant if possible.
The Judge then explained the law clear
ly and comprehensively to them, and
in such easy and simple style that they
could not fail to be able to differentiate
the degrees Of murder and man
slaughter
Upon the part of the defense 1t Is
alleged that it is a case of mistaken
identity, and the defendant did not
know Rafter and had no motive nor
reason to take his life. The evidence
of the defense was then reviewed. On
the part of the commonwealth there is
positive testimony from two eye-wit-
nesses proving that Toni did the shoot
ing, and of other witnesses who saw the
flash of the revolver, heard the shots,
and gave corroborative testimony.
THERE MUST BE PROVOCATION.
Words or scandalous language, in
dignities offered to the person, or even
| a common assault ard battery are not
sufficient cause of provocation to war
rant a person in taking the life of
another and the one who takes the life
| of another without provocaton is guilty
counts, the first charging murder and
| the second manslaughter. There was
| very slight evidence, said Judge Gun
ster, that it was case of manslaughter,
| for Toni had no other provocation than
| that Rafter stumbled against him.
The first count in the indictment,
charging murder is of two grades, muir
der Of the first degree and murder of the
second degree. When person wilfully.
deliberately and plemcdtatedly takes
| the life Of another that Is murder of the
first degree, and all other murder Is of
the second degree. In this case, said
| the court, the indisputed evidence shows
that the shooting was done almost i'm
mediately after the two men met, and
while the laws presumes that a fully
formed and conscious intention to kill
| can possess the mind Of person in a
| flash, yet swiftness Is opposed to de-
liberation.
There are other elements in the case.
The deadliness Of the weapon indicates
an intention to kill and the use of it on
a vital part of the body may be taken
| as an indication of an intention to kill
The one who did the shooting had a
deadly weapon in his possession and he
fired not one, but two shots at Rafter's
body at part which was vital, and
| these facts might be taken as good evil
dence that there was deliberate inten-
tion to kill. He instructed the jury
that first they must decide whether the
defendant did the shooting and neXt
fix the degree of his guilt.
REQUEST OF THE JURORS.
The jurors asked that they be allowed
to take to the jury room with them the
revolver which the commonwealth
claimed was the one used and the two
bullets which were found in Rafter':
body by Coroner S. p. Longstreet at the
autopsy.
| When court convened in the mornine
John Gallagher was called and aftel
him John Jenkins testified. Both gave
rebuttal testimony. jenkins swore alst
that Luigo Finnello threatened him fol
swearing that Toni was the man whit
shot Rafter.
Attorney Martin began his argumen
for the defense at $50 and spoke con
tinuously until noon, with the exception
of a few minutes while Juror T..
Ward was attacked with temporary i'll
ness. Mr. Martin resumed in the after
noon and did not finish until 800 hav
ing occupied in his address about fou
hours. The main points in his speecl
We're that Ross Keogh, one of the prin
cipal witnesses for the commonwealth
| from his own testimony, was intoXicat
ed the night of the shooting; that Coun
ty Detective Leyshon was responsible,
for the testimony of John Jenkins, tn,
other eye witness; that Toni was a law
abiding citizen, who never carried re
volver and that the shooting was don,
by an italian named Angelo Conforti.
District Attorney John r. Jones mad
one of the best closing arguments eve
heard in homicide case in this county
In the Boschino case, he said, three ey
witnesses testified that the defendan
did the killing and several witnesse
In direct opposition swore that Boschi
no was in his own house away from tn
scene OF the murder when the shots wer
fired; yet the jury found him guilty an,
the evidence of the commonwealth
which was not much stronger than II
this case, stood the test of the Suprem
court.
MEROLO CASE CITED.
He cited the Merolo case, the case O
Holmes, the multi-murderer recentl
hanged in Philadelphia and other cases
and while doing so Attorney Josep
| Brown objected to that mode of argu
ment, bringing those cases to the mind
Of the jury. The court did not TAX
cognizance Of Mr.. Browns objection
however, and he contented himself wit
writing down now and again express
sions made in Mr.. Jones' argument.