The Pacific commercial advertiser. [volume] (Honolulu, Hawaiian Islands) 1885-1921, 1897-11-27

At eighteen minutes before noon yes
terday Judge Perry finished his charge
to the jury in the Smith murder trial,
and they at once went out. The trial
has been long and both prosecution
and defense have been steadily at
work. The charge to the jury contain
ed all the points in law likely to be
used or needed by them to arrive at
verdict in accordance with the law and
evidence. In the charge were incOr-
porated all the instructions asked by
the prosecution and such of those of
the defense as were granted.
These instructions were as follows:
''If you believe from the evidence that
the witness Iosepa and the defendant
Kapea went to the house of DR.. Jared
Smith on the day mentioned in the
indictment and that Kapea then and
there shot and killed DR.. Smith with
deliberate, premediated malice afore-
thought, without authority, justifica
tion, or extenuation by law; or if you
by Iosepa, and that Kapea was present
and aided, melted, cOuntenanced or
encouraged the murderer in the COM
mission of the crime, then, and in
either case you will find the defendant
Kapea guilty of murder in the first de-
gree.
eff you believe that either Kapea or
Iosepa murdered Dr. Jared Smith in
the manner already defined, or that
either Kapea Or Iosepa was guilty as
principal, being present and aiding, in
citing, cOuntenancing or encouraging
the murder, and that the defendants
Upapa and George Rathburn or either
of them knowing the guilt of Kapea
and IOsepa, or either of them did aid,
harbor, conceal maintain or assist the
person known to be guilty, with the
intent that such person should avoid
or escape from detection, arrest, trial
or punishment, then such defendant is
guilty of being accessory after the fact
to the crime of murder in the first de-
gree, and you should so find.
LAS far as Kaio is concerned the law
allows him to shield his own son; but
this protection does not extend to the
case of nephews. If, therefore, you
find that Iosepa is nephew to Kaio,
that Iosepa was guilty of the crime OF
murder in the first degree, either as
doing the act himself, or as being pres
ent and aiding and that Kaio knowing
this, did harbor, conceal, maintain or
assist Iosepa, with the intent that To-
sepa should avoid or escape from de-
lection, arrest, trial, or punishment.
then the defendant Kaio is guilty of
being accessory after the fact to the
crife of murder in the first degree, and
you should so find.
''In considering whether or not the
defendants Kaio, Upapa and George
Rathburn had sufficient knowledge of
the crime to be accessories after the
fact, | charge you that it is sufficient
to render aid given by him unlawful,
if you find from the evidence that the
alleged accessory had good reason to
believe the person aided by him to be
guilty of the murder. 1t is not neces-
sary to prove that the accessory had
actual knowledge of the facts connect
ed with the guilt of the murderer.
In order to convict Kapea you must
be satisfied from the evidence that the
prosecution has proved his guilt be-
yond a reasonable doubt, and you must
have an abiding conviction that he is
the person who fired the fatal shot or
| that he was present aiding, abetting
or encouraging the murderer.
| I'm order to convict Kaio of being an
accessory before the fact to the murder
of DR.. Smith. you must be convinced
| beyond a reasonable doubt that he
shared the criminal design Of the prin-
cipal felon, and also that that design
was substantially effected through his
! incitement thereto; i. e., that such in
citement in fact contributed TO or
| helped along the commission of the
offense.
''In order to convict Kaio of being
an accessory after the fact, you must
be convinced beyond a reasonable