The Salt Lake herald. [volume] (Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1870-1909, 1897-04-03

ton, that is if he has knowledge and is
| conscious that the act he is doing is
wrong, and would deserve punishment,
he is in the eye of the law of sound
naind and memory and capable of COM
hitting crime.
you believe beyond a reasonable doubt
that the defendant committed the crime
| OF which he is accused, in manner and
| form as charged in the information, and
such crime the defendant knew that it
was wrong to commit such crime, and
was mentally capable of choosing either
TO do or not to do the act or acts con-
Stituting such crime and of governing his
conduct in accordance with such choice.
then 1t is your duty under the law to
find him guilty, even though you should
believe from the evidence that at the
time of the commission of the crime he
$3.50.
The irresistible impulse to commit an
act which one knows is wrong and I'M
lawful. if it ever exists. does not consti-
tute the insanity which is legal de-
fence. The law does not recognize the
! impulse as uncomfortable which leaves
the reasoning powers, including the
capacity to appreciate the nature and
quality of the act, unaffected by mental
disease (62 Cal. 120)
One sane IN his normal condition, los
ing his reason for the moment through
excess OF passion, is responsible for any
crime committed during the heat of that
passion, however violent, although such
passion may have instigated the crime.
Passionate impulse, arising from a mere
moral perversion, is no excuse for the
commission of a crime. (BuSWel on
insanity, page 1885,
In order to acquit, the insanity must be
the efficient cause of the act complained
of, which must be proved by the defend
ant by a preponderance of the teSti-
mony.
r,TrNr,T
1 further charge you that the chastity
or want of chastity, or want of fidelity
of the prosecuting witness was not in
any sense a legal excuse for the COM
mission of any crime; nor is such
chastity or want of chastity or want of
fidelity in the prosecuting witness any
provocation whatever sufficient in law
to produce or give rise to irresistible pas
sion in the mind of a reasonable person.
In determining this case you are sole
judges of the credibility of the witnesses.
the weight of the evidence and the facts.
In arriving at your conclusion you should
exercise your judgment as reasonable
men and men of experience, and give
such weight to the testimony of each wit
ness as in your judgment it is entitled
to. Judging of the credibiiity and weight
of the evidence l charge you that you
may take into considerations the appear
ance of the witnesses. the manner OF
their testifying. their apparent frankness
or want of frankneSS, and in TACT every
fact and circumstance testified TO by the
witnesses which in any way affects the
particular witness credibility: and If you
are satisfied in your own mind that the
witness was telling the truth you must
give it such weight as under all the
circumstances you deem 1t entitled TO;
and If in your own minds you conclude
that any witness or witnesses have tes-
titled falsely you may disregard the testl-
mony entirely, except in so far as it may
be corroborated by other credible evil
dence.
You are instructed, gentlemen OF the
jury, that since the defendant has been
examined as a witness in his own be-
half that he is competent to testify, and
if from all the facts and circumstances
in the case you believe his testimony
consistent and truthful you have as
much right to consider his testimony IN
making up your verdict as the testimony
of any other witness; but, as bearing
upon the question of credibility the jury
may consider the situation of the de-
PENDANT and the interest he has In the
trial. and in fact it is your duty to
weigh the credibility of all the witnesses,
and determine the facts and clrcum-
may believe the defendant and disbe-
lieVe any other witness, or vice versa.
and determine from all the facts and
circumstances the truth as nearly as you
conScientiouSly can.
PRESUMPTION OF INNOCENCE.
The presumption of innocence attends
the defendant through all the proceed
which convinceS you to the contrary be-
yond a reasonable doubt, and by reas-
enable doubt is meant such doubt as
is based on reason 1t is not mere pos
sible doubt, but is such a doubt as would
govern and control person in the
weighty affairs of life. If the minds of
the Jurors. after the entire consideration
and comparison of all the evidence, are
in such a condition that they feel an
abiding conviction of tIe truth of the
charge then there is not a reasonable
=. In1fn RI ha
be actual and substantial, not mere pos
sibility or speculation. doubt produced
by undue sensibility, in view OF the con-
sequences of the verdict, is not reason
able doubt; and the jury is not allowed
to create sources or materials OF doubt
by resorting tc fanciful suppositlonS ana
remote conjectures as TO possible state
of facts differing from that established
hv the evidence. They are not at liberty
to disbelieve as jurors II from the evi-
dence they believe as men. Your oath
imposes no obligation to doubt where no
doubt would exist if no oath had been
In this case all of your number must
agree upon your verdict; and when you
have retired to your jury room you may
select one of your number as foreman,
and when you have agreed upon your
verdict let the foreman sign 1t and return
it into court
WAITING FOR THE VERDICT.
After the reading of the judges
charge a motley of the crowd d1sap-
peared but for the most part it re-
NAMED intact and waited for the YER
diet which seemed to be expected early.
Miss OFT, her parents and friends, re-
NAMED as did Edison and his relatives
and friends. AS the minutes grew to
hours the hopes of the defendants
friends rose and the other people were
correspondingly anxious. Every minute
of delay seemed to presage that Ed
sons case had been made out a strong
one and if not an acquittal then surely
a disagreement might be looked for.