The Topeka state journal. [volume] (Topeka, Kansas) 1892-1980, 1897-10-18
FATE
Is Now in the Hands of the
Jury.
Judge Tuthill Delivers His In
StructiOns.
MUST BE NO DOUBT
That Mrs. Luetgert is Dead and
by Her Husbands Hand.
To Warrant a Verd let of
Guilty.
MUST BE NO DOUBT

Chicago, Oct. 1S.-The ninth week Of
the famous Luetgert trial opened this
morning with the greatest crush yet
seen at the criminal court building. 1t
was known that today would be the
closing day of the great trial and that
States Attorney Deneen would make a
speech.
States Attorney Deneen promptly
began his closing argument.
He opened with a defense of several
of the leading witnesses for the prose-
cution. When the states attorney had
closed Judge Futhill instructed the jury
as follows:
Before a conviction can be had in
this case, the state must prove beyond
reasonable doubt and to a moral GER
tainty, first that Louisa A. Luetgert is
dead; second that she came to her
death on the first of May, 1897, in the
county of Cook, state of Illinois; third,
that AdoIph L. Luetgert, the defendant
wilIfully, ,maliciousIy, ,feloniously and of
malice aforethought killed and murder
ed the said Louise A. Luetgert by the
various means charged in the indict-
ment or by means unknown. The bur-
den of proof rests upon the prosecution
to make out and prove to the SatSfac-
ton of the jury, beyond all reasonable
doubt, every material allegation in the
indictment, and unless that has been
done the jury should find the defend
ant not guilty. 1t is not incumbent up
on the defendant to prove that Louisa
A.Luetgert is alive, or her whereabouts
or what became of her. If it is possi-
BILE for you to reconcile the facts in this
case upon any reasonable theory con-
sistent with the Innocence of the de-
fendant, it is your duty to do so and
find him not guilty.
You are instructed, as a matter of
law, that if you believe from the evil
IL ~
the defendant assaulted and killed
Louisa Luetgert, as charged under cir
cumstances showing no considerable
provOcation, but showing an abandon
ed and malignant mind on the part of
the defendant and a total disregard Of
human life, then the law pronounceS
such killing to be murder and a jury
should SO find; it matters not that Suo4z
evidence is circumStantia1 or made up
from facts and circumstances provided
the jury believe that such facts and
circumstances, pointing to the defend
ants guilt have been proved, so that
from a. consideration of all the evil
dence in the case there is no reasonable
doubt in the mind of the jury as to the
guilt of the defendant. Direct and pos
tive testimony is not necessary to
prove the intent It may be inferred
from facts and circumstances shown by
the evidence.
mo man may be convicted of a crime
until what is known as the corpus del
icti has been established by the prose-
cution.
"And unless you are convinced by the
evidence in this case. beyond a reason
able doubt that Louisa Luetgert died
at the time charged in the Indictment,
and also that she came to her death in
manner and form as charged in the in
dictment, in such case it is your duty
to acquit the defendant. To prove the
corpus delicti the state is required to
produce only such legal evidence as es-
tabIishes in the mind of the jury, be-
yond a reasonable doubt, a conviction
that the murder charged in the indict-
ment has been in fact, committed, in
manner and form as charged, and that
the defendant is guilty of it's commits
sion; and it matters not that the proof
of such corpus deficit consists in whole
or in part, of circumstantial evidence,
provided it is sufficient to satisfy the
minds of the jurors, beyond a reason
able doubt, of the commission of the
offense charged.
while the statute of the state pro-
vides that a person charged with crime
may testify in his own behalf he is not
under any obligations to do so. and
the statute expressly declares that his
neglect to testify shall not create any
presumption against him"