The Seattle post-intelligencer. [volume] (Seattle, Wash. Terr. [Wash.]) 1888-1914, 1897-05-12

t.sf steps Ia the Kraus murder
-. .hnrs of the actual verdict, were
- r1~seraay forenoon when Judge
s..-s~ 6~lfvered bis instructions and at
- s.~lrck turned over the case TO the
- ~ agreement Judge Jacobs stated
-. H. would hold himself in readiness
3. s~ee1vs . verdict from the Jurs up 10
Z Se3ock last night Al that hour they
- aiied 70 agree.
a. ,rxfrurtionx were elaborate. cover
s.. 81 fhs various degrees OF homicide,
-. ~vtdeace required 10 fasten a crime
q = accused man. the nature and iimi-
s.@s~-s II cireumsfantlal evidence. and
~ ss.fe< OF law By which the jury should
(. @serued. IT. part Judge Jacobs said.
Sd s1s.~fux stated 10 you the general priu-
s. - nerfsining 20 feionious homicsdes.
= 5 ~S~h 10 call your attention 20 some
- ,rinc,pIes OF law which are 20 gov
- -ssry conduct In the investigation and
-sse61eraston OF the evidence In this case.
~ ~t.st Be- satisfied beyond a reasonable
49, fhsf the remains found In the burn
81 <nain were the remains OF a human be-
- You must DC satisfied beyond rea-
~s,s,s doubt that they were the remains
- Uawsrd voiski. You must be aatis-
- tevond a reasonable doubt that the
1xsfkut Killed Edward yoiskf on the
s.5r1nx d February II with an AZ or an
<uf OF like kind. All Of these
ttfons must be found b. you be-
/ - re4<onab bic doubt before you can
800 verdict OF guilty OF any kind OF
z111fnns homicide. You will carefully
49, I'll the evidence bearing upon
. Dslnts.
e. Snnfderin9 the evidence in this case
= - remember and Be governed by
xS1Duing rules OF law: I. That every
accused of crime Is. by law. pre-
- be innocent until he Is proven
eyond q reasonable doubt. This
hon remains with him until after
or guilty Is found aud returned
80 actions juries act upon fair
1Gerance OF the evidence In Grim
nnsa the rule is different and more
~oel In criminal case there must
ri 1oiy be q fair preponderance OF the
re- against the defendant but IL
- - one step further and exclude
~ rkasonaie doubt of the innocence of
1g1ooner. This doctrine Of reasonable
~ feaches and operates upon every
Necessary to be proved by the state
(eblish the guilt OF the defendant.
y reasonable doubt? Much Of the
80 In this case IL circumstAntial:
late Ia you the rules of law per-
~ 10 this kind of evidence. First.
mmpicion. however strong. IL not
mt I must not enlarge upon this.
~. probability OF guilt, however
3 will not answer the purpose. The
pdlisy may he 10 to 4. or % to l. or
or loo 10 1. that the defendant is
n. but none of these degrees of prob
N are sufficient What I mean TO
\ that the doctrine of probability has
lnce In criminal law Third. the cir
9anees. II any, which go to establish
Ale cations OF this information must
1mly be proven satisfactorily and be-
Uessasouabie doubt. but they must ex-
II svery hypothesis Of innocence. II
IN reconcile this testimony on any
Aesis consistent with the innocence
~ defendant. n n your duty to do so,
- y that case your verdict should be
10y. II. after n full and fair con-
IA of all the testimony you have
8 hable doubt OF his guilt. you should
the benefit OF that doubt and
him
- commenting further on the nature
9mstantial evidence. Judge Jacobs
[ned: You are the exclusive judges
~ weight to be given TO the testimony
Rnessss sworn and testifying In this
n there r. q seeming conflict. you
b reconcile the conflicting statements
~ can. IL You cannot. you viii give
eace 10 those parts which your ex-
<net. observation and Judgment CON
- yoa are true. II you are satisfied
any witness has deliberately and
ylngiy stated that which - false. you
~ liberty 20 reject all of his testimony
efrohoratea by the testimony of
- Witnesses
M rssard TO the alibi defense set up.
- jacobs said in his Instructions:
~ the defenses interpcsed by the
ant III this case IL what is known
~ - an aiibs. that Is. that he was
oe&her place at the time OF commits
q the crime. and the court instructs
Vat such defense is as proper and
eAts, K proved. as any other. and
- evidence bearing upon that point
a = carefully considered ~ the jury,
N view OF all the evidence. the
~ have any reasonable doubt as to
~ the defendant was In some 9TH
hacs when the crime was committed
~ mould give the defendant the bene-
ne doubt and find him not guilty.
@fN IS any single fact In the case
~ Tue issry is satisfied is inconsistent
~ he defendant's guilt. this is suf-
70 raise n reasonable doubt and
~ should acault the defendant
rOsonahla doubt for a trial Juror
var instrncfs you. Is such a doubt
~ man OF ordinary prudence. sensshil-
:. - aerision, in determining an issue
eoncern 90 himself as that before
ny = to the defendant In this case
- allow 10 have any influence upon
-. Make Dim pause or hesitate in ar
nag - his determination.