The Anaconda standard. [volume] (Anaconda, Mont.) 1889-1970, 1898-05-20
FROM THE SHADOW OF THE GALLONS
A Lewis and Clarke Jury Finds Thomas j. Riley Guilty O
Murder in the Second Degree - He Kicks Be-
cause He Was Not Acquitted.

law correctly. A synopsis OF the in
structions II as follows:
The defendant In this case is charged
with the crime Of murder In the first
degree. alleged to have been committed
in the city of Butte. county Of Silver
Bow. state of Montana, on the 18th day
Of January. 1895. He has pleaded not
guilty and this makes Il incumbent up
on the state to prove every material al
legation Of the information beyond a
reasonable doubt.
The defendant comes into this court
protected by the presumption OF law
that he is innocent of n crime, and
particularly Of the crime charged in the
information.
The defendant is presumed to be in
nocent until his guilt is established 20 a
moral certainty beyond a reasonable
doubt. and this presumption attends
him at every step of the trial.
The information In the case is no evil
dence as to the guilt Of the defendant.
The defendant, under the information,
could be convicted of the crime Of MUIR
der in the first degree. murder in the
second degree or manslaughter.
Murder Is the unlawful killing OF a
human being with malice a~forethought,
either express or implied.
Malice il express when there Is an
express and deliberate intention unlaw-
fully to take away the life of a fellow
creature; II il implied when no SUM-
stances show an abandoned or malig-
nant heart.
All murder which is perpetrated by
means of poison or lying in wait. tor
ture. or by n other kind of willful.
deliberate and premeditated killing. Is
murder in the first degree. and all 9TH
er kinds of murder are of the second
degree.
Manslaughter Is the unlawful kill
ing of a uma being without malice.
1t ia of two kinds: One. voluntary.
upon a sudden quarrel or heat of pas
sion; two, involuntary. in the commits
sion of an unlawful act not
to felony; or in the commission of a
lawful act which might produce death,
in an unlawful manner or without due
caution or circumspection.
M~anslaughter is punishable by i'm
prisonment in the state prison not ex-
ceeding ten years.
II you find from the evidence that the
defendant Is guilty of an unlawful hon.
icide, you will then determine whether
il is murder or manslaughter by the
presence or absence OF malice afore-
thought: If the act of killing is done
with malice, IL Is murder, If without
malice, 1t is ma~nslaughter. Malice I'M
ports a wish to vex, annoy. or inJure
another person, or an intent TO DO a
wrongful act. established either by
proof or presumption of law
The presumption IS that when there
is manifested a deliberate intention un-
lawfully to take away the life of a fell
low creature, express malice is estab-
lished.
If you find from the evidence that the
defendant is guilty of an nlaw hon.
icide, and that such act was done with
malice a~forethought. he is guilty OF
murder.
Murder is of two degrees, murder In
the first degree and murder in the sec
ond degree. Every person guilty OF
murder in the first degree h suffer
death; and every person guilty OF muir
der in the second degree is punishable
by Imprisonment in the state prison for
not less han ten years, which may be
extended for life.
Heat of passion as used in defining
manslaughter means a condition or
quick anger or sudden injury engen-
dered by some real or supposed griev-
ance SUFFERED at the time, I'M amount
ing to a temporary dethronement OF
reason. which must be sufficient TO
arouse an irresistible and
liable passion In a reasonable person.
To reduce the offense to manslaughter
the p~royocation must at least be such
as would stir the resentment OF a rea-
sonable man, and nc words OF appro-
and no threats, however onen-
siye. will mitigate an Intentional homi-
eide so as to reduce 1t to manslaughter.
If the Jury hnd that there is reasonable
ground of doubt In which of two or
more degrees the defendant is guilty. he
can be convicted of the lowest OF such
degrees only.
THE court then charged. the Jury as
to what constitutes a reasonable ooupt'
and. continuing. the court said:
In every crime or public offense there
-..- z-tat a Vninn or 1Oint OnRrAylOn OF
act and intent.
The law presumes when an unlawful
act is shown to have been deliberately
for he purpose OF in1uring
that the defendant had a ma
Iicious and guilty intent. and also that
a person intends the ordinary conse-
of any voluntary act commit
ted by him.
JJpon a trial for murder. the commits
sion of the homicide by the defendant
being proved, the burden OF proving
circumstances of mitigation. or that
Justify or excuse IL. Of the
upon him unless the proof on
the part Of the prosecution ends to
show that the crime committed only
mounts to -manslaugbter or that the
defendant was justified or excus-
The defendant has interposed the
plea Of insanity. Insanity. as used In
I0lS SClBC IIiSoiS eeSf
dition of h mental faculties as to
render the person incapable of distin-
gushing between right and wrong in
to h act with which he Ii
charged.
idiots, lunatics and insane persons
are incapable OF committing crime.
II the defendant was conscious OF
the act ne was doing and knew it's con- |
and knew that II was wrong
TO do the act. the defense of insanity
cannot avail him. |
The true test of criminal response |
bility Is whether the defendant a
sufficient use of his reason to under
stand the nature OF the act which he
to know that II was
When insanity is set up as q defense
by a person accused of crime. in order
that defense may avail, the jury
ought to believe. from the evidence, |
that at the time Of the commission of
the crime the mind of the accused was |