The Pacific commercial advertiser. [volume] (Honolulu, Hawaiian Islands) 1885-1921, 1898-02-11
State, Blackf. $685. i'd 6o7; People Reynolds, Is Cal
1913; People a. Durdat, 116 Cal. ITO

order the marshal allow them private with the
witnesses Iosepa and Johnny These having turned
states evidence upon statutory order OF the Judge OF
the Fifth Circuit Court committed Jail and the
custody of the marshal The refused the motion Coun
sci for defense contend that the authorizing the commit
ment of witness Jail unconstitutional The complete
that is that the right of the defendants to make
this objection Only the parties affected make the attack
and appears witnesses willing remain in
custody. We know of obligation resting upon the prosec
ton allow the accused know what the states will
testify in advance of the trial Defendants had waived pre-
minay examination and they lost the benefit of the witnesses
statements before commitment Their counsel had
the evidence of these witnesses taken before the They
had and exercised the right full examination of the
witnesses before the jury We question the authority of the
court to make any such order
Exceptions 10 to 16 the courts allowing certain que
tons to be put by the prosecution Johnny Kaahea the red
They follows:
(10) chat thereafter johnny Kaahea was called as wit
and testified behalf of the prosecution and after being
cossexamned counsel for the prosecution proceeded
the witness the redirect and asked him the question: The
Saturday that Kaio and the others mp the house,
the Doctors the body whose proposition it go
To which the witness replied Kao" Then counsel asked,
And what did he sayg Defendants objected said questions
and the ground that proper redirect
nation and did relate matter elcted
examination The overed the objection defendants
ceped and the exception allowed.
CD That counsel for the prosecution further questioned the
said witness why he thought Kaio the doctors
house guilt werepon defendants objected to
the testimony being redirect examination The
court oveued the objection defendants excepted and the
ception allowed
az That counsel for the prosecution then asked the said
witness whether he desired make other corrections his
testimony Defendants objected the question being
proper redirect examination The overrued the obec
tion defendants excepted and the exception allowed.
3) That continuing the examinations counsel for the pros
ecuon asked said witness the following question: Rather than
that from these defendants you just
said that you wished that in reference
hoonalonao" that is that it is thing that from you.
Do understand that you you wish
that these defendants did actually make such statements
but that your impression and beiefw Defendants OBJ
to
and leading The overrued the objection defendants
ceped and the exception allowed. II
4 That to the said question the witness replied The idea
out from Kao whereupon counsel for the prosecution
asked, when that Kaio said that Defendants object
ed to the question not being proper redirect
The court overed the objection Defendants excepted and
the exception allowed
05 That continuing the examination of the Witness
sci for the asked him the question: Now them
you any other correction make Defendants objected to
the question not being proper redirect examinations The
court overrued the objection defendants excepted and the
cepton allowed.
(6) That continuing the examination of the witness coun
sci for the prosecution asked him the question: Now your
statement stands with those corrections you
to the best of your knowledge and belief the whole
reference to this the deendans Defendants
Jeced to the question being proper redirect
The court overrud the objection defendants excepted and the
exception allowed"
The witness had said that by the direction Of
Kaio all the family but Iopa and Johnny Saturday
ing Doctor Smiths dead body in order to conceal
hoonalonalo their guilt Iosepa johnny should
remain home lest they should let something that would
lead to discovery Johnny had crosexamnaton made
contradictions of parts of his testimony and had admitted
he had told mruth On redirect he said that going
of of the family to the body not by Kai
direction but that his they did
conceal the We think it within the discretion
of the allow latitude this examination for the
OF getting the exact truth and far from the replies
pejudcng the defendant Kao they favorable him
We overrule this exception.
Exception H. Defendant claims that the testimony given
by KAPPA who and heard Mr. Kinney nterroga
Kao the Wednesday after the MURDER did mpate
and should have been rejected before the jury implicated
only Kapea and he present the examination Kao
admissions clearly implicated Kapea But KAPPA testified that
ne heard Kaio Il did not this thing being done
and opposed and forbade strongly Kapea and Iosepa
their doing this thing Ao being asked how he knew that
they going to do anything serious important Kaio said
Ihey told that they going carry the work they
had planned" This admissible evidence tending show
knowledge of Kao of the plan kill the DOCTOR although
might be sufficient prove his aiding abeing
crime