The Bellefontaine Republican. [volume] (Bellefontaine, Logan County, Ohio) 1855-1905, 1899-12-26
The TRIAL OF ERNEST AUSTIN.
SPEECHES OF HIS COUNSEL
And of the Prosecuting
Attorney.

In our last issue we gave the cOnclu-
sion of the testimony in the case of the
State VS.. Ernest Austin, indicted for
the murder of his brother William, and
the able speech of Judge VIM. II. West
in the opening argument for the State.
Owing to the late conclusion OF the
trial, and the crowded state OF our
columns, with holiday advertising, we
could not give the able defense made
by the attorneys of the prisoner, and
the excellent speech made by the
Prosecuting Attorney. But we feel that
our readers who have followed our re-
port Of this trial through four issues,
will wish to see the conclusion OF the
proceedings, Notwithstanding the find
ing of the jury, verdict OF murder in
the first degree, with recommendation
of mercy was given in Fridays edition.
WEDNESDAY MORNING.
Court opened at $50 Wednesday
morning, and Attorney John s. Willis,
of North Lewisburg, began his argu-
ment for the defense, occupying the
forenoon.
Mr.. Willis began with the statement
that he would review the testimony and
give the law bearing upon the case In
trial. He said IL was the duty OF every
citizen to see that the law was enforced,
Justice secured, and every citizen pro-
tected In his rights. The jury is part
of the court called to determine the
state OF facts, and IL devolves on you to
determine which facts do or did exist.
Certain principles of law enter into
every case. Homicide Is charged upon
the prisoner. IL Is for the State to pre-
sent facts To warrant you TO draw con-
clusions consistent with nothing else
but his guilt II the State does not ar
rive at such conclusions, II Is the duty
OF the. Jury TO bring In verdict that
the prisoner is not guilty. The State
must prove |, that VIM. Austin Is dead,
beyond u reasonable doubt. IL you SOW,
you may reap; but there Is reasonable
doubt that you may not get crop
Your mind must be convinced that you
will reap u crop.
The State must prove that the crime
was committed as charged In one oi
other OF the four counts IN the indict
. mcnt: |, by an AK; 2, by revolver; 8
by blunt instrument; 4, by u sharl
instrument.
State introduced evidence only as tt
one count In indictment. Judge Wes
argued that he had established corpus
delicti, or the body Of the crime. Blu
not only the death must be proven tt
establish corpus delicti, but the manner
OF the death must be shown. Have the,
proved the body OF the crime? The,
introduced DR.. Bleine to prove tba
there were human hairs and stains o
blood on the AK found at the Austir
ruins; but DR.. Bleine says he could MOI
tell whether the stains were of blood
or whether what they supposed wer,
hairs were human hairs. Judge Wes
said they appeared to be human heirs
and stains Of bloods. Would you take
u mans life on appearances!
The State is required to prove the
death and the means of 1t. There Is M
proof that this AK was used to commi
the murder. They must prove: l, tina
VIM. Austin Is dead; 2, corpus delicti
3, that defendant inflicted the wound
4, that he committed it purposely; 8
with the intent to kill; g, that he did 1
of premeditated and personal malice.
The law is founded on human reason
and Justice, and presumes the prisoner
Is Innocent; that when you hear thi
testimony you take it to your rooms
and the presumption of Ernest Austin
innocence goes with you. This is not
formality, but positive:shield that tn
law throws around every man. 1t stay
there until your mind is made up as t.
his guilt beyond the peradventure of
doubt. If there is any other view yo'
can take of the evidence that would b.
consistent with his innocence, you ar
bound to accept it and find verdic
accordingly. The State must max
good its charges, or, such is the human
ity of our law, the prisoner must be &C
Quilted. Better that the guilty go ur
punished than that the innocent b
punished. Nothing could be more hoi
rible or more revolving than to punis
an innocent person. Be careful tina
you do not punish an innocent person
If YOU are not certain of the prisoner
guilt, you must acquit him. Be sur
that you make no mistake.
You are to be satisfied to mora
certainty. How are you to arrive q
that certainty. Simply by using you
own minds, your own reason-not
what convinces another juror. Their
is no exact mathematical test by whic
we may know what is beyond a reason
able doubt. Its meaning must depen
upon the mind of each juror; proc
must remove every reasonable doubt
Direct evidence and circumstantia
evidence both depend upon human ties
timony, but in circumstantial evidenc
you have to draw conclusions from tn
testimony-which may or may not b
correct-while in direct evidence yo
do not.
Does the finding of the ak point t
the guilt of the prisoner? No.
Simulated evidence, which has bee
charged, is evidence not real, but Judg
West assumes as facts, things there
no evidence to prove; that Ernest Aus
tin brought that ak, or that he was OF
Dolan's place that night? No. Ernes
Austin never went there, and neve
brought that AK; there is no evidenc
of it.
They claim that prisoners converse
tions are irreconcileable with his in
nocence. There is great difficulty il
repeating conversations correctly, ant
this class of evidence is very unreliable
Wivuesses uhy leave Uut one word q