The times. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1890-1903, 1900-06-07
the jury only to determine what facts
have been established by the testimony.


the jury only to determine what facts
have been established by the testimony
VALUE OF TESTIMONY.
The court instructs the jury that II
is for Them to determine the value OF
every variety of testimony, including
therein expert testimony; that they are
not bound to accept the opinions of any
witnesses. whether expert or non-expert,
upon any fact as to which they testify,
and that when experts present opinions
founded upon hypothetical cases upon
personal examination made by them, or
upon both, 1t is competent for the jury
to reject such conclusions when the same,
so arrived al by the experts, do not agree
with the conclusions reached by the jury
upon a view of the entire evidence, ex-
pert and non-eXpert Upon tho question
of sanity the opinions OF on-professional
witnesses, qualified by observation. are
admissible. is based uon knowledge of
the prisoners conduct and behavior, de-
rived from their immediate observation.
QUALIFIED TO JUDGE.
persons or ordinary intelligence, ac-
cuStomed to associate in business and
social way with the prisoner are quail
fed TO Judge Of his mental capacity, and
their opinions, If based upon facts and
circumstances impossible to be given in
all their details to the jury, but which
tai and physical expression, are proper
evidence to be considered by the jury in
determining the question of the prisoners
sanity. There is nothing in the law
which determines for the jury the weight
of any class of testimony, but it is for
them to draw their conclusions as to any
question of fact upon view of the whole
body of testimony, non-expert and eX-
pert, deciding for themselves where Gre
ic 10 hp tyiy nd
be accepted, they, and they only, being
the trers of the case and they judges
of the weight Of the testimony.
Where provocation is relied upon to re-
duce a killing from murder 10 voluntary
manslaughtcr it must appear that the
killing was sudden killing, upon the me-
mentary excitement and impulse of pas
sion, upon provocation given at the time.
or so recently before as not to allow time
for reflection. Even if man is laborng
under partial insanity, if he still under
stands the nature and character of his act
and its consequences, and has knowledge
that it is criminal and wrong and a men
tai power sufficient 70 apply that knowl-
edge to his own case, and to know that
if he does the act he will do wrong and
receive punishment, possesses withal a
will sufficient to restrain the impulse that
may rise from the diseased mind, such par
tial insanity is not sufficient to exempt
him from responsibility to the law for his
crime. When 4 man has sufficient mental
capacity to distinguish right from wrong
and possesses power to control the i'm
pulses Of his mind, mere passion or frenzy
produced by anger, jealousy or other pas
sions will not excuse.
NOT INSANITY.
The court instructs the jury that be-
lief in supposed facts which do not exist,
however illegal or preposterous, is not an
insane delusion. when it is founded on
facts from which narrow, prejudiced or
bigoted mind might derive a particular
idea or belief, though they may be INSULT
Gent in reality to justify it. A belief
founded upon reason and reflection is not
an insane delusion, however absurd it may
be, but it is of the essence of an insane
delusion that it has no basis in reason,
cannot by reason be dispelled.
The test question which jurors should
put to themselves in a proceeding involv-
ing the question of the existence of an
insane delusion is: Can any man in the
possession of his senses believe such a
thing? If the jury believe from the evil
dence that the accused, at the time he
shot and killed DR.. Temple, was laboring
under such defect of reason arising from
a. disease OF his mind that he did not
know that the act was wrong, or if know
ing the act TO be wrong he did not have
the power of will to control or restrain
his action in that respect by reason of
such mental disease, then he was, in con-
temptation of law, insane, and is entitled
to be acquitted upon the ground of in
sanity.
GROUNDS FOR ACQUITTAII.
To entitle the prisoner to an acquittal on
the ground that he committed the act
charged in the Indictment under the in
fiuence of an Irresistible impulse, the jury
Continued on Seventh Page.l