The daily morning journal and courier., 1901-06-22

nally responsible. If they believed the | defendant was sane at the time of the 1 shooting they must convict. | Judge Blair after recess charged the | jury. He said: "The issues in this case are now to be submitted to you.
 An atrocious assault Is by no means | novel one Your duty is to discover whether the defendant is guilty or not guilty and the punishment is in the hands of the court. You are to act without prejudice, passion or sympathy
 and be guided solely by your oaths, You must be guided only by the evil
 dence, disregarding all you may have read in the newspapers There are four counts In the indictment. The first two charge Barker with atro- cious assauH with intent to kill, The two others charge common assault You may find him guilty or not guilty
 on any of the counts.
 "The chief defense is insanity. It is a defense which is subjected to a care ful scrutiny and the burden of the proof is on the defendant. The law presumes a man to be sane. The mind
 
 been on such a state as to make him ir- responsible and not to realize his duty to society He must prove his Jack of knowledge that he was doing wrong. He cannot say he did it under an ire Sistible impulse. There is emotional insanity and moral insanity. These conditions may exist in persons of thoroughly sound mind. These sugges- tionS that a person can be sane 1mme- diately before or after the commission of a crime present psychological problem which is not recognized in law.
 Tn determining the defendants con- dition of mind you may recall the tes- timony of those who testified to his ac- tions, Where insanity is set up the law has its own way of regulating and applying evidence which may be at variance with medical profession or scientists. The law regards insanity as a disease of the mind and rejects emo tional insanity"
 The judge told the jury to take into consideration the actions of Barker on the day of the shooting and he read parts of Barker's testimony to the jury, to show what he did on the morning of the shooting after he left the house, wherein Barker said that he realized what he had done when he saw the blood on Keller's face and went away to give himself up
 After the judge finished reading he told the jury that if the accused had sufficient sanity to know right from wrong the insanity plea was not sus but if the jury found that the accused had not sufficient sanity at the | time of the shooting they must so find. | The intent Is often to be inferred from the fate of the shooting itself. There is testimny to show that on that Sun day morning Barker left his home, walked thirteen blocks fully dressed, wearing an overcoat and carrying a re- volver and that he fired at Keller shooting so close that it discolored the face. The judge read the testimony of Miss Roome as to her seeing the shoot ng from her fathers house opposite the scene of the shooting.
 The court continued: Tn determin- ng the question of intent to kill you must consider all the facts in the case, A loaded pistol was used so close as to liscolor the skin and that Barker aim d at the mans head and that he fired 1t Keller while he was lying on the sidewalk and these facts all show the intent. If you believe Barker was in iane it must be established beyond a reasonable doubt. You are to deter nine whether he has established his in- anity at the time and if so he must ,e acquitted. If contrary you must ind him guilty of the charge in the indictment. There Is evidence as to the rood character of the defendant and of lis being peaceable citizen It is proper for you to consider this. The natter Is now left with you to decide" The jury then retired.