The mirror. (Stillwater, Minn.) 1894-1925, 1901-03-07
A REASONABLE DOUBT.

iCy IOFOHSo Ill us pldc0. An eye Tor an
eye, has the same force in life today as
it had when the Romans exacted it
from the Jews in Palestine. Judges
are as pliable to society's public opin-
ion today as they ever were. We have
all kinds of reform agitation touching
all things in our everyday life, but
where is the man bold enough to advo-
cate Judicial reform or a jury reform q?
Judges and jurors are not always in
accord with each other, as far as men,
tai ability is concerned. Take highly
cultivated legal mind, jurist of high
order and let him deliver charge to
the sample mass of ignorance that
generally finds its way into jury box
and he might just as well be pounding
sand into rat hole with his mallet.
Yet that same jury will file into court
with verdict, looking as wise as an
owl, and the reasonable doubt through
all of their deliberations has been as so
much hog-Latin to them.
The greatest bugaboos in our Jury
trials of today are the reasonable doubt
and circumstantiat evidence. More in
justice, more wrongs have been COM
mitted by judges and juries in the in
depreciation of doubts and circum-
stances than any other part of civil
and criminal law. Jurors have in
many cases, here in the state of Min
nesota, been known to form part of a
jury and render a verdict that could
not talk or understand the English
language, and judges have been known
to have accepted the verdict, passed
sentence upon the defendant; and then
say it is of divine authority and that the
judiciary is infallible!
One of the evils of the 10Th century
which will be relegated to a has-been
in the goth century will be the abolish
ing of the jury system, both grand and
petit, and something of higher order
of intelligence and justice to take it's
place. The present system has out
lived its day of usefulness. Could it
have remained in all its purity with it's
high order of intellect as it originated
not in Connecticut, but elsewher in
our country-Warden Reeve and other
prison managers would not today be
recommending greater buildings, more
capacity and gigantic improvements
for the punishment and reform of Jury
blunders and judicial miscarriages.
Judges are not always the sentencing
power in criminal cases. 1t is true
that trial judge may be PRECEDING
while evidence is being taken and the
case is being tried; but in arraigning
the offender for sentence, how often is
the prosecuting attorney the final
judge in determining the length of SEN
tence! Very few judges pass sentence
without consulting the prosecutor as
to the time that ought to be given to
the prisoner Many man now look
ing for fly specks with folded arms in
this prison are victims of the consult
ing oracles thatare ever at the Judges
ear when sentencing day comes. Is
that method that recommends itself
to any reasonable and intelligent man,
that the prosecutor not only prosecutes,
but that he also help the judge bear
the burden of whatever might dwell on
his conscience hereafter?
Then we all know of the manner in
which conviction on a plea of guilt is
brought about when there is absolutely
not particle of evidence to convict or
even enough for probable cause-how
the prosecutor will plead to you that
ne can give yuu-i iifo-.iiss- -fc!!!!cgs
you up after you are dead If you
do not plead his way; but that if
you do, he will see the judge and to-
gether fix you up nice little sentence
that you will have much JOY and hap
piness in serving. This is what you
call bargain pure and simple and
justice is so nicely balanced that a
feather is supposed to tip it either way.
Up in John Lind's town, New Ulm,