The Leon reporter. (Leon, Iowa) 1887-1930, 1902-11-20

say to you that the law and interests of |
society require that such defense ought
not 10 be regarded as sufficient to en-.
title person who has committed an act
OF violence to an scquittal, unless the
jury believelfrom the evidence that the
propensity to commit the act existed
to such an extent as to subjugate the
intellect. control the will, and render it
impossible for the accused to do other.
wise than to yield to the insane i'm.
pulse.
1t proper also to say that while the
jury should acquit entirely if they find
the defendant mentally unsound and
incapable of restraining himself at the
time of the acts complained of it is
proper for the jury to consider the con.
dition of defendants mind in .connec.
ton with the included degree
OF crime. If the jury find
that the defendant was mentally in
such condition at such time as would
not entirely excuse him from the acts
complained of, but that his mental con-
dition was such as to partially, or to
degree, palliate his acts, and reduce it
to lesser degree than would be the
case otherwise, then the jury are
justified in considering it in that re-
gard.
For instance, his mental condition
may be properly considered in .de,erm.
lining whether the acts complained Of
were "wilful' as defined in these in
structions; it may also be considered in
determining whether said acts were
deliberate" as herein defined; it may
also be considered in determining
whether the acts were "premeditated"
it may also be considered in determin-
ing whether such acts were of lhis
"mallce aforethought." The jury
should consider all these, and it is their
duty to hold the defendant to account.
ability only for such crime or degree
thereof as the evidence shows he is
mentally responsible for under these
instructions; and il they ind his mental
condition such as that he cannot be
held responsible for the crime charged,
or any degree or crime included therein
then they should acquit.
The law presumes the defendant sane,
and responsible for his acts; and before
the defendant can be justified in his
plea of insanity, he must establish it by
a preponderance of the testimony. By
preponderance of the evidence is not
meant that the defendant is required to
prove his insanity beyond a reasonable
doubt, he is only required 10 establish
it by the greater weight of the evidence.
If upon this issue you find that the
greater weight of the testimony submit.
ed indicates the mental unsoundness of
the defendant, such findings would
raise reasonable doub: as to the de-
fendanl's guilt, and entitle him to an
acquittal.
The defendant has introduced evi.
dence tending to show that the deceas.
ed, DR.. Duff, while acting in the capac-
ity of family physician of defendant's
family, had seduced the defendants
wife. This fact, if you find it establish.
ed by the evidence, may be promptly
considered as bearing upon the degree
of defendants guilt, if you find him
guilty, and may be considered as bear.
ing upon the issue of insanity.
But such fact, ifestablished, is not of
itself a justification for the commission
of homicide. The law makes adultery
crime, and has fixed punishment for
such crime, and it also affords civil
remedy in damages for such an invasion
OF the home; and however inadequate
these may seem to you, they are all
that the law approves. 1t does not jus.
| tify, or excuse, or condone an appeal to
violence, however great the propagation,
or however grave the wrong inflicted.
The defendant has placed his previous
reputation and character as to being a
man of peace and quiet and as law.
abiding citizen in evidence. If you find
that previous to this difficulty and hon.
icide in question he sustained a good
reputation for peace and quiet, you will
weigh it in his favor, for what you, in
your honest judgments, may think it
is worth. Where the question to be
determined by you in close, it should be
sufficient to turn the scale in his favor.
The jury are instructed that they are
the sole judges of the credibility of the
Witnesses. In determining their cred
Utility, you have a right to take into
consideration their appearance on the
stand and manner Of testifying: their
candor and fairness, or lack of those
qualities, their intelligence, their knowl.
edge of the matters of which they test.
ify, or lack of knowledge, their interest
in the event of the suit, or want of in.
Tor -, NO 1lo A..