The morning Astorian. [volume] (Astoria, Oregon) 1899-1930, 1902-03-18
CONFLICTING EVIDENCE,

AZ conrts OF Justice. is the coniilcuhs
.,.,,,.nce that arises in nearly every
-. where important questions are
,n,,o,vea II has been stated by those
familiar with court trials that thefs
~ never been case in which all q
=. w,tnesses agreed. 1t rs claimed
4n.t I dozen Of the most reputable
...rsons IN the community may see the
..,na incident. and be wholly impair
,,s, and unprejudiced, and yet, When
thew come to give their evidence oe-
fore court under oath, they wiz con-
a., with one another 50 that rarely
ever do two tell the same story
There are many reasons assigned tor
,h,s peculiar state of affairs in the
trial Of cases at law. 1t Is ciaimeu
.nat Al, persons have different ways OF
loo,Ing at things. and often in tne
excitement OF incidents which are lat
er taken into the courts, the attention
of different witnesses is called to dif-
ferent phases OF the affair at the same
time ana no two see the same thing
Al once. And then it is claimed that
there IS no perfection on this earth
and every man has more or less pref
udice. and but few are able to lay
this aside when they enter upon the
witness stand. though they are placed
under oath and are called upon to sat
isfy their own conscience by telling
the whole truth as they promised in
their oath. 1t is claimed that the
natural inclination for the white race
to take sides in everything, even IL It
Is no more than street dog fight,
that the best citizenship is often found
conCSdhnS SOiHC Va thc Ae"
conflict with the theory they have
formed regarding the transaction, in
spite OF their known high regard for
the truth and their high standing In
te community. Men whose integrity is
above reproach. whose word is their
bond, and against whom no one would
dare speak reproachfully in public, it
is claimed, are often not exempt from
this rule of permitting their preju-
dice through interest or belief la the
right Of their side of the cause to lead
them astray from seeing the Whole
truth in the case and telling it in the
courts. II individuals were told this
to their faces it would probably not be
safe for the frank one who made it his
business to inform them, yet the
statement from a general standpoint
is not denied but generality agreed
upon as true
If this be true of ouM most intelli-
gent and most prominent citizenship
no wonder that the ignorant and GRIM
inal classes and their frineds are gull
ty of the same discrepancies. If there
were no disputes as to facts in cases
juries would never be needed. Then il
juries are required when only men Of
"unimpeachable" character testify in
the courts to pass upon the point oi
who is telling the truth, and often fai
to agree after hours of uninterrupted
and impartial deliberation, it is nc
wonder that they are required in cases
where the vicious and ignorant are
involved, and it is no wonder thai
they often disagree and sometimes ren.
der erroneous verdicts.
The case involving the murder Of
Gabriel Jarvi now pending before tht
coroner's jury is a typical illustration
Of conflicting evidence. Two witnesse,
swear that the murdered man was
not drunk while number of witnesses
swear that he was drunk Mr.. Rah.
konen swore that he did not know
anything about. the murder until the
following morning, and his wife swears
that she woke him and told him about
II that night. He swore that he
saw deceased lying in front Of his door
blocking the door SO that he could not
open it. His wife swears that he went
to the window. raised it and saw Ca
briel through the window. The wife
and Mat Jarvi stated that on the night
OF the murder the old man was swear
ing down stairs that he would kill
them all Mrs Rahkonen and steph-
anus Jarvi swore before the coroners
jury yesterday morning that the old