The semi-weekly messenger. [volume] (Wilmington, N.C.) 1897-1908, 1903-08-14
Both Guilty
CONTINUED from page one..)

each witness after Considering all
the testimony.
The evidence of the defendants who
were examined as witnesses in their
own behalf u be carefully scrutinlz-
ed. but. the rule of law (which REGARDS
it with some suspicion, does not re-
Ject II, or necessarily impeach 1t, and
If from the testimony of the defend
ants, 81 from it and the other testl-
mOny in the case, the jury IND that
the defendants have sworn the truth,
then they are entitled to as full credit
as any other witness. The fact that
the defendants are interested should be
considered by the jury, bait the jurors
are the sole judges of the weight to be
given 40 their testimony and Such
weight and credit should be given to
their testimony as the jury may hnd
it is entitled 10 receive.
I'm weighing the testimony OF the
defendants relatives, it is proper that
YOU should consider their relationship
to the defendants, but if you lind that
the defendants relatives have sworn
the truth they are entitled to as full
credit as any other witness. An in
terested witness or a witness who IS
related to the defendants may tell the
truth as well as any one who Is en-
tireIy diSinterested, and the rule OF
law which regards his testimony with
some suspicion, does not reject 1t or
necessarily impeach it.
THE state contends that you should
believe the testimony of Cross Ed
mondsOn and that he is corr0bOrated
by the testimony of other witnesses
and by facts and circumstances the
existence of which has been shown by
the evidence.
<sThe defendants contend that Ed
mOndson has not been corroborated
and tina you should not believe his I'M
supported testimony.
You are the sole judges Of b tes-
timOny Of this witness as o are of
the testimony of all of the witnesses.
a conviction upon the uncorrObo-
rated testimony of an accOmplice IS
legal. but you should be cautious IN
~COnvicting upon the uncOrrOborated
testimony of the witness Cross Ed
mOndSOn, h if his testimony IS true
was an acuOmpllce.
You are to say whether the tesu-
many offered by the state to corrobo-
rate the testimony of this witness, or
any part of it. is TO be believed and
how far it c~orrObortes him and are
also to say whether the existence OF the
cOrrpbOrating facts and circumstances,
which, the state contends it has ShOWR,
has in fact beer shown and how far
SUCH facts and circumstance, if their
existence has been shown, cOrrObOrates
the Witness Cross EdmOndsOn.
"A person may be convicted upon
the unsupported testimony of an ac-
complete, if the testimony produce
conviction of it's truth upon the mind
of the Jury. The jury must carefully
consider ahe testimony of Cross Ed
mondson,Aan give it such weight az
the jury az an accOmpIice, il the jury
as an acconiplice, if the july shall be-
shall believe ! is testimony
You can belieye the whole or a part
of the testimony of any witness, or re-
ject it entirely. 1t is cur duty to con-
slider all the te. itimOny and 70 deter
mine what weight is due to it and to
Upon the testimony which has been
introduced in this case. gentlemen off
the jury. the state. contends and In
sistS tht Jabel 3. Register is guilty Of
murder in the first degree and that H.
B. Register is guilH of the crime
charged against him in the bill of in
.dictment. that is. guilty as an access
sorry before the fact. The defendant
not only plead not guilty, but theE tes-
Tify in their own behalf that they are
not guilty of the charges made aSalnh
them. They say that the testimony
Offered against them by tGe state is
not sufficient to SATISFY the jury be
yOpd a reasonable doubt that they are
guilty. an dthat even if the testimony
Offered by the state alone would
be sufficient to warrant Il conviction,
that they nave offered testimony their
own testimony and the testimony OF
their witnesses, which shows that they
are not guilty of the charge made
against them. or. at least, creates Il
reasonable doubt as to their guilt, ana
that IN eithe view of the case, either
that they are shown to be innocent. Or
that the states testimony IS tnsufh-
cient t. warrant a conviction, or that
upon the whole testimony there is 4
reasonable doubt about their crime,
that they are entitled to a verdict OF
not guilty.
"One Of the licences relied upon by
the ~efendants is that the defendant
label g.. Register was not At the place
of the commission OF the alleged hon.
icide ut the time at which II is alleged
ii was committed. but was at his homo
in WhitevilIe several miles from he
place of the commission of the alleged
homicide. This defence is what Is
usually termed an alibi. An alibi T
proved and established by testimony
is the most complete and satisfactory
defenCeS that can be made. When o
proved il cannot avail the defending
as an afibi. Whether an alibi IS proved
IL A. QLESJ4OIl 1O lllS Jul y. bNAtO
of proving an abb does not rest upon
the whole evidence of the guilt of the
defendants.
If the jury shall find from the evil
dence that defendant label Register
has proven a complete aHb1. they
should find him not guilty. But even
if the jury should not be satisfied THAI
a complete alibi was shown, yet if the
Jury shall believe hat the testimony
Of tho witnesses who atTtemDtod TO
prove the alibi creates q reasonable
doubt in the jury's mind. they should
firSi the defendant not guilty.
\ successful aIibi may be proven al
though it does not cover the whole
1im,- Of the occurrence. and if the jury
believe that such an a1ibi has been
proven in this case. although it does
not cover the time of the entire trans
action. they should find the defendant
not guilty. If the jury Is sat-
isfied that label Register was in
fact III WhiteviIIe on the night of the