Decorah public opinion. (Decorah, Winneshiek County [Iowa]) 1895-1928, 1905-02-22

its existence, the same as any Other
| fact. But, when the claim set VI
as defense is unusual, unnatural and
out of the ordinary course of affairs,
you are not required to take the same
for granted upon slight evidence, MOI
should you so find except upon evil
dence of a reliable character. and
which satisfies you that the defense
has been made out.
Par. %. The nature, character, and
degree of insanity, which exonerates a
party from criminal responsibility, is
not easily explained or understood. 1t
| is not necessary that it should be
shown by the evidence, that the defen-
dant at the time of the commission of
the act did not know right from wrong,
as to his acts in general. The inquiry
must be directed to the act charged.
If you believe from the evidence that
the defendants act in striking Bige-
low (if he did strike him) was caused
by mental disease or unsoundness,
which dethroned his reason and judg-
ment with respect to that act. which
destroyed his power nationally to
comprehend the nature and conse-
quences of the act, and which, over
pOW Gil lux lIlS w Ill, lhCN ltaDly lOlCcu
him to it's commission, then he is not
In law guilty of any crime, and your
verdict should be not guilty.
But if you believe from all the evil
dence and circumstances in the case,
that he was in the possession of a
rational intellect or sound mind. and
from some real or fancied injury he
allowed his passion to escape control,
then, though passion or revenge may,
for the time, have driven reason from
its seat and usurped it, and urged the
defendant, with force at the moment
irresistible, to desperate acts. he can
not claim for such acts the protection
of insanity, and he is guilty.
The practical question for you to
determine from all the evidence is,
whether passion and revenge, or in
sanity, was the ruling force and con-
trolling agency which led to the COM
mission of the act.
If you believe that the striking was
the direct result or offspring of in
sanity, you should acquit if of pas
sion or revenge, you should convict.
You should indulge in no prejudice
against the defense, but give it
thoughtful, thorough, and disposition
ate consideration, and yet the interests
of society and the welfare of the State
demand that this defense ought not
to be regarded as sufficient to excul-
pate, unless you believe from the evil
dence that the propensity to commit
the act existed in such violence as to
subjugate the intellect. control the
will, and render it impossible for the
defendant to do otherwise than to
yield to the insane impulse.
In other words, it should appear not
only that the mind of the defendant
was insane, but that the act for which
he is indicted was the direct off
spring of such insanity. This being
shown, responsibility is annulled, but
not otherwise.
Par. 80. You are not to take for
granted that the statements contained
in the hypothetical questions which
have been propounded to the witnesses,
are true. Upon the contrary you are
to carefully scrutiniZe the evidence
and determine therefrom what if any,
of the averments are true, and what
If any, are not true.
You are to determine from all the
evidence what the real facts are. and
whether they are or are not correctly
stated in the hypothetical question or
questions. If you believe from the
evidence that the statements in the
hypothetical question or questions
are true you will give the opinions
based thereon such weight as you be-
lieve the experience, ability, skill and
knowledge of the subject under con-
sideration by the respective witnesses
nrttflac fhnv,, 70 1>,,t 10 ha ii NJ
are not established by the evidence you
will give the opinions based thereon
no consideration whatever.
Par. 80. Expert medical witnesses
have appeared before you and testified
in behalf of the respective parties.
You should carefully consider the
testimony of each of these witnesses,
and give that of each witness the full
weight which You believe it Justly en-
titled to. These opinions will be of
greater or less aid to you in your de-
alterations, depending very much upon
the skill, knowledge and ability of the
witness, and his acquaintance with
the subject under consideration. It
will readily occur to you that this
kind of evidence may be found quite
reliable and satisfactory, or the re-
verse and entitled to little if any con-
sideration.
Par. 81. Certain non-expert wit
nesses have been sworn upon the trial
and have given in evidence their
opinions as to whether the defen-
dant was or was not insane. They de-
tailed before you the acts, conduct,
appearance and conversation of the de-
PENDANT upon which they based their
opinions. These opinions must be
considered by you and be given such
weight as you believe the same justly
entitled; you carefully and conscien-
tiously weighing the facts, acts, con-
duct, appearance and conversation of
the defendant upon which the opinions
were based as testified to by the diff
ferent witnesses.
Par, 32. In determining the ques-
tion whether the defendant was in
sane at the time the assault is said to
have been committed you will care
fully consider the appearance, acts,
conduct and conversations of the de-
PENDANT during the time covered by
the evidence as testified to by the re-
spective witnesses.
You will consider the testimony of
the respective medical witnesses, and
all the testimony bearing upon the
question of the insanity of the differ
ont ralatiyac of dafaudopt forathar