Morning appeal. [volume] (Carson City, Nev.) 1877-1906, 1905-09-22
SUPREME COURT DECISION.
CONTINUED From Page Two.)

CONTINUED from rage iWOl -
ed an unqualified opinion in regard
to the guilt or innocence of the ac-
cused. He stated on his vOir dire
that he had heard the case discussed
and what purported to be the facts.
That he had not discussed it himself
and had not talked with the witnesses
regarding it, That from rumOr and
reading the newspapers he had form
ed an opinion regarding the guilt or
innocence of the defendant. That
his opinion was not unqualified and
that it would require evidence to
change it.
After he had been challenged by
the defendant the Court gave him the
following examination:
20. Mr.. Hombold, from what
source did you get your information!
A. Why, through the papers and
through hearing talk generally.
@. Do understand you to say that
you have not discussed the case your
self?
A. | have not, no, sir.
@. And do understand that the
opinion you have formed is not fix
ed, settled positive opinion?
A. 1t is not.
O. Has any one purported or at
tempted to detail to you what evil
dence was in this case?
A. No. sir
@. Have you heard any of the wit
nesses talk on the case that you
know of?
A. No, sir.
@. Have you any firm. fixed opin-
ion as to whether what you heard or
what you read was the truth or not
A. Well, l could not say that,
Judge, | listened in hearsay kind CT
way. l could not express an. opin
ion of man innocent or guilty unless
| heard the evidence.
@. Until you heard the evidence!
A. No.
@. Well, nov .Ae opinion that yol
have got. as l understand it, depends
entirely upon the truth or falsity of
what you have heard
A. Exactly.
q. Well, now. supposing that Their,
were no facts detailed upon the tria
OF this case as you have heard on tbs
outside. What effect would what yo,
nave heard on the outside have upol
your mind in determining this case
@. Would it have any?
A. 1t would have some until
heard the evidence
O. Then do l understand that yo
could not divest yourself of any opir
ION that you might have and decid
this case upon the evidence as it i
produced here?
A. | could
A. l would.
Q. Well, now. supposing it weuf
make no difference as to what 80
mad heard. or supposing upon the tris
OF this Case the State did not prov
TO your satisfaction bey ond a reasc,
able dcu.t by the evidence adduc
here upon the stand that this MA
was guilty CT any ofsense incluo:.
in or ciiersed in the il ictment. VII
would ysu 60 then in a case OF III;
kind
A. | would give the defendant ii
benefit Of the doubt
-. If they had not proved it b
ssaa Tea sonable doubt. You won
acluit him?
A. BesonG reasonable 6oubt.
would.
@. You would acquit him?
A. Yes, sir
Q. You understood. Mr. Helmol
In law, that an acauittal NAV SIM,
amount 10 this: That the State h
net proven TIE Defendant guilty !
yond a reasonable doubt?
A. understand that
@. Now. if you were chosen as
Juror IN this case. could you dive
your mind of all opinion that y
have in the case. and hear eviden
and determine it solely upon that a
the law as given to ycu by the Coul
A. Certainly
@. Is your mind made up that Il
nan is either innocent or guilt?
"A. Well. could net say as it
I..@de up. but I have on opinion fir
what have heard talked ca.
:. Well are you prepared to 6
that his man is either guilty CT
nOcent!
A. l am not.
O.. Did the persons who. tai,
about .tals case pretend to lave be
listr 70 the evidence, or knt
what tho evidence was in the case
A. Well ] could not say that
O. You do not know whether Il
did or not
A. No.
@. Is your op.n.cl based u,
what would be termed street run
or street talk?
A. That is it,
HE COURT: Challenge is
MED.
Tho condition Of the jurors m
should be determined from the VIII
of his examination and doubts shO
be resolved In favor of the accus
as in other matters, to the end t
he may be tried by twelve fair :
unbiased men,
State VS.. Burralli, ~ New.
Considering all the juror said,
was apparent that from reading
paDers and talking with others