The times dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1903-1914, 1905-01-27

49, IA.
~ considered, !, sli1icloht 70 sustain III
5s The second assignment OF error Is! as 70
.stocEdeii.i who was challenged ~ tho PEI
stltioners ,49 Isl AZ ..S fS ~ w Ia
pressed an opinion. TO which he replied,
;I formed an opinion on the n waraper!
5evidcnc II 9 wa reirlin by oui,sel
that In law Il he prise g presumed to
be Innocent, and tht wa 8 ASK ca IN your
present state OF mind, could you 60 on
that Jury starting V out with that pre-
,aumpti on OF Innocence IN u your NH az
IA could not & say that ~ ould, sir
idence. NATURALLY theroS III some impress
sion on my mind. but r cannot say that
tits biased For pref iced The o1lysthii1sf
Il have heard Is one side as published IN!
thing read ~ the nevspa pers was !! one
Side. fter furt fler qnesti on and ian.
swer, counsel asked the Juror, this CUES,
itlon: sr,l teS OF what YOU have I, read
ana herd s Sd Pa pa 2uf
Strial, 5ncco rding to the instru Ions 81 the
court and the eylde az detailed BY
the Illnesses 2f fell that ! an, g
sfair-mlnded man N. g. Z, But 3 also 5un;
have read In this case has destroyleed iii
your mind tho presumption OF the prison.
ser's sinnocence n that you 4 would 4 not go
The 5Hry prespm,ltrg nm inG-
8Itll Is a question MS to drawing g line be.
tween thinking him Innocent and know.
ing him to- be- guilty. wiich I don KNOW
n IN answer to ot her q estions.S the juror
could render d verdict according to the
law and. tho evidence, not biased sAs Z have
no prejudice on 9 way or 9th er &; and That
as. to Innocence orr quilt he would be
gGyer,n1ed by f,e syldenee and
AZ Juror Questioned 4
asked sar,d reiterated, thes object OF which
was to sasce rtaitlS The precise haracter
and %strengt 4 Of the opinlloni hiofla the
Juror had formed and $cx ressed counsel
asked bin PM tiera
rs d presumption Il IN your mind that this
defendant Is an innocent man u 8t5 sE
70 which he replied would like ITO
say this hat ~ feel that n am an honest
could er,te this jury IN prejudice . and
unbiased and give the prisoner a. trial ac.
5cording to the law and the evidence. Il
" did SO. would @Wans 70 y pc ss
turned out but the same tim'si ZEE
3tofRseryeJ md that II is therefore, my
duty to serve N
EI (By the ,court) do you feel that YOU
can 20 Into this trial leaving your mind
OPEN ING ~
#viouslyf read accounts In the newspapers
and 90 throug Is the trial believing him
innocent until he is proved guilt g. =.
es.s SIR Il SS a
trSr was aee s1Iseei
without & numb " and they are nett, 4 g
be Ereconciled. The trend OF recent de-
scisions Is 4 In d the dire Ion OF limiting,
rather than extending AZ the DISC cation
S9ha tsvss t rs mind Receives an eeei
upon passing with almost In flnit 20 grad:
tsua tionSf ronTa II m ere impression to tfixed
sbellef.s The State strains every nerve to
gdisseinlnat know ledge. Bystt he o. fusion
ofEedication h it hopes to create d higher
scitIzenship and Ito find the means Of re-
pressing vice and crime y but d the courts
take an extreme posi- ton upon his SUB;
ject hold that every opinion saail
Juror, the decentralization OF jus tlce will
be confded, not to the most intel ligent,
but TO the mos It L. b rRnt % our Gill
The courts, 81 there fore, while resolute IN
an Impartial jury inquire into the quality
and degree OF the opinion and to- that
end search he conscience OF the Juror
Supon@lis voir dire. nd glo ok N To- me
sources OF X thes Information upon %WhlcE
IN man an B read the rigid examina.
Etion + to which, this Juror wa $ Z su bjected
without being impr essed n with MS .iair.
ness, with his desire 20 deaEgJuhLty ny
the prisoner, and with .hls consclentiou
purpose to- discharge his duty as 9 clti-
zen. q .. -
b Cites Other c asses.
@ In foran IS case. o Leigh. G51 }. two Jurors
}sHere examined upon4their voir5 dire, One
I stated that he had heard the case oxen
|5of In the town and rumo rs In regard t.
l8ita circumstances, upon which he had ex.
/ pressed no opinion, though he believes
those Frull1ors to be- true, and Y they
SHOULD turn out upon the trial to. be true
Tho has Is decid led opinion 4 n gard to .the
cnse; but he feels no pre- udice,4 and ais
{sntisfled that he shall he able to- decide
the tie e case e upon the evidence which may
BID given In, uni fiuenced by the runners q
The hadsheard. 4 His opi nion was hat r, he
prisoner had stab bed.tle deceased surdel
tho circu,nst tan lch he had #hea rd, ht
ought to- he punished. /; Tho OF her urol
stated that he had madeun no decided optn
lion: that he had heard a part OF the 3eYl
| dance Of one witness and forme cd an I'M
| spressIon, and if8theS balance Of the test
i5mofly should run that way, TIM inpreS
onYwould be onflrrncd s. that so far al
| the evidence went he Ind n ided topin
lion, if the rest should not rlln. ia "
but sthat3heS had no pre- udl co, had ~ ~
l5prcssed any opllio on. and was preparedltt
! decide the case accordlhg to the yldenct
which might he given In, unlnt uellced hs
| tho portion oe evidence he had HI heard
Both iii Jurors We're held to DO compe tent.
LIN Smith VS. Commoll,WeaIlLn Grh ts