New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1907-02-06

what you think. DO YOU think you are, or do You
sEinx Eou are not? We don't knoTi We ie must ra
expert or do YOU think you not? Al will
sulcisni experience EXP to testify as an expert:
2oWeI' 90 you assume YOU have great Know OWL
consider themselves EXPERTS
procession assumes The knowiedee Of an expertY
Al believe have expert knowledge.
expert alienist? Am Pittsburg
- I,,,p profession generslK! 81 tnink SO:
profession2 Al have disputed il.
Q--Then YOU 90 believe yourself an expert? A.
DO you consider that you ara an expert IN
mental and nervous diseases? Ayes.
Mr.. Jerome closed what was thought to be his
entire cross-exazninatton shortly afterward and
Mr.. Gleason. on the redirect, asked:
Il desire TO ask you whether in your expert
opinion. the defendant at the time he committed
this act, knew that it wrong"
After some pickering of counsel, the witness
answered. No"
Mr. Jerome then began his re-cross-examina-
ton, which lasted the entire morning and most
Of the afternoon.
He brought out that the witnesses answer to
the Hypothetical! question OF Mr.. Gleason was
not based entirely on the question itself, but also
on what he had heard testified to in court and
the witness. expert. could answer nothing
except the question. and requested that his pre-
vious answer be stricken out. The Court of APP
peals quoted as authority for the District
Attorneys contentious.
STUCK TO INSANITY OPINION.
Justice Fitzgerald asked the witness to be in
struoted as 10 what lines Of insanity defence are
allowable in this state and Mr.. Gleason read
he bVnorbetical question wa
then repeated by Mr.. Gleason. with the addition
that the legal sections regarding insanity were
inserted. Again the witness replied he believed
the man who. having committed such acts was
insane
Mr.. Jerome went different tack after this
by going into particulars about the word de
lusions.'' and brought OFT the possibility that
believers in Christian Science have decisions.
He asked:
Q.--Now. do you believe in Christian Science?
do You think that the men who believe in it
sncere snd . Rohes3' ''s'
Q-Do YOU thiak they are insane? A.-Not neces-
o.2Do yoI think they have reached wrong con-
clusions srom false premises? Al know nothing
Q.@Theu 2-ou knew certain sincere men and wom-
en- who were Christian Scientists whom you did not
consider insane? A.-Yes.
faulty conclusions? Al didn't know what their
conclusions Wefe, positively.
O.-Well old you, far You did know their
concusions-wolpd You, as a scientific expert be-
lieye they had r s3ched false conclusions a. es;
faulty feasoningF Ayes. because they don't
know anything alo9ut the matter. ,.,-. .,.,
Q.-You thoIgir7 they had reached false conclu-
sons. did you? Apparently.
$50 You thinI they reached their conclusions
from erroneous Ind wrong premises? A-Aes,
$50 the dinere.lce between a delusion. as you
or ,no5 S' ,oiel,f enfertaitbe difSerence is
lat n false conclusion is the result
of erroneous reasonig, insufficient data, ignorance
or what not. and IN The other case The false con.
clusion is the result Of n pathological condition.
A-Yes.
Mr. Jerome then asked the witness series Of
questions on pathology and pathological rea-
sonings The witness did not appear 10 be very
clear as TO his answers, and the prosecutor gave
the derivation Of pathology himself The sub
5ect of dation Of arter5es was next taken up
and the reasons for passive, normal and abnor-
NAL dilation were discussed Getting back TO
the shooting, the District Attorney asked:
Q-Do You find any evidence Of an insane de-
fusion from the fact that man VINO a9d h k be
ruined his wife. should seek to avert panic in a
dence Of an insane deusion in that fact? A--No.
Do You any s evidence s 81 an ba5 5ape fed
three bullets into the hody of arpther man at a
some eight hundred or nine hundred people about.
should. after firing those three shots Hft the
5ob-wouid that indicate TO you that he did not
all appreciate the environments a(-11e may
have appreciated the environment. assume by
my conclusion that that was the result of an in
sane act and he through. -,
C-Through with the jOp2 Although with
the killing and removing OF this object which had
been a constant mental msnace 70 him
CONDUCT SHOWED INSANITY.
Q-But that was not exactly the fact I vas
directing your attention 70. ! was directing your
attention 10 the fact that, having got through
with the job, I'm order 20 avert a panic at the
place, he held the pistol upward and walked
quietly away Would that fact 70 Your mind m
dicate that the man who did H. was insane? A
No; Il would he insane act IN itself.
Cured on the night of June p 1904, that showed
that this defendant insane. A.-The declara-
tion that q have probably saved your life
O.-How does that show that he was insane?
Alt shows TO my mind that he was laborng
under p deusion.
O-Why2 A.-Becsuse do not believe that the
facts justified 81. ! don't know bait that is my i'm
preston
Q--You are importing here into this trial I'm
pressiOns ara you. doctor2 A--No-
Didn't you just say that was an impression7
Al may have volunteered II. but am not I'M
porting If.
OWN you please abstain from volunteering
------------------ --------