The Mitchell capital. (Mitchell, Dakota [S.D.]) 1879-1918, 1907-12-06
MORAL STANDARDS DIFFER
FOR MAN AND WOMAN-JUp

washington. Zee. 5.-JuQS0 STAFFORD &C.
cup!ed fifty-two minutes IL charging the
Bradley jury. The charge among other
things set forth that a person is mentally
responsible In law when ne Is capable OF
understanding the physical nature Of his
act (as for instance the defendant, II found
guilty. must have been capable Of under
standing she was shooting BROWN. of un-
Outstanding whether the act 10 right or
wrong, and must be capable Of controlling
his action. and OF choosing the right and
refraining from the wrong. Mental inca
pacity must be the result OF mental dis
ease. The law distinguishes sharply be-
tween disease and mere passion. III one.''
said the court. lis kindled by rage, jeal-
pusy or revenge or any other passion so
no Cor she, cannot understand what he
Is doing, or that 1t is wrong or cannot
resist mis- impulse to crafty his passion.
It may reduce the grade Of his ofense,
but does not constitute insanity. h
theory Of emotional insanity or irresistible
Impulse N utterly rejected by the law Of
aAis jurisdiction. IT there is reasopabls
Aoubt about the defendants responsibility.
or II there is reasonable doubt about her
guilt, the law declares that she shall be
acquitted"
In Self Defense.
The jury was to consider the evidence
as to whether she made threats as bear
ing on whether she fired the shots. or
whether she in fact shot Brown and
death resulted therefrom: how she came
to do the shooting. and how 1t was done.
He said there hould be no argument that
ehei fired In self defense; that of course
when one takes life in self defense it is
dustifable. II the jury had u reasonable
doubt. whether the shooting was in self
defense the defendant should be held not
guilty.
.As there is no direct evidence as to
now the shooting did occur," said the
Judge, II simply call attention to this as
. possibility that might be considered"
tion of the possibility of accidental shoot
ing. II she was not trying to use the pistol
to do any harm to Brown or herself, and
the pistol discharged accidentally, she
would not be guilty. II she was making
unlawful use of the weapon and the pistol
discharged as a consequence and death
resulted therefrom. 1t would be man
slaughter. II Mrs. Bradley went 20
Browns room to shoot herself and IL
Brown rushed to prevent her from
shooting herself and the pistol killed him
che would be guilty of ma%nslaughter and
nothing more.
To Awe Brown.
The court also suggested the possibility
that Mrs. Bradley may ave been menace
ing Brown to I'VE him into marrying her,
but without intending to shoot him, but
that in trying to prevent what he thought
was her purpose to shoot him he was shot
md killed, and said that would be man
slaughter.
Judge Stafford pointed out that all the
matters essential to the commission of
the crime must be proved beyond a shadow
of doubt. Reasonable doubt meant be-
yond a moral certainty: 1t meant a feel
:nE SURF that you are making no mistake,
The law. continued the court, requires
. man to master his passions and Furnishes
RS- ~ no 10Na ~ ;VSkn avn 1850 l----.A-
theory is entirely rejected in this district,
said he: II there is a reasonable doubt of
the defendants mental responsibility the
defendant should be acquitted.
sit may be difficult" added the court.
s'to be untnfluenced by personal wishes
and theories. II Ia Y severe test of your
abilities to be unswayed by your feelings"
Thu court epoke of Senator Browns
moral delinQucncies, which he discussed
with some sharpness. and added: .In
passing moral judgments no mar can
weigh in equal balance the man and tho
woman