The Detroit times., 1908-01-31


tice In this case. 4 congratulate you
on the careful and serious considera-
ton which you have uniformly given
to the testimony given. You have
been daily enjoined not 10 form OF
express any opinion herein. until you
could weigh all the testimony In Its
entirety and be advised as to the
principles OF law which apply 10 the
facts sought to be proven.
"You will at the outset realize that
this case Is TO be determined solely
upon the evidence. Your verdict must
not be Influenced by any matters out.
side the record. Neither passion, pre-
JUDGE nor sympathy should sway you
In your deliberations. You must not
speculate or guess as to matters not
in evidence here. but decide the Issue
solely upon your calm, dispassionate
judgment az to the weight, credibility
and meaning OF the testimony TO
which you have listened. Nor are
you concerned with the question OF
the punishment which may follow q
verdict Of guilty at your hands. The
legislature OF this state. In It's wis
dom, has seen At to assign certain
forms OF punishment to certain de-
grees OF crime, and your sole func-
ton is to determine II any crime has
been committed, It's grade. and leave
the question OF the penalty to those
responsible for its imposition.
1T is the duty OF the court to deter
mine the questions OF law arising In q
trial, including the exposition OF those
principles applicable to the Issue pend
ing. II Is the duty OF the jury to take
from the court, without endeavoring
to question their correctness, any
rules OF law which II deems necessary
for their guidance to apply them to
the evidence and to pass upon and de-
termine all the questions OF fact invol-
we'd. In passing upon the. testimony
the jury are the sole judges OF the
facts. They are to rely upon their rec
objection Of what the facts are which
were testified to and neither the argu-
ments OF counsel nor the remarks of
the court and to control or supersede
their own remembrance or what was
sworn.
you will recollect ut the outset
that the defendant IL presumed to be
innocent until he is proved to be gull.
ty. This presumption rests with him
throughout the case until the moment
when the jury are convinced, beyond a
reasonable doubt, upon the proofs sub
mitted to them that the defendant Is
guilty, when the presumption of limo.
cence Is destroyed.
THE burden OF proof rests upon the
prosecution throughout the case. The
district attorney Is bound to prove ev-
cry material fact necessary to q con-
viction before you can reach that con-
clusion. This does not mean that he
must prove his case beyond every
doubt, or beyond every possible doubt.
1t means that he must prove his case
and every material element thereof be-
yond reasonable doubt. and what
that means l shall hereafter define to
you.
you are the exclusive judges of
the credibility OF every witness who
has testified. 1t 10 within your prov.
ince alone to determine whether any
witness has told what Is false. II Ia
within your power to accept or reject
the testimony OF any witness In whole
or In part as either credible or In
credible, as the case may be; and II
Is equally within your power to de-
termine the weight or Importance to
be given to the testimony of any wit
ness. But this power you must, OF
course. exercise fairly and reasonably
and not arbitrarily snnreaSopahly-
In considering the credibility. OF
witnesses and the amount Of weight
to be given by you to their testimony.
you must apply your impartial, care
full scrutiny In the endeavor to reach q
proper conclusion.
you may consider the demeanor OF
the witnesses upon the stand. the in
herent probability of the stories mar
rated by them. their interest. IL any,
by relationship or otherwise, In the
parties involved therein, the contradic-
tons. II any. In their narratives.
III witness has been convicted Of
crime, you may consider that fact in
connection with the questions as to
how far you shall credit him. II you
find that any witness has deliberately
testified falsely as to material fact,
you may disregard his testimony en-
tirely, il you so determine.
and IL you find that contradictory
or inconsistent statements were actu-
ually made by hef, or BY any other
volved In the main issue, you may
take that into consideration in arriv-
ingfi at conclusion as to the credi-
bility OF such witness or witnesses.
But contradictory or inconsistent
statements as to trivial matters are
not to be considered by you as Affect
ing the credibility Of witness.
The defendant ut the bar. Harry X.
Thaw. IL indicted for the crime of
murder In the first degree In that on
the evening Of June Is, 1906. at the
Madison Square garden In the county
Of New York. he killed Stanford White
by shooting him with q pistol.
Homicide, which Is the killing of one
human being by the act, procure
ment or commission OF another, IL d.
vided into murder, manslaughter. ex-
cusable homicide or justihab,e homi-
eide. The killing Of human being.
unless 1t Ia excusable or justifisble..
Is murder In the first degree when'
committed from deliberate and pre-.
meditated design to effect the death
OF the person killed.
The killing OF a human being, unless
1t Is excusable or justifiable. il MUIR
der in the second degree, when conf
mitted with q design to effect the
death OF the person killed or OF an
other. but without elaboration and
generalization. The killing of hui
man being. unless It Is excusable or
justifiable, IL manslaughter In the first
degree, when committed without de-
sign to effect death, In the heat OF
passion, but In cruel or unusual
manner or by means Of a dangerous