The daily sentinel., 1908-07-14

, deadly weapon, malice is inferred un-
| less it be proved that the killing was
done in self-defense.
! 3. The burden of proof rests upon
, the state. 1t is not sufficient to shov
the defendants guilt by prepond
erance of evidence. as the defendant il
presumed innocent until he is proved
guilty beyond a reasonable doubt
6. Reasonable doubt was defined a,
such a doubt as would cause a normal
, reasoning man to hesitate before act
| ing in any matter. The jurors were
warned that while they We're to find
| the defendant guilty beyond a reason
able doubt, they We're not to search for
| doubts.
I. The jurors were told that they
We're the sole judges of the credibility
of the witnesses. and that they We're
at liberty to take into consideration
| any interest in the outcome of the case
or any motive any witness might have
| in order to test the falsity or truth of
the witness. They We're also to take
into consideration the manner of the
| witness on the stand. the probability
or improbabiIity of his statements the
| consistency of his testimony inherent
ly and with the testimony of other wit
nesses, and so on. If the jury should
believe the testimony of any witness
false. the jury would be at liberty to
disregard that testimony entirely eX-
cept it. should be corroborated by
the credible facts from the testimony
of other witnesses.
s. Where evidence that would rebut
or sustain the evidence of other wit
nesses is in the power of the defendant
to give. the jury may take that fact
into consideration.
.. The jury We're reminded that in
this case the chief defense of the de-
fendant is that of an alibi. in other
words. that the defendant was at an
other place at the time the crime was
said to have been committed. The
jurors were reminded that such de-
fense is proper as any other. and
that all the evidence offered in sub
sanitation of the alipi is to be given
the same weight as any other testi
mony. and that If from such testimony
there should be in the minds of the
jurors a reasonable doubt as to the de-
fendant's whereabouts at the time of
the crime, that doubt must be resolved
in favor of the defendant The jurors
were reminded. however. that it is easy
to fabricate an alibi. and hard to dis
prove such a defense. and that there
fore they must scan closely the testi-
mony to the, alibi, Ii. however af-
ter all this shall have been done, any
reasonable doubt remain. IL must be
decided that the defendant was not at
the place where he was charged with
having committed the crime.
10. If verbal statements concerning
the crime have been made by the de-
fendant. they may be taken into con-
sideratIon. If such statements are
against his own interest. the law pre-
sumes them to be true, without evil |
dence to the contrary; Vile if they are
in his own interest. it is not obligatory |
upon the jury to consider them true |
unless there is corroborative evidence. |
IL. Proof of motive is not required |
to convict provided 1T is shown that
doubt, committed the crime. 1t is only
necessary to show that at that time
the defendant was sane and there were
no extenuating circumstances.
12. If a confession is corroborated
by the facts in the case. the fact that
the confession itself was made while
the defendant was in custody without
process or on an invalid process does
not necessarily invalidate the confess
sion.
13. If the jury is satisfied that
Arthur Collins died from the effects
of gun shot wound. and if it appears
from the confession of the defendant
and from corroborating circumstances