The Mankato free press., 1909-12-17

u.
or want of candor, and as well all the
facts and circumstances before you
which can aid you in the matter
Much of the evidence i'll this case is
what is known in the law as circum-
stantial evidence, distinguished from
positive and direct evidence. Evidence
Is positive and direct when the facts
at issue are testified to by those who
have actual knowledge of such facts
by reason of their senses, as of sight,
hearing, feeling, etc. 1t is circumstan-
tial when the fact which is not person.
ally known to the witness, is presumed,
or inferred, from other facts which
are known and given IN evidence.
In this case many of the questions
of fact rest upon circumstantial evil
dence. The state having proven, or
attempted to prove certain facts, asks
you to infer from such facts so proven,
if they are proven, the fact of the
guilt of the defendant.
Circumstantial evidence is the proof
lof such facts and circumstances con-
nected with and surrounding the COM
mission of the crime charged as tend
to show the guilt or innocence of the
person charged, and it is legal and COM
petcnt evidence in criminal cases; and
if it is of such character as to ex-
clude any reasonable hypothesis other
than that the defendant is guilty, it is
entitled to the same weight as posi-
tive and direct testimony, and if the
facts and circumstances so proven sat
isfies the jury of the guilt of the de-
fendant beyond a reasonable doubt,
then such evidence is sufficient to au-
thorize the jury to so find.
But the prosecution must not only
show you beyond a reasonable doubt
that the facts and circumstances SO
proven are true, but they must be alb
solutely Incompatible upon any reason
able hypothesis with the innocence of
the party accused, and not capable of
Iexplanation upon any reasonable hy-
pothesis other than the guilt of the
accused. 1t is not enough, that the
facts and circumstances so proven are
consistent with and point to the de-
fendant's guilt, but they must be of a
character that they cannot be reason
ably true and the defendant be inno-
cent.
| When person is accused of crime
it is natural to inquire whether such
person had a motive to commit the
crime, and in this case it is your duty
to consider whether, under all the
evidence before you, the defendant
! did, or did not, have motive for the
commits sion of the crime charged
against him, for from a careful con-
sideration of this question you may
get material aid in determining the
question of his guilt, or innocence.
If YOU find from the evidence that
to be considered with all other evil
dence in the case in determining the
question of his guilt or innocence, but
the proof of the motive alone, how.
ever strong it may be is not suffi
cient to justify a conviction of the
defendant; it is, however, circum.
stance, as / have said, to be consider
ed by you in determining the question
of his guilt or innocence; and if nc
motive for the commission of the Of
fense is proven, it is circumstance
! favoring his innocence.
! This question of motive, like al
other facts in the case is one for you
to determine from all cf the evidence
in the case.
! Before conviction of murder car
be had, it is necessary for the state
to prove by direct and positive testi
mony beyond reasonable doubt, OF
the death of the person charged tC
have been murdered.
What the Evidence Shows.
| There is evidence in this case tend
ing to prove, that prior to the fifth
day of May, A. D.. 1909, one, Holland
j. Ledbeter, lived and resided in a
house upon premises owned by him
situate in the town of Lime in this
county of Blue Earth.
That at said time he lived and re-
sided with his family, consisting of his
wife, Grace L. Ledbeter, and four chill
dren, Hazel, Mabel Howard and
Charles, of ages ranging from seven
to fourteen years.
That they all lived in the said
house, and constituted the family of
said Holland j. Ledbeter.
That at said time, and for year or
more prior to said day, to-wit, May 5,
1909, the defendant, Frank Smith, was
living with said Holland j. Ledbeter,
and was employed by him in working
upon the farmb.
That on or about the said fifth day
of May, A. d. 1909, the said Holland j.
Ledbeter disappeared from said prem
ises and his whereabouts were un-
known to his neighbors and those liv-
ing about there; for some two months,
or thereabouts. ot 1f
There is evidence in this case tend
ing to prove that on or about the 9th
day of June, A. A. 1909, a party was
organized by one P. A. Ledbeter, a
brother of said Holland j. Ledbeter to
institute a search for the said Holland
j. Ledbeter.
There is evidence in this case tend
ing to prove, that on said twenty-sev-
enth day of June, A. d. 1909. the said
parties, or some of them, discovered
the body of said Holland j. Ledbet
er, in field upon his farm at point
some fifty or sixty rods distant from
the house. b"s
There is evidence in this case tend
ing to prove, that when the body of
said Holland j. Ledbeter was so found,
it contained marks and evidences of an
assault having been committed and
made upon the body of him the said
Holland j. Ledbeter.
There is evidence in this case tend
ing to prove, that the body of said
Holland j. Ledbeter showed evidence
of his having received several blows