The Mankato free press. [volume] (Mankato, Blue Earth County, Minn.) 1879-1924, 1910-01-07

than are those who are not so accused
in any event, they have the more i'm
medla,e need OF the laws protection
Your duty calls upon you to see t,
it that the people shall understand
from your verdict, that those wht
violate the law are brought to speed,
punishment, and as well, that thos,
who are innocent though accused, ar
safe in the hands of the law.
So you will take up your work, de
termined to do exast Justice and
while you will not lay aside sympathy
for those in trouble, you will not al
low sympathy, on one hand, nor preiu
dice, or public sentiment on the other
to blind you in your duty, or to swer,
you one iota from the line of YOU
duty. Upon you alone rests the tasE
of determining the guilt, or innocence
of the defendant and you are to deter
mine this from the evidence intro
duced in this case, before you, and the
law applicable thereto as given you by
the court
trial before you, charged in the indict.
ment found by grand jury of youl
county, with the crime of murder in
the first degree.
To this Indictment the said defend
ant has entered her plea of not
guilty of the crime so charged, and il
is for you to determine from the evil
dence introduced before you, and un-
der the instructions of the court, the
question of said defendants guilt, OF
| innocence of the crime so charged
AT the outset the defendant is pre-
sunied to be innocent of the offense
with which she is charged, or of any
other public offense, and this presump-
ton remains with her until she is prov
en- guilty, and the fact that she has
been indicted by the grand jury, in
no manner removes this presumption of
innocence.
Before you can find the defendant
guilty, you must be convinced by the
evidence introduced, in the case, be-
yond a reasonable doubt, of her guilt,
and if the evidence fails to so con-
vince you, beyond a reasonable doubt,
then it is your duty to acquit her.
1t is encumbent upon the state to
prove every material allegation of the
Indictment as therein alleged beyond
reasonable doubt; for nothing is to
be presumed against the defendant, for
as L have stated under the law she is
presumed to be innocent until she is
proven guilty beyond reasonable
doubt, by the evidence in the case,
and if the death of Holland J. Led
better can be accounted for upon any
other reasonable hypothesis, other than
the guilt of the defendant, then you
should so account for it and find the de-
PENDANT not guilty, even though you
should believe that it demonstrated the
probability of the defendants guilt, for
as | have stated before, the evidence
must be such as to convince you beyond
reasonable doubt, of her guilt, but,
by this, | do not mean a mere posi-
bic doubt, for everything relating to
human affairs and depending upon NOR
al evidence, is open to some possible
doubt.
A reasonable doubt is that state of
the mind, which, after the entire COM
parison and consideration of all the
evidence, leaves the minds of the jurors
in that condition that they cannot say
that they have an abiding conviction
to a moral certainty, that the charges
are true.
Absolute certainty is not required
in order to justify a conviction of a
person charged with crime, but when
the evidence establishes the truth of
the charge to a moral certainty, GER
tainty that convinces and controls the
understanding and fairly satisfies and
directs the mind and judgment of those
who are bound to act conscientiously
upon it, then the proof is beyond a
reasonable doubt. And in this case,
you should not go beyond the evidence
and hunt for doubts, or entertain
doubts based upon groundless conjec-
ture. In short, as | have already stat
ed and instructed you, you should be
convinced beyond reasonable doubt of
the defendants guilt, before you find
the defendant guilty.
1t is not intended however, by this
rule of law which envelops the defend
ant with the presumption of limo
cence and requires the state to estab-
fish every material fact of the indict-
ment beyond a reasonable doubt, to
SHE'D the guilty, but the rule is intend
ed for the protection of those, who,
though innocent, may be accused of
crime.
In order to arrive at right con-
clusion and determine whether or not
the defendant is guilty, or not guilty,
you should fairly, carefully and dis
passionately consider all of the evil
dence before you, the testimony of the
witnesses produced on the part of the
state, and as well, those on behalf of
the defendant, and whenever you can
reasonably do so, reconcile all of the
testimony, to the end that you may
correctly determine the question of the
guilt, or innocence of the defendant
And in weighing the testimony of the
different witnesses, you should take in
To CON dpra tiOp fha infaraSf or Ia oil of