The Fairmont West Virginian. (Fairmont, W. Va.) 1904-1914, 1912-08-21

ne isfisd iesicnsof Ii rourt. ii ID none
refused, III a. i am adyised 10 pSI
pear when summoned, j ieel safe iiiI
asserting that the defendant mad the
fullest bensfit ol All the expert teansI
nony which could be secured. az:
perts do rot decide canes. All they
can do Is TO express opinions. upon
d given stateof facts. and these opln.
ions may aid the jury in making
correct conclusions, but after all the
responsibility rests upon the jury, /
do not think the prisoner was injured
by the court refusing delay on this
account, The prisoner knew he
would have to make defense, and had
been long enough in custody to have
made some preparation. This being
a Especial term Of court, there was
nothing else for the Jury 10 do, and
all would have been Idle during this
time without, in my opinion. any suf;
fitient reason for the delay. Clearly
the defendant would have gained
nothing by the delay, and has no Just
cause OF complaint on this account.
itiiiy becomest he defendant to com.
plain OF speedy trials. He must not
forget that on the 2lst OF July he held
court all OF his own. His brother
had been arrested by an officer having
authority TO do SO, and taken into Gus.
tody. He decided that his brother
should be freed from the arrest by
court OF his own making. He was his
| own judge. witness and executioner,
and without notice slew his victim,
scarcely giving him time to offer a
prayer. The man who has this no.
ton of justice Is In no condition to
complain In view Of tho open. deliber.
ate and impartial trial he has had, in
a court presided over by judge who
has no possible feeling against him.
defended by able counsel, and his
case decided by twelve good men who
gould not, under their solemn oaths,
IND him guilty unless his EsilIt was
RroFen beyond all reasonable doubt.
Hoy different was this trial from the
ono he gave poor Otis Shaver He
slew his victim like a dog and cast
his body into the weeds along the
road side, Notwithstanding all this
he has had just such trial, surround.
cd by all safeguards. which would
be accorded TO the best citizen In the
commonwealth. There is but one law
Applicable 10 all me nand he has been
tried by that law.
From what have said It follows in
my opinion the verdict should not be
disturbed, either because the court
did not remoe the case 10 another
county, or for the reason that he was
put upon his trial so soon. Then did
the court commit any error TO the
prejudice of the prisoner. upon the
trial.
| %First, did the court err in ruling
upon quegtions OF law? The court
was required during the progress Of
the trial, by instructions 10 the jury
10 pass upon three important and in
deed ital questions OF law defining
the responsibility OF the defendant
for acts causing the death OF Shaver.
l held,
First. that If the death of Shaver
was caused wholly by the wound in.
!licted by the defendant, that the de.
PENDANT must be held responsible for
such act. To this ruling no objections
were made. 1t is conceded 10 be the
law, 500 r. ~ 'Ha7 "l
Second, that IL the death.of Shaver
was caused wholly by wound intlict-
ed by himself, Independent OF the
wound inflicted by the defendant.
then the defendant is not guilty Of
murder. All agree that this is the
| law.
Third, that II the defendant intiict.
ed upon the deceased mortal wound,
that afterwards the deceased wounded
himself, and that this selF-lnflicted
wound fastened his death, this would
not relieve the defendant from the eff.
tect OF his criminal act To this de.
tendant objected. Counsel for defend.
ant insist that while death may have
resulted from the combined effect OF
the wound inflicted by the defend.
ant, and the one inflicted by himself,
that therefore the defendant should
be relieved from responsibility for the
death. am clearly OF opinion that
the law Is. and should be, that II
wrongful act of the defendant in
whole or In part caused the death OF
Shaver that the defendant is respon
sibIe. His act need not nave been
the sole cause Of the death. | adhere
g.. l.