The evening world., 1912-10-24

uence 10 not ueHueu py tuo ieW, Uoso
the Court TT 10 unnecessary for me
to define the word tend You must
decide ~ there has been suoh other svi-
dence as tends to connect the defendant
with commission Of the orifne. send
II to you gentlemen. and II 10 for you
90 say II such corroborative evidence
Is sufficient to tend to connect che de-
fendant with tho commission OF the
crime.
JURY MUST DECIDE A. TO WHO
ARE AccoMPLIces.
Formerly. testimony Of IN aocomprcs
was accepted IN the courts A. sumcisnt
to secure q onviction. But . more lib
era, and human custom arose not 70
eonviot on the uncorroborated testimony
Of an accompnce Then. On The advice
Of judges .hts custom became . 1aw,
but Il was left wholly IN the discretion
OF jury TO decide who are and ~hs
arc not accomplish and 10 dsS:ds
whether thu testimony Of An acoomples
has been corroooratsd BY the witnessed
1T would Be impossible TO outline the
most important features Of evidanca
Every case must rest upon dts ewu to.
tal Of evidence u u for the Jury to
say how far the testimony Of ne admit
ted accomplioss has been corroborated.
ION the testimony Of the aceomphoss;
the law permits such testimony. Il does
not say such testimony may not b re-
ceived. On ths other hand. II says 80.
completes testimony must b received
and that you must aoospt u for what
you believe II 70 b worth.
THE law recognises tha& In many rasss
the sxtgences OF the oOcaston demand
that testimony OF Acoompaoss sh0uid
be taken. .
There 10 no inhibition on you OF &C.
cepting the testimony Of Rose or Web
Der or Schepps. Cor me law recognizes
tho value Of that evidence. The law
recognizes tho exigenctss that made II
absolutely necessary to use such ew-
dence In order that the ends Of Justice
may be served. Tho law cannot exclude
such evidence and this Jury must weigh
It for what II 10 worth.
There are three stages Of . crime:
First: Preparation for the crime itself
Second: The commission Of tho crime
Third: Hiding the traces. 80 that the
criminals may escape Out Of that
third clause, OCCASIONS arise that make
II necessary often for the State to use
the accomplices as main witnesses.
There 10 nothing In the Law 70 zaAke
you exclude the testimony Of confesssa
sooompNoss. Instead, the Law Directs
you to take the testimony Of NJ 40
completes ana give Il suoh wSl6At -
you believe IL merits"
Justice Goff justified his course IN
rushing the trial, saying that It was
important that the Jurors should have
had continuous stream Of evidence
poured before them: that the complsxi-
ties of the evidence made II necessary
to ray before them . continued nara
tive.
Jack Rose" continued the Court.
Was under direct examination Tor three
hours and under cross-examination for
seven. He was compelled TO testify in
continuous strain. and you must con-
slider that no time was allowed between
cross and direct examination for him To
change his story"
Justice Coz then took up the credi-
bility to be sivsu 10 the testimony OF
the witness. declaring that rested en-.
tirely In the minds OF the Jurors. but
adding that the appearance Of the wit.
ness on the stand. his manner. his an.
swers, his attitude-all these should b.
taken into considerations.
HOW TO WEIGH TESTIMONY OF
JACK ROSE.
"Of the witness Rose" said tho Jus,
tice, "you must consider the environ.
ment Of his life IN the slums and hi
| occupation. the frankness or difiidencs
with which he answered questions, hi
ability to Withstand tho rigid and grill
ing cross-examnation Of tho learned
| counsel for the defense. the manner II
which he told his story and the manner
In which he stuck to that story undel
cross-examinathon.
lis It within the probabilities Of hit
mentality to concoct such storyf Il
1t humanity possible that ne could ri
upon that witness chair and concoo
such a story, with all Its details ant
ramlfications7 You must decide that
You must recall how he stuck 20 4
under cross-examination. You must con
slider his relations with the defendan
and his social relations.
at Is of crucial Importance for you
gentlemen. to decide II Jack Rose
story was a creation of his own brail
or whether he narrated to you tho fact
and circumstances OF the crime.
AS before instructed you, II u
within your power to believe or
disbsusvs his story IN whole or
part. II he Impressed you % toll
ing . story that was Q pure CON-
oootion OF his brain, with no foun-
dalton In fact, the Peoples case
must fall.
"oentismsn, IN oommen laa.
guags, look 1T this testimony
squarsly. On Roses story largely
depends the guilt or innocence Of
the accused.
"If You regard the testimony Of
Jack Rose - true then you must
bring In . verdict OF guilty, but
II You reject the testimony Of
Jack Rose then your verdict must
be an acQutttal.
DISCUSSES THE THEORY OF
NAAnl Enop n NJ