The Leon reporter. (Leon, Iowa) 1887-1930, 1912-04-11

she received in the face while che
was in the house, hence it was of the
utmost Importance to the state to
have the jury clearly understand
the exact location and character OF
the wound that Mrs. Zornes received
out in the yard.
State VS.. Novak, 100 Iowa, TT.
There was a moon an hour or two
high on the night in question, and
the states witnesses testified that
the defendant struck Mrs. Zornes
with, club, or board, about three
feet long. A club of this general
description, had been on the prem
ises near the house for some time
prior to this night, and the next day
it was found some distance away at
a point where the defendant, Clar-
ence Teale, was shown to have been
after the ARRAY, and with cap that
one of the party wore the night be-
fore. We think the club was suf-
ficiently identified to admit it as an
exhibit.
The court gave the following in
struction: THE intent with which
an act is done, is an act or emotion
of the mind, seldom, if ever, capable
of direct and positive proof; but it
is to be arrived at by such just and
reasonable deductions, or differences,
from the acts and facts proved, as
the guarded judgment of a candid
and cautious man would ordinarily
draw therefrom. The law warrants
the presumption, that a person in
tends the results, or consequences,
to follow an act which he intention
ally commits, which ordinarily do
follow such acts. If person makes
an assault upon another, and death
ensues, the presumption is warrant
ed that he intended to commit muir
der, if there is no evidence tending
to show that he intended lesser in
jury. If you find the defendant COM
mitted the assault, it will be your
duty from the evidence to determine
his intent in so doing by the sur
rounding circumstances and all the
evidence, in the case before you
which tends to show the intent
And the defendant says that the
last: sentence of the second clause
thereof is erroneous, because the
court omitted reference to a danger
GUS and deadly weapon. But read
in the light of the undisputed evil
dence, that the blow that killed Mrs.
Zornes was struck with deadly
weapon, it was as specific as was
necessary for the jury could not fail
to understand that it was to be ap-
piled to the evidence before it. The
court instructed on the weight to be
given to certain admissions claimed
to have been made by the defendant
and other witnesses outside of court,
different from what they had testi-
fed to as witnesses. The instruc-
ton was in line with similar ones
that have been often approved by
this court. Complaint is made be-
cause the court did not submit to the
jury special instruction asked by
the defendant, which was to the ef-
feet that he could not be convicted
unless the jury found, beyond a
doubt, that he, person
ally struck, the blow that caused the
death of Bertha Zornes. The sub
ject Of this request was fully covered
by the instructions given, and hence
there was no error in refusing it.
The defendant challenged a grand
juror on the ground that he had
formed an unqualified opinion as to
the guilt or innocence of the de-.
fendant, providing facts which he
had heard we're true. The flnal An-s,
aver OF the juror. however, was that
= - - u