Strike bulletin. (Clinton, Ill.) 1913-1915, 1914-10-14

sure the fair administration of criminal justice
esd guarantee uniformity OF outlook on the par,
"a jur, ahd the first great distinguishing fea
tsre OF modern Christian law "A distinguished
from pagan. un.t'hristian law, Is the doctrine Of
OUT Law that makes II the sworn duty OF a juror
and Of Jury To indulge the defendant In the pre-
sumption Of innocence.
Mr. Herrick In his comment to you pointed out
10 his questioning that that presumption Is legal
legal presumption. that u 10 not uleoal pre-
Hnciion and know Of no presumption Sssoaosr
enaa one reinforced by the fact that II In created.
esaserved. and protected by the Law. In ths Fiyan
eass the supr~m. court. the highest aWthortty In
!Ais state In Interpreting Determining ssA asfinins
Ne conditions under which = juror should view
attendant. said. The court instruets the jury
mat u II their duty to presume the defeadant.
John Flynn not guilty" That 10 the duty Of .
Presumption throughout the trial This vas the
nserurtion given. From nov until evidence
Aah have been introduced which. to the minds
the jury. IL sufficien, TO establish the guilt Of
Ms defendant beyond all reasonable doubt. and 10
seh evidence be not introduced then the defend
aat should have the benefit Of such presamptton
ufoush all stages of tho trial. and further. u 10
NE duty of the jury TO explain the evtdsacs Of
Bred against the defendant upon the hy1ethesis
uat the defendant acted In self defence " they
eeh reasonably and consistently do 80 Ia tks Hight
svsn
The portion that I called your stteation 70: -un-
~ evidence shall have been introduced which 10
ne Minds Of the jury is sufficient Ia establish the
ss'I OF the endant beyond all reasonable doubt
such evidence be not introduced then the
ssfshdani should have the benefit Of such pre-
1mphon through all stages OF the trial. 10 In
wslies The Court said. THE words which We have
"aneised we're inserted by the court In lieu OF the
.efas until they shall retire to the jury room
other words. the trial court had Instructed the
JsFS u was not their duty to indulge this pre-
~"puon during the entire trial until they sot into
sse Jury room but only TO that time or ut that
W Jury felt that the presumption OF innoeeuce had
ssen rebutted by evidence Indicating the xviit Of
he defendant
Hesvs~k OAje~sa-
~ Herrick: Il believe the opening sta suent
" enough 10 read the law and decisions
me Court. ! don't know any objection 10 IT,
-. herriek lie may proceed"
hv"
Ihe Court: Proceed. gentlemen"
me court said the modification was erroneous
NE Jury were thereby authorized upon considera-
ssa OF the evidence for the prosecution " they
~smsd that evidence sufficient. To establish the
wv OF the def endant beyond a reasonable doubt
= .nen take away from the defendant the benefit
.hs presumption OF innocence and consider the
s"sh'r "ffer'd In his behalf without any REGARD
'nst presumption. The defendant Is entitled TO
"a eeneft of the presumption of Innocence during
=. 'hf steps OF the trial and during the consider
"h OF all the evidence by the jury. After they
eeeh instructed by the court and until they
- ss.'mihe from consideration Of all the evidence
~. sas me guilt of the defendant has been estsb-
ss-. '' o'Yond reasonable doubt The presufnp-
- - OF Innocence attends III. accused at every
"' IN" proceeding until the jury agree upon
.saalet teiing number OF eases previously
.,sa@atsh by tn. highest court In our statel.
."''s OF law change like fashions They are q
"a " ,hs progress OF the human race.
'"e rule OF law applicable To this case In one
ssv,1ment - II is distinotiveiy American rule
s an evidence OF the larger humanity of our
"'''Ah spirit In administering criminal justice |