Graham guardian., 1915-05-14
A FEW HINTS ON EVIDENCE

means OF proving the trutn OF IaIsily
of any disputed question or issue of
fact. 1t is also generally believed
that there are two kinds of evidence
direct or positive evidence and
indirect or circumstantial evidence.
AS an instance of direct evidence
the books mention the testimony of
a witness that he saw A kill b by
means of a gunshot. and as an in
stance of circumstantial evidence
where jury finds AS guilt from
the following circumstances: That
A was BIS enemy; that shortly be-
fore, he had threatened BIS life;
that A owned a gun that was found
concealed near the scene of the
homicide; that the waddiDg of the
gun was part of a letter addressed
to A, the counterpart being found
in his possession just after the kill
ing, each circumstance itself being
satisfactorily proved.
But instead of these circum-
stances. let US suppose A on trial
for the same offense and the follow
ing circumstances given in evidence
against him: That A was a French
man and B Dane; that A was a
monarchist and B a democrat; that
a neighbor of A owned gun. This
will serve to show the reason of
the following common test on cir.
cumstantial evidence: Would any
number of the circumstances offered
convince?
Most circumstances are neces-
sarily brought to the attention of
court and jury by witnesses, and all
witnesses may err and falsify. But
some circumstances spring out of
the case. A man was on trial for
stealing a suit of clothes from an
express office. Another man had
given his order to a tailoring agent
in Chicago to have the suit made
and sent by express. The alleged
owner testified he had ordered Just
such a suit as the one shown in
court, was asked but few cross
questions, and the prosecution ex-
cused him from the case without
attempting to show that the clothes
fitted him. AS he was going out of
the door the attorney for the defend
ant called to him to try on the coat.
He put it on and it lacked about
four inches of meeting in front.
The court directed verdict of ac-
quittal. The defendant in a Grim.
inal case testified that he was near
the scene of the offense about an
hour after dark feeding his hens.
The prosecuting attorney asked only
one cross-question: DO hens eat
after dark" 1t convicted the &C.
cused on the first ballot.
The great danger in cases of cir.
cumstantial evidence is generalizing
from insufficient data, deciding on
unfit or too few circumstances,
jumping to conclusions. The law
excludes four classes of facts which
are first and most confidently &C.
cepted by the average layman.
These are: Character, hearsay, opin.
ion and acts similar to, but discon,
nected with those in controversy.
The following synopsis of a dia.
logue between a complaining wit.
ness and prosecuting attorney i.
typical and common: Il want A
prosecuted for horse stealing. He's
sure guilty" How do you know
he's guilty." Because he's crook,
ed" The state can't show his
bad character until he offers evi,
dence Of his good character. But
how do you know he's crooked?'
B told me that c told him that A
was suspected of stealing back east. .
BY the word circumstances" i:
meant such evidential facts as those
first above mentioned in the trial OF
A for killing B. 1t literally means
things standing around" The
words res gestae" literally near
things DONE" and now mean the
most remote, characterizing or col
oring circumstances of a case. A
case" is at bottom based on the
idea or figure of three concentric
circles of evidential facts, with the
main issues of law and fact at the
center. The inner circle stands for