Evening times-Republican. [volume] (Marshalltown, Iowa) 1890-1923, 1916-07-15
JURY CHARGE
FAV0RS 0:|RPET
Judges Instructions Re
garded as Tantamount
to Acquittal.
ORPET's FATE NOW
IN HANDS OF JURORS
Court Cautions Jury Against convic-.
tion Without AbsoIuate Certainty Of
Guilt Flight Of Defendant After
Finding Of Girls Body, Not Regarded
az Evidence That orpet Committed
4 crime-Excerpts From Charge.

az Evidence That Orpee Oommleteo
X crime-Excerpts From Charge.
waukegan, Ill. July 1.-THE case OF
Will H. Orpet, University Of Wisconsin
student, charged with the murder OF
Marian Lambert, was given to the jury
this afternoon. Counsel for Orpet said
that Judge Donnelly's instructions
were tantamount to command to the
jury to acquit.
An audience, mostly Of women, from
white haired grandmothers to half
frightened school girls, packed the
court room today in expectation that
the case Of Will H. Orpet, charged
with numbering his sweetheart, Marian
Lambert, would go to the jury.
Orpet seemed more cheerful at the
prospect Of the end Of the trial. HIS
mother sat by him as usual ana the
.landlady of his university days, Mrs.
Edwin Taylor of Madison, on the other
side. His father, the big, bearded SUI
perintendent of the Cyrus Mccormick
estate, was behind him.
Refers to, "Boomerans" Testimony.
Attorney Joslyn, who began the
closing argument for the state, Friday,
said his final remarks would take most
Of the morning.
Mr.. Joslyn's first subject was the
boomerang testimony Of DR.. William
g. McNally, the chemist who, after
testifying for the state that Marian
died fof liquid cyanide Of potassium
poison, voluntarily appeared for the
defense and reversed his evidence. He
said that further analysis showed that
the poison was taken in the form Of a
powder.
II am going to ask you gentlemen to
ignore the testimony Of hired experts
from Chicago and use your own COM
mon sense" said Joslyn.
Mr.. Joslyn said that there could be
no doubt that the white spots on
Marian's coat were made from LIQUID.
He said that the only real attack on
this as made by, the defense, out
side the use Of experts. was to init
mate7that the spots were put there by
some one interested in the prosecu-
ton.
..And you don't believe that" insisted
the lawyer
Speaking Of Orpet's testimony. that
he merely looked at the body and ran,
Mr.. Joslyn said:
IF he suddenly was surprised to find
her unconscious there, wouldn't he
have bathed her head in the snow.
wouldn't he have opened her dress,
wouldn't he have searched all over for
signs OF life? Even the callous de-
fendant would have done that but he
did not, because he knew she was
dead, and he alone knew"
Instructions to Jury.
At the close Of Joslyn's argument
Judge Donnelly delivered his instruc-
tions to the Jury. Excerpts follow:
THE jury should not. go beyond the
evidence to ilunt Ep uuunt must
they entertain such doubts as chimer-
ical or conJectural.
"The court instructed the Jury that
altho the Jury should be satisfied from
the evidence beyond reasonable doubt
that the deceased Marian Lambert died
from cyanide Of potassium, poison, still,
If the Jury further finds from the evil
dence that she had the same opportun-
ity for taking the poison herself, with
out the aid of the defendant, that the
defendant had to give it to her, and
II It Is possible from any reasonable
manner to explain all the facts ana
circumstances proved in the trial, that
she did take the poison herself. for a
purpose Of killing herself. then this
sufficient to raise doubt and the 1,,,
should render a verdict Of not guilty.
Proof Must Be Convincing.
Nothing short Of proof so clear and
convincing as to exclude every <rea-
sonable hypothesis of his Innocence
win justify a conviction and without
such proof the jury must And the de-
fendant not guilty.
'.To warrant a conviction the de-
fendant must be- proven guilty so
clearly that there Is no doubt OF the
theory that he can not be innocent.
"Unless you find beyond all reason
able doubt IN considering the evidence
that the defendant had potassium In
his possession, Just before the death
of Marian. then you should ind him
guilty.
Flight Not Evidence Of Guilt.
''F'light, tho circumstance to be
weighed against the defendant. is NOT
OF conclusive character and may not
Be evidence Of guilt IL there was any
other motive for II than sense OF
guilt.
'M there are two theories, one for
guilt and the other for Innocence then
adopt the innocence- theory and acquit.
presumption Of innocence Is not a
mere form to be disregarded by the
Jury at pleasure, but 1t is an essential,
substantial part Of the law OF the land.
THE jury has NJ right to assume
the guilt and then' try to reconcile the
testimony with such theory"
PRESS NEWS CENSORED.