Norwich bulletin., 1919-02-13


at Capt Lennen's homa, 40 Boswell |
avenue, on the night of Dec 5th came |
t.. an end in the superior court here |
w ednesday afternoon when the jury |
that has been hearing the case since |
Wednesday, Jan. 20. reported dis |
agreement.
After court adjourned 1t was learn
ed that the jury stood ten for con-
viction on the charge of simple as
sault and two for acquittai.
Their report to the court was made
at 3.45 in the afternoon. BY thar time
the jurors had been in deliberatiou in
the jury room for three hours, and al
most another hour had been used in
the court room IN reading to them at
their request the official court STEM
ographer's notes on the evidence and
the examination of Mr.. Scarborough
OF New Haven, the expert who festi-
fed as to the blood stains on the over
coat and gloves of Mr., Holmes.
When the jury reported, Judge VIII
liam N. Maltbie. asked the foreman
Henry J. Adams of this city. if there
seemed to be a prospect that they
could reach verdict. Mr.. Adams an
swered in a very positive way that
there seemed to be no chance.
The Judge remarked that he thought
the jury had made an effort to reach
verdict and he was not inclined to
send them back to try longer. After a
word or two with the states attorney,
he thereupon thanked them for their
services and discharged them from
further consideration of the case.
Mr., Holmes and his attorneys, all
with smiles on their faces. left the
court room soon after the jury had
been finally discharged.
When court came IN at 9.45 in the
| morning States Attorney Hadlai A.
Hull took up about fifteen minutes in
| concluding his argument, which he
| had not finished on Tuesday. He at
tackled the alibi that the defense
| claimed it had established, the eX-
plantations made of the payment of
TIE note, and praised the efficiency of
the Norwich police.
Judge MaItbie's Charge.
Judge Maltbie spoke for As minutes
| III making his charge to the jury, and
they retired TO the jury room at i0.45
O'Clock. In substance his charge was
along the following lines:
| Every man appears before the
court as an innocent man until he
has been proven to be guilty and the
stote must prove every element that
constitutes the crime charged. Proof
must be beyond a reasonable doubt
and such doubt must not be g. guess
or a conjecture or q surn1ise or q
doubt suggested by the ingenuity OF
counsel 1t must come from the evil
dcnce or lack of evidence for which
you can give a reason.
The particular charge in this case
is assault with intent to kill anG
murder The thing first to be deer
mined is was an assault made. The
state has produced evidence OF vari.
Gus injuries which is not seriously
disputed. The first great question i:
to find whether or not this accused il
the man who made the assault.
Judge Maltbie said that the evi
dsnce and the arguments in the cas-
Rad been very full and he shouls
make no attempt to enter into re,
view OF this.
He would first call attention to TIL
nature of the evidence offered by tn
state Except for p partial Identified
tion by Mr.. Boland there was no di
rect identification OF the accused NJ
one says, 7 saw him DO It. It is
: perfectly proper way for the state +
= attempt to prove it's case by circunl
| atantial evidence, and proof rerchet
! this way is Just as vail and prope
as the evidence Of I saw, l heard.
/ felt.
: Motive is no part of crime and i
I not evidence. To secure conVictio
I it is not necessary for the state t
Z show a motive; but the law rccog
y E.izes the value of motive. and if mo
e tive IS shown or is not shown ii is 70
!. the jury to consider this VITA the 9th
; er circumstances. The state need nc
n prove a motive but the jury shout
take into consideration what is show
o in connection with this part Of tn
c case, In q doubtful case, the abSenC
t OF motive might be enough to raise
e reasonable doubt.
# Good reputation is not an eXcus
: for crime. Frequently men OF GOO
reputation have been found in secrt
crime. But good reputation in a con,
Tnunity is to be taken into accoun
ard in doubtful case good reputa
ton might be enough to raise re-
: sonable doubt.
II you are satisfied the ecused d.
Is commit this assault, continued Il
: Judge you will then proceed 10 Il
y further claims in this ease. This
lie not a simple assault as charged
Is the state against the accused. TIL
ot charge is ASA tit with intent 10 X
" ard murder. It admits ne either a.
2, a2ult with intent to kill or assam
&c with intent to murder. A word as
In case which the state must prove
I'd you. 1t is almost Impossible TO pr
ut sent direct proof. If is necessarily
a. matter of inference. Ask yourself,
the circumstances point clearly a!
ct irresistibly TO the existence Of this i
1e tent II you find it SO, IT is prove
;. | It there still remains reasonab
is doubt, it has not been proven
In There IS the assault with intent
kill. It would not be necessary 70 e
re tablish that the man who made t.
ny assault went to the house with t
intent to kill But if the intent h
IT been formulated up to the time of t
IN assault, it would Re shown. In IL
ce connection, it should also be consi
he cred whether the attack desisted b
fore death actually ensued.
t. There is also the intent in ASA,
he with intent to murder. Murder ne
essarily involves killing. You MT
nd first find intent to kill before fndi
n intent to murder. These elemer
1T have to do with the state Of mind
~. tie man. This condition we expire
Iy, by the term malice aforethought-''
r. You may find malice from hatred,
of will, or maievolence towards Ca
Lennen. You must consider ali t
. circumstances. You may find NAL
- III deliberate design to kill Capt. lie
ren for the sake Of concealing son
thing. You may find malice from
assault of such 2 nature as show