The Telegraph-courier. [volume] (Kenosha, Wis.) 1888-1946, 1920-11-25

first degree of ''premeditated design to
effect the death of the person killed or
of any human being" and in the sec
ond degree of the absence Of such de-
sign, the other essentials of murder in
the second degree being present. Given
all the elements of the second degree
and the prem editated design" men
toned, the offense is raised to the
higher degree.
The statute defining murder in the
third degree, reads "The killing of
human being without any design to
effect death by person engaged in
the commission of any felony shall be
murder in the third degree"
Third Degree Murder Defined.
If you are satisfied by credible evil
dence. beyond reasonable doubt, that
the defendant killed Pacini, without
any design to effect death, while he,
Ire defendant was engaged in the COM
mission of a felony that is, while un-
dertaking to rob Pacini, then you are
at liberty to find him guilty of murder
in the third degree, in case you are
not satisfied beyond reasonable doubt
that he is guilty Of one of the higher
degrees of homicide.
Conviction of a lesser degree Of
homicide must rest upon evidence es-
tablishing the essential requirements
and facts Of such lesser degree, and
failing to establish the requirements
and facts incident to higher degree.
You are instructed that the law pre-
sumes that every reasonable person
intends all the natural, usual and prob
able consequences, of his act and that
when person points loaded gun,
which the law says is q dangerous
weapon, at the vital part Of the body
of another and fires with the intention
at least of disabling the latter, and
the life of the person thus fired upon
in consequence Of such act, then the
law presumes that the natural and
ordinary consequences of the act were
intended, hence that death was in
tended.
Discusses AIibi Plea.
Included in the defendants plea of
not guilty and hence matter to be
considered by you is the defense called
an "alibi"; that is, that at the time
the fatal act was committed the de-
PENDANT was at another place and not
at the scene of the crime. You are
instructed that such defense is as
proper and legitimate, if proven, as
any other; and all evidence bearing
thereon should be carefully considered
by the jury, as should all the evidence
in the case. If, after considering all
the evidence there remains in your
mind reasonable doubt as to whether
the defendant was at the scene of the
crime or in some other place at the
time the fatal act was committed, then
the defendant is entitled to the bene-
fit of such doubt and to acquittal You
are instructed that the defendant is
not required to prove the defense of
alibi beyond reasonable doubt.
AS to Expert Testimony.
Testimony has been given by GER
tain witnesses who are termed experts.
The opinions of expert witnesses are
to be considered in connection with
all other evidence in the case and you
will consider them in the same manner
AS you consider any of the other testi-
mony in the case. Where the opinions
of experts are based upon facts as
sumed by hypothetical questions, you
will know whether all the assumed
facts included in the hypothetical
questions are in evidence and proved,
and you may consider that in de
mining what weight to give the testi-
mony of such expert witnesses. The
conclusions of expert witnesses are
opinions merely and to be considered
as such. Such testimony is not con-
elusive merely because given by ex-
perts, nor does the mere fact that the
same is given by experts compel you
to accept such testimony in preference
to any other. There is no rule of law
which requires yCI to surrender your
own judgment based upon the evidence
to that of any person testifying as an
expert witness, or, necessarily, to give
controlling effect to the testimony of
such expert witnesses.
Defendant a Competent Witness.
The defendant is competent wit
ness in his own behalf. He has given
his testimony and it is before you to
consider with all the other evidence in
the case. In determining the weight
to be given his testimony it is proper
for you to take into consideration. his
interest in the result of this prosecu-
tion and everything shown in the case
tending to corroborate or to discredit
him. You will give his testimony such
weight as under all the evidence in the
case you think it is entitled to. The
testimony of all the witnesses in the
case should be subjected to the same
test. The credibility of the several
witnesses and the weight to be given
to the testimony Of each is wholly for
your consideration and determination.
If you find thst any witness has
knowingly and wilfully testified falsely
in regard to any matter material to the
case, you may, if you see fit, but are
not bound to on that account, reject
all the testimony of such witness which
is not corroborated by credible evil
dence in the case.
What Is Reasonable Doubt"
The term reasonable doubt" as used
in this case means, as its name i'm
plies, doubt resting in reason, and it
must arise from all the evidence, or