Grand Forks herald. [volume] (Grand Forks, N.D.) 1916-1955, 1921-07-09

stestifyinS q he. aid. It n not enough
ITO prcpesathe testimony given As
charged Was false. Az TO whether AZ
not IL wAs false IL only Incidental.
The question is: Did the defendant
know thestestimony.he gave MA false,
Eor did hes make an 4unaualiAeA 4t4te-,
Ment - the fact which hA knew he.
did not know TO satst?' The aefendS;
ant n this case does not have ia
prove that HE testimony was true
that he WAS hofestly mistaken, The
burden Is an the STATE Is establish BY
his whole case i the satisfaction of
each ard every one Of you gentlemen
that any Testimony charged BY the
state to have been falsely given by
the defendant was In fact falsely
given by him withingthe meaning OF,
that term as dAhne It in these in-
structtcns. The ofsense consists IN.
swearing falsely and corruptly With
out probable cause of belief. not Ia
swearing trasl1ly Or inconesderateiy
according 70 belief. The fdllssS oath
take cannot amount to voluntary and
corrupt*perJury.ss ss 90
SIN determining What Is probable
cause il this case ana In passing upon
the question . ( the falsity 81 any
testimony the defendant may have
given you ntust determine that prob
able cause not. from your standpoint
nor from mine but from the stand
point Of the defendant at the time he
gave such testimony; that Is, you
must look. at this matter through the
DEFENDANTS eyes as he then saw It.;
You must hear through the defend
upon which he may have formed any
Inference hnirfnn ar NnnHtusion t4Aa
The RAal Teen.
Tho test 10: Did the defendant. at
the time he xave the testinGny In
question honestly believe that which
he said to be- TRUE. Then, and in that
event, even though the same was not
true and even though such belief as
to its truth was rashly and inconsid-
erately formed, nay move, even
though a. little diligence on5 his part
would have enabled him to discover
it's falsity, yet. IL he was honest In so
crime Of perjury as charged in the
information and your verdict must be
q verdict OF not guilty.'s
II charge you. gentlemen, that the
giving OF wilful false testimony IN a
manner calling for the exercise OF
Judgment and expression OF opinion
may constitute the. crirne Of perjury il
he who 50 ttestines wilful!y aad cor.
irupt1y refra!ns from exercising his
judgment and giving expression tc
his real opinion but IN such ase The
state must establish beyond a reasons
able doubt the wi!ful failure and re-
, raent and I further charge you tina,
where the testimony which Is thu
! basis Of an assignment Of perjury !:
a matter OF construction and deduc.
ton from given matters and thing.
? the mere fact that it is erroneous o,
Is not a correct construction or is no,
g logtca! deduction from. all the mat
ters and things On. which Il e baset
or from which II is drawn. eannoi
! naakehit perjury. The test Is: Wa
euch opinion, belief conclusion or In.
: ference wtlfully false or errone
: ous?'sts'
in this case the intent II the gts
at the offense charge against the dc
: PENDANT IN the information. II h
= testified falsely in order to make hi
: ease; the state must establish beyont
a reasonable doubt that he TESTIFIED
SO wtlfully and In this case the inten
must be derived from the evidence o
the acts and things Of, the word
a spoken, If any were spoken. in o
nection with the other evidence II
the case and It is for you to say. from
, the evidence IN the case whether o
not an intent existed In the mind Q
the defendant at the time OF the al
legged offense to speak falsely or t
Z speak that as the truth which he di'
d not know 70 be the truth
i Judge Nuesaae's entire charge wa
some 10, 600 words in length. It IL
Guided a. full, recitation Of the infer
nation against Brtnten ana the usua
explanations regarding the doctrine Q
reasonable doubt. reliability Of evi
: denoe and other detailed explanation
o Of the law. =. J ;