Decorah public opinion. (Decorah, Winneshiek County [Iowa]) 1895-1928, 1923-01-24

n cautious in considering evidence a. to
alleged admissions or statements of the
defendant il same are testified TO by any
ipe5sou who may appear biased or pre-
ludiced against INN 10 any extent Ad-
missions OF statements made BY a party
freely, voluntarily and intelligently
when correc:ly understood, remembered
and related ~ witness, are proper
Iclideucr and same may be, and often
are. Cogent and strong evidence OF. the
facts involved IL such admissions or
statements: but same are not conclusive
and will not IN any event warrant a
lcDnEiction unless accompanied with 9TH
Ter proof that the OifenSe was committed.
-.
/ Il yJu believe from the evidence that
iauy evidence that any witness has will
fully sworn falsely on this trial as 10
am material TACT or matter connected
with the case, or If you find that any
witness has al any other times and
Iplaces sworn 10 facts and circumstances
/ az variance with his testimony here, or
If you ind that any witness has made
statements OF: Of court and when not
under oath al variance with his state
merits on the witness stand, you should
carefully weigh the entire testimony of
such witness for the purpose of deter
mining 70 what extent, II any, this tends
to i1lpeach either his memory or his
ltrufhfElneSS and credibility or detractS
from the weight which ought to be
given 70 hrs testimony You ought not
| 20 disregard the testimony of any wit
ness which YOU believe TO be true or is
sustained by the corroborating evidence
sa.. Ill Il
witnesses. but you are of course TO dis
regard any evidence in the case which
YOU do not. under al the facts and cir
lcuElS-arces proved, believe 10 be true.
| III you md from the evidence that any
witness IN this case has wilfully testi-
I fed falsely a 10 any material fact. then
Z you are a. liberty 70 disregard the whole
I OF the testimony Of such witness. except
( n 81 far as the same is corroborated
. by other credible evidence. Ii Is for YOU
Ito say, from ILe evidence which has
Z beer introduced upon the trial. whether
( or not yua find thar any witness has so
Testified falsely and in any event the
weight, II any TO he given to the teSti-
fUony q such witness Is matter TO
+ be determined hy you alone
You have 10 night TO disregard the
4 testimony OF the defendant on ground
alone that he i the defendant and
stands charged with the commission of
4 TIE crime alleged n the indictment. The
Law allows him 10 testify in his own be-
half and YOU should fairly and impair
rially consider his testimony. together
with all the other evidence in the case
and II f-orl a. OF the evidence you have
a reasonable dolhS a. 10 the defendant 5
guilt as charged II the indictment. YOU
should give him the benefit of such
i5o2bt ard acguit him
-
/ Evi1ence OF previous good character
is competent evidence in favor OF Z
party accused as tending 10 show thai
he would not Re likely 10 commit Tho
crime charged against HIM and. II
ldcEbrful cases. same IS conclusive IN HI:
favor. IN this case ii you ind. iron
the evidence introduced upon the trial
. THAT, prior 70 December IL, 1921, I'll,
defendants character was that OF /:
,qEiet. pezceaGe, well disposed and Law
abiding man II the community in which
. he resided. then this Is proper 10 b
! considered BY ypg, together with all TIL
iCthe- Evidence in the case, in deterTnin
, rig whether or NOT he is guilty OF an!
crime Involved n this case. Ii Is 10
'y0- - say. from the evidence intro
'tuced in the case. whether the tru,
character Of the defendant in the res
lrer-s mentioned was good or otherwis,
lp-ior % said date. The weight, il any
70 be gwen 10 ire fact, as same may b,
lfoIrd by you. Is for You alone 10 de
ite-llline. Ii. after consideration Of al
r itile egidence IL the case. including tina
Hearing upon ms previous character. yol
. .e-te-taia any reasonable doubt OF de
PENDANTS g-,Ilt, yoir verdict should b'
not guilty
( TIE state mast prove, beyond a rea.
.Eo=able doubt, that the defendant j:
guilty Or you sh,1ld aequit him.
p.
II yo- End. from the evidence intro.
|Guoed upon the rriaL under these in
Ist-uctio1s, beyond reasonable doubt
THAT the defendant : guilty OF some one
iCf the offenses included in the indict-
Irleat. and YOU have a reasonable doubt
* 10 whether he Is guilty OF a greater
Tor lesser offenye, then you ought 10 give
defendant the benefit Of such doubt and
find him guilty Of the lesser offense.
=.
! One theory O. the defense is that FL
liner van Brocklin killed Irene van
Brcckiin. If in fact this theory Is COR
lreCt, then II necessarily follows that
the defendant r. F. Kneeskern is no,
guilty. II. after consideration OF the evil
Idence introduced upon this trial as to
! LINER van Brocliir. IN connection with
IAN Of the other evidence. or lack OF evi-
|derce. YOU have 2 reasonable doubt as
Ito whether Or not the defendant p. F
IKneeskern IS guilty. then YOU ought &c
EYe the defendant the benent OF such
dOubt and return q verdict OF not guilty
II 26
In criminal cases the defendant is pre-
sumed 90 be innocent until he is proven
guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. Full
and satisfactory proof of guilt is re-
Iuuired. 70 mere weight OF evidence IS
sufficient. but all reasonable doubt as &c
THE guilt OF the defendant must be ex'
.cluded. The proof Of guilt OF the de.
Ifendant must be excluded The proof
10. guilt must be inconsistent with
|any other rational explanation. Thi:
doubt must, however. be real, no
. captious or imaginary Il must b'
! a doubt wEich.. without being sough
: after fairly and naturally, arises IL
! THE mind after comparing all of th'
evidence and carefully and deliberatel!
considering the whole case. If, upoi
Z such comparison and consideration, th,
! minds and conscienceS of the jurors ar,
4 =. CO..