Show JUDGE TO THE JURY the charge which exploded gaithan Guit eans Delu delusive siTe hopes the insanity dodge laid bare in its emptiness by W U to the washington jan 25 at judge cox began to deliver ins his charge to tile th jury he lie commenced by say ing that the constitution provide provides that in all criminal prosecutions the accused shall enjoy pros alio ill krisht rig lit of a speedy and public trial by an impartial jury in the state or district where the crime shall have been committed that lie shall be informed of hie tile cause and nature of the tion ag abst him that ho lie shall bo be confronted with the tile witness against him that he lie shall have compulsory v process to obtain witnesses in his favor lavor and that he lie shall have the assistance alsta si ce of counsel in the defense those provisions brov inions were intended for the protection ortho of tho innocent from injustice and oppression and it was as only I by their faithful observance guilt or innocence could be fairly ascertained certa ined every accused person was presumed ed to be innocent until tile accusation i was as proved with what difficulty and trouble the law has been administered in ill the present case the jurors have been daily witnesses it w was as how bov ever veyer a consolation to think not one of those sacred guarantees of tho the constitution had been violated in the person of the accused before proceeding further ho be wished to notice an incident which which had taken place pending the recent rece t argument a the prisoner had breque frequently tt taken occasion to proclaim that public opinion as evidenced by the press and correspondence was in his lav favor dr these declarations could not be prevented except by process of gagging th the prisoner prisoner any suga suggestion estion that the tile jury jury could bo be influenced by such lawless clattering of the prisoner would have seemed to him absurd and lie should have felt lio lie was insulting aultin the intelligence of the jury if he ile had w arned warned them not to regard it counsel for the prosecution had felt it necessary however i in final argument to interpose cont contradiction ra diction to such statements and exceptions as had been taken on tho tile part of the accused to the form in which that effort was made for the tile purpose of purging the record of any objectionable matter he ile should simply say anything any an thin which had been said on either side in reference to public excitement cit or newspaper opinion was not to be regarded bythe by the jury to establish murder it had to bo be proved ro C d first that death was caused ey by tt the act of the accused and further ft atcas was caused by malice aforethought that did not mean however the government had bad to prove any ill will or hatred on the part of the accused toward the deceased whenever homicide was shown to have bave been committed without lawful authority and with deliberate intent it was proved to have been done with malice aforethought and malice was not disproved by showing the accused had no personal ill will towards the deceased and that ho be killed from other motives es the jury would have e to say defendant was guilty of murder or innocent la lit order to constitute the tile crime of murder the assassin must have a reason reasonable ab le sane mind in technical terms he in must be of sound mind memory and discretion any irresponsible insane man could not commit murder ciflie if he was laboring laborin under disease of anent mental I faculties to such an extent that he lie ed did not know what lie lieras was doing or know that etwas it was wrong then he was wanting in that sound mind memory and discretion that was part edthe of the define defini tion I of murder every defendant was presumed innocent until tho tile accusation a against ast him was established by proof p of notwithstanding this presumption 91 eption of innocence it was equally true the defendant efen dant was presumed to bo be eane sane and to have been eo so at the time the crime was committed the tito burden of proof as to insanity was on tho defense inthe if the jury entertained reasonable doubt on any ground as to anhof the essential elements of crime ill alie defendant was entitled to the benefit of that doubt and to acquittal doubt however must be since sincere e and fortified by proofs and testimony the jury should bo be reasonably and morally certain of the facts which they declared to be their verdict there was no question about the firing g of the tile shot its pro producing ducin death and and providing the deafen defendant dg n t were capable capable of criminal intent or malice of its malice aforethought thearis the prisoners own handwriting hand writing showed that ho lie contemplated tho the removal of the president resident six weeks before the shooting n g and had deliberately planned it a and I M prepared for it these thise things e establish malice nevertheless f ani animosity were established to a necessary degre eit must be allowed weight wei glit 11 lie already ready said a mancho man who is insane in the sense that makes him hini irresponsible it cant commit crime the defense of insanity lias has been so abused as is to bo be brought into great discredit it was tho the last resort in cases of unquestioned guilty it has been the excuse for juries in bringing in a verdict of acquittal when w hen there was wais public sympathy for the accused and c especially poci ally when there was provocation for homicide according to law it was sufficient to prove the act was done by deliberate intent as distinct from the act done under a certain impulse in heat beat of blood the jury was w as not to infer that the prisoner w was as insane because he committed dan an enormous crime the only safe rule was for the jury to direct its attention to one test of crim inal responsibility namely whether the prisoner possessed mental capacity nt itt the time tho the act was committed to know that it wa was whether he lie was deprived of that capacity by mental disease there was one im important distinction which the jury must not lose sight of and they must decide bow how far it was a applicable to distinction Nis ili liia casc that was the tile distinction between mental and moral obliquity between mental incapacity to distinguish between right and wrong an and d moral insensibility to that distinction and now gentlemen to sum up tip all I have said to you if you find from the whole evidence that at the time odthe of the commission of the file homicide the prisoner was laboring under tinder a defeet defect of his reason that he lie was incapable of understanding what he lie was doiny or of seeing that it was a wrong thing to do as for ex example ampo if he lie was under the insane delusion that the almighty had bad commanded him to do the tile act then he lie was not in a responsible condition of mind but is an object of compassion and should now be acquitted if on the other hand you YOU find he was under no insane delusion that he had possession offis of his faculties and had power to know his act was wrong and if of his own free will he lie deliberately conceived the idea of and ejected the then whether his motive was personal vindictiveness vindictive animosity a desire I to to avene avenge suppose political wrongs or a morbid desire for notoriety or tt if you 11 are re unable to discover any motive at all the act is simply mur murder derand and it is your duty to find a verdict of guilty as 11 indicated or after a suggestion from scoville to that effect you find the prisoner is not guilty by reason of insanity it is you duty to say so you will now retire to your room and consider a verdict during the delivery of th i judges charge which vi was as completed at pm there was perfect stillness in the crowded court room and even the p prisoner arso n r kept kept absolutely quiet with t the h exception ep on of one or two simple inte interruptions r ru t T the h e jury u immediately retired and d many odthe of the spectators left the court room |