FREE BOOKS

Author's List




PREV.   NEXT  
|<   379   380   381   382   383   384   385   386   387   388   389   390   391   392   393   394   395   396   397   398   399   400   401   402   403  
404   405   406   407   408   409   410   411   412   413   414   415   416   417   418   419   420   421   422   423   424   425   426   427   428   >>   >|  
that the man died of concussion or contusion of the brain. There was no evidence of it, because the brain was too decomposed, but he knows and is perfectly satisfied that that was the cause of death. Dr. Egbert could not, by any possibility, assign the cause of death, owing to the decomposition which had taken place, nor could he tell whether those wounds were made before or after death. Dr. Perkins says the same thing, and Dr. Moyer says the same. If they do not know, how do you know? Some of you told me your minds were made up, but by the living God you must try us according to the law. The burden of proof is on them and they must prove the cause of death, and how do you know it? Will you guess at it? Do you propose to guess my clients guilty and then hang them?" TESTIMONY OF THE EXPERTS. Mr. Forrest read from the testimony of medical men at some length to show that they could not assign the cause of death, and asserted that the State had compelled its witnesses to stretch their consciences and to testify to what were not the facts, because of the State's Attorney's blunder in not putting into the indictment "cause of death unknown." "Are you reading that testimony of Dr. Perkins correctly?" inquired Mr. Hynes. "You are putting as an answer and reading to the jury as an answer of the Doctor's what in reality was a question of your own." "Well, possibly I did," responded Mr. Forrest, who went on reading testimony. His misquotation of the testimony in that case, however, induced the State's Counsel to keep a very sharp eye on the evidence he quoted. Mr. Forrest criticised at some length the testimony given by Dr. Perkins, and argued that if it would not be possible to tell whether the victim died from concussion or contusion of the brain without a microscopical examination, it was a remarkable thing that no such examination had been made. It was evident from the testimony that some one was straining his conscience as far as he dared, and it was also in proof that it would have been impossible to have told even by a microscopical examination of the brain whether death resulted from concussion or contusion. However, if it could, they did not do it. Yet the attorneys for the State will ask you to say that this matter is satis
PREV.   NEXT  
|<   379   380   381   382   383   384   385   386   387   388   389   390   391   392   393   394   395   396   397   398   399   400   401   402   403  
404   405   406   407   408   409   410   411   412   413   414   415   416   417   418   419   420   421   422   423   424   425   426   427   428   >>   >|  



Top keywords:

testimony

 

examination

 
Perkins
 

reading

 

Forrest

 

concussion

 

contusion

 

length

 

evidence

 

answer


putting

 
microscopical
 
assign
 

Counsel

 
induced
 
argued
 

criticised

 

quoted

 

misquotation

 

wounds


question

 

reality

 

Doctor

 

possibly

 

responded

 

decomposition

 

However

 

resulted

 

impossible

 
attorneys

matter

 

remarkable

 
victim
 

conscience

 

straining

 
evident
 

clients

 
propose
 

guilty

 
EXPERTS

TESTIMONY

 

perfectly

 

living

 
satisfied
 

Egbert

 

burden

 
indictment
 

possibility

 

Attorney

 
blunder