|
141
inference which the Government draws frqm them, but they must
exclude every other possible inference. Because, if a set of circum-
stances could establish two distinct hypotheses, and one is contrary
to what the Government assert, and the other in accordance with it, -
that is to say, if one is in favor of the defendant's guilt, and the other
of his innocence,-there is an end of their case. The Jury are bound
to take his innocence for granted. And it is from this rule being
disregarded, being overlooked, that a vast quantity of misery bas"
been inflicted upon innocent people.
I will refer to Best upon Presumptions of the Law, page 282.
" The evidence against the accused -"
Mr. Cliford. I do not understand that that work is authority
in these Courts. I have not been much in this Court; but I suppose
that that is the work of a very extravagant man, and I do not know
that it has been passed upon by the Court.
Mr. Sohier. It is a work that has been cited here very often ;
and I am not sure that it was not cited in Peter York's case. I
think it was.
Best refers to the first of Starkie's Evidence, page 577, third edi-
tion, and to Willis on Circumstantial Evidence, page 187, as author-
ities. The rule is stated, as taken from several works, that the
evidence must be such as to exclude, to a moral certainty, every
hypothesis but that of the guilt of the defendant. And if any other
hypothesis can be sustained, it is for the Jury to assume that hy-
pothesis to be the true one. And Mr. Best says that this must be
°° understood by reference to instances where inattention to contrary
hypotheses has led into error. In the first place, then, the safety of
individuals has occasionally been jeopardized by the fabrication of
circumstances ; which may be either casual, or intentional. Under
the former are ranked those cases where the accused, although inno-
cent, is shown to have had peculiar temptations, or facilities, for
committing the act with which he is charged: as where, in cases of
murder, he has lived with the deceased, or had an interest in his
death ; or where a man becomes covered with blood, by coming in
contact in the dark with a bleeding body ; or death is produced by a
weapon which is proved to be the property of a person, who, never-
theless, is not the real criminal." These are cases which I shall
read, if they are proper authority.
Chief Justice Shaw. Taken with a qualification, that it must be
consistent with every other reasonable hypothesis.
Mr. Sohier. I will refer to Starkie, page 577. The particular case
which I was going to state to the Jury-and there are several cases
stated-was this. °°A servant-girl was indicted for the murder of
her mistress. The chief evidence against her was, that no one person
lived in the house but the prisoner and the deceased, and all the
doors and windows were secure as usual. After the prisoner was
condemned and executed, it appeared, by the confession of one of the
real criminals, that they had gained admittance into the house, which
was situated in a very narrow street, by means of a board thrust across
the street, from an upper window of an opposite house, to an upper
window of that in which the deceased lived; and having committed
the murder, returned the same way, leaving no trace behind them."
And there are numerous other cases.
|
