And the jury, thank heaven! do not content themselves with a moral
conviction. The strongest probabilities cannot induce them to give an
affirmative verdict.
Placed upon a neutral ground, between the prosecution and the defence,
it demands material and tangible proofs. Where the magistrate would
condemn twenty times for one, in all security of conscience, the jury
acquit for lack of satisfying evidence.
The deplorable execution of Lesurques has certainly assured impunity to
many criminals; but, it is necessary to say it justifies hesitation in
receiving circumstantial evidence in capital crimes.
In short, save where a criminal is taken in the very act, or confesses
his guilt, it is not certain that the minister of justice can secure a
conviction. Sometimes the judge of inquiry is as anxious as the accused
himself. Nearly all crimes are in some particular point mysterious,
perhaps impenetrable to justice and the police; and the duty of the
advocate is, to discover this weak point, and thereon establish his
client's defence. By pointing out this doubt to the jury, he insinuates
in their minds a distrust of the entire evidence; and frequently the
detection of a distorted induction, cleverly exposed, can change the
face of a prosecution, and make a strong case appear to the jury a weak
one.
Pages:
194
195
196
197
198
199
200
201
202
203
204
205
206
207
208
209
210
211
212
213
214
215
216
217
218