Okie Legacy
SIGN Guestbook
VIEW Guestbook
ParisTimes Pioneers | WWWPubCo
OkieLegacy | About Us
Latest Revision -
Tuesday, May 2, 2006 8:56 PM
- Webmaster
Copyrighted © 1999-2006 by WWWPubCo & OkieLegacy.org All Rights Reserved.
Old Opera House Mystery
(Alva's First Homicide - 9 November 1910)
Courts Instructions to Jury
On the 12th day of September 1911, Instructions to the jury were filed in the District Court of Woodward County, Oklahoma, which said instructions to the jury are, in words and figures, as follows, to-wit:
Instructions To Jury
Gentlemen of the jury the court instructs you that the information in this case charges that, In the name and by the authority of the duly elected, qualified and acting county Attorney, in and for Woods County and State of Oklahoma, and gives the District Court in and for said Woods County and State of Oklahoma to know and be informed that the above named N. L. Miller did, in woods county and in the State of Oklahoma on the 9th day of November, in the year of our Lord 1910, commit the crime of murder in the manner and form as follows, to-wit:
He the said N. L. Miller did then and there, in and upon the body of one Mabel Oakes, then and there being, unlawfully, purposely, and feloniously and without authority of law and of his deliberate and premeditated design to kill and murder and effect the death of her, the said mable oakes, make an assaul upon her, the said Mabel oakes, and did then and there, unlawfully, feloniously and without authority of law, and his the said N. L. Miller's premeditated design to kill and murder and effect the death of the said Mabel Oakes, with a certain piece of cloth, same being commonly known as a scarf, then and there in the hands of him the said N. L. Miller, hold, kill and murder and effect the death of her, the said Mabel oakes, and did then and there and by means of said scarf aforesaid, and in the manner aforesaid, unlawfully, purposely and feloniously and without authority of law, and of his deliberate and premeditated design, to kill and murder and effect the death of her the said Mabel Oakes, choke and strangle her the said Mabel Oakes, until she then and there died, as it was by the said N. L. Miller intended that she the said Mabel Oakes should do. And so the county attorney aforesaid, and at the time and place and in the manner and by the means aforesaid, charged and informs and gives the court aforesaid, the know and be informed that the said N. L. Miller then and there did kill and murder and effect the death of her, the said Mabel Oakes, contrary to the form of the statutes in such cases made and provided and against the peace and dignity of the State of Oklahoma."
To which information the defendant has entered his pleas of not guilty. Which pleas puts in issue each and every material allegation in the information contained.
The burden of proof in this case is upon the State to prove each and every material allegation in the information contained beyond a reasonable doubt, and if you find from the evidence that the State has proved each and every material allegation in the information, to your satisfaction beyond a reasonable doubt, it will be your duty to find the defendant guilty.
Gentlemen of the jury the Court instructs you that homicide is the killing of one human being by another:
That homicide is either:
1st. Murder;
2nd. Manslaughter;
3rd. Excusable homicide, or
4th. Justifiable homicide.
The court further instructs you that homicide is murder in the following cases:
1st. perpetrated without authority of law, and with a premeditated design to effect the death of the person killed, or any other human being;
2nd. When perpetrated without any design to effect death, by a person engaged in the commission of a felony.
1.
Given.
Excepted to by Defendant at the time.
Gentlemen of the jury the Court instructs you that the information in this case is no evidence of the defendant's guilt and must not be considered by you as such. it is only a form of procedure provided by law placing the defendant on trial for the crime charged.
2.
Gentlemen of the jury you are instructed that the defendant in a criminal action is always presumed to be innocent of the crime charged until his guilt has been established beyond a reasonable doubt, and this presumption continues in his favor throughout every stage of the trial down to and until the jury shall have reached a verdict, and does not cease upon the submission of the case to the jury.
3.
The Court instrurcts the jury that the verdict in this case must be based upon the testimony which the court has permitted to go before the jury, and the law applicable to this case as contained in these instructions, aided by such general knowledge and experience as the jurors may possess in common with all persons of ordinary intelligence.
4.
You are instructed that the opening statement of counsel for the state and defendant is just an outline of the facts that the respective parties intend to offer evidence in support of and is not evidence, and when you retire to deliberate upon your verdict in this case you will not consider the same as evidence.
You should listen to the argument of counsel for the State and the defendant and not form any opinion in the case until the argument is completed, but the statements of counsel for the state and defendant should not be considered by you in any way as evidence, but are simply made in explaining their respective theories of the case and aiding you in arriving at a fair and impartial verdict in the case.
5.
The Court instructs the jury that evidence is of two kinds, direct and circumstantial.
Direct evidenc is when a witness testified directly of his own knowledge of the main fact or facts to be proven.
Circumstantial evidence is proof of certain facts and circumstances in a certain case, from which the jury may infer other and connected facts, which usually and reasonably follow, according to the common experience of mankind.
Crime may be proven by circumstantial evidence as well as by direct testimony of eye witnesses; but the facts and cirucmstances in evidence should be consistent with each other and with the guilt of the defendant, and inconsistent with any reasonable theory of defendant's innocence.
6.
The jury are instructed that the prosecution in this case seeks a conviction upon circumstantial evidence alone. The court therefore instructs you that you cannot convict the defendant unless the State has proven his guilt from the evidence beyond a reasonable doubt, by facts and circumstances all of which are consistent with each other and with his guilt, and absolutely inconsistent with any reasonable theory of his innocence.
7.
The Court instructs the jury that circumstantial evidence is to be regarded by the jury in all cases. it is many times quite as conclusive in its convincing power as direct and positive evidence of eye witnesses. When it is strong and satisfactory the jury should so consider it, neither enlarging nor belittling its force. It should have its just and fair weight with the jury; and if when it is all taken as a whole, and fairly and candidly weighed, it convinced the guarded judgment, the jury should act on such conviction. You are not to fancy situations or circumstances which do not appear in the evidence, but you are to make those just and reasonable inferences from circumstances proven as the guarded judgment of a reasonable man would ordinarily make under like circumstances.
Given.
Excepted to by Defendant at the time.
8.
To authorize a conviction upon circumstantial evidence alone, the circumstances must not only all be in harmony with the guilt of the accused, but they must be of such character that they cannot reasonably be true in the ordinary nature of things and the defendant be innocent.
9.
The Court instructs the jury that in order to convict the defendant upon circumstantial evidence it is necessary, not only that all the circumstanes relied upon for a conviction concur to show that he committed the crime charged, but that they are inconsistent with any other rational conclusion. It is not sufficient that the circumstances proved coincide with, account for and therefore render probable the hypothesis sought to be established by the prosecution; but they must exclude to a moral certainty every other reasonable hypothesis but the single one of guilt, or the jury must find the defendant not guilty.
10.
Gentlemen of the jury the court has permitted expert testimony to be given in the trial of this case and in this connection the court instructs you that the opinions of expert witnesses are to be considered by you in connection with all other evidence in the case.
You are not to act upon such opinion to the exclusion of other testimony.
In determining the weight of the testimony of expert witnessed, you are to apply the same general rules that are applicable to the testimony of other witnesses.
Taking into consideration the opinions of the expert witnesses, together with all other evidence, you are to determine for yourselves, from the whole evidence whether it establishes the guilt of the defendant beyond a reasonable doubt, as charged in the information.
Given.
Excepted to by defendant at the time.
11.
Gentlemen of the jury you are instructed that no person can be convicted of murder, unless the death of the person alleged to have been killed and the fact of the killing by the accused are each established as independent facts beyond a reasonable doubt. In other words, you cannot convict the defendant for the crime charged unless you believe from the evidence beyond a reasonable doubt that Mabel Oakes is dead and that she was strangled to death by the defendant windning a scarf about her neck with the premeditated design to effect her death.
12.
Gentlemen of the jury the court instructs you that every person convicted or murder shall suffer death, or imprisonment at hard labor in the State Penitentiary for life, at the discretion of the jury. Upon trial of and information for murder, the jury, if they find the defendant guilty, must designate in their verdict whether he shall be punished by death or imprisonment for life at hard labor, and the judgment of the court shall be in accordance therewith.
Given.
Excepted to by defendant at the time.
13.
Gentlemen of the jury the court instructs you that in order to return a verdict in this case it is necessary that all twelve jurors concur.
14.
You are the sole judges of the credibility of the witnesses, of the weight of the evidence, and of the facts. It is your right to determine from the appearance of the witnesses on the stand, their manner of testifying, their apparent candor or frankness or the lack thereof, their apparent intelligence or the want of intelligence, which of the witnesses are more worthy of credit and to give weight accordingly.
In determining the weight to be given to the testimony of the witnesses, you are authorized to consider their relationship to the parties, if any is shown, their interest, if any, in the result of this suit, their temper, feeling or bias, if any has been shown, their demeanor on the stand, their means of information and the reasonableness of the story told by them and to give weight accordingly.
15.
Endorsed as follows.
State of Oklahoma vs. N. L. Miller. Instructions.
Woodward, Oklahoma. Filed Sep. 12, 1911, Jerry Coover,
District Clerk, N. H. Alexander, Deputy.