The Trial of William Freeman: For the Murder of John G. Van Nest, Including the Evidence and the Arguments of Counsel, with the Decision of the Supreme Court Granting a New Trial, and an Account of the Death of the Prisoner, and of the Post-mortem Examination of His Body by Amariah Brigham, M. D., and Others
Trial of the question of insanity and trial of the main issue at a Court of Oyer and Terminer for Cayuga County, held at Auburn, June-July, 1846.
What people are saying - Write a review
We haven't found any reviews in the usual places.
Other editions - View all
answer appeared arrested asked attention Auburn believe called cause challenged charge child committed consider conversation conviction counsel count court crazy crime Cross deaf defence delusion dementia deranged difference discovered disease Doctor doubt effect evidence examination expressed facts faculties feel five formed Freeman gentlemen give guilty hand head hear heard horse indicate insanity jail John judge juror jury kill knew knife laughed learned lived looked memory mind motive murder natural Nest never night noticed object observed once opinion person present prisoner prisoner's proved punishment question reason recollect regard reply respect sane sanity seemed seen smile spoke stand Suppose sworn symptoms taken talked tell testified testimony thing thought told took trial tried understand Van Nest verdict wanted witness wound wrong
Page 467 - ... to establish a defence on the ground of insanity, it must be clearly proved that, at the time of the committing of the act, the party accused was labouring under such a defect of reason, from disease of the mind, as not to know the nature and quality of the act he was doing, or, if he did know it, that he did not know he was doing what was wrong.
Page 428 - Also if a man in his sound memory commits a capital offense, and before arraignment for it, he becomes mad, he ought not to be arraigned for it ; because he is not able to plead to it with that advice and caution that he ought.
Page 484 - The mode of putting the latter part of the question to the jury on these occasions has generally been, whether the accused at the time of doing the act knew the difference between right and wrong...
Page 161 - The opinion which has been avowed by the court, is, that light impressions which may fairly be supposed to yield to the testimony that may be offered ; which may leave the mind open to a fair consideration of that testimony, constitute no sufficient objection to a juror; but that those strong and deep impressions, which will close the mind against the testimony that may be offered in opposition to them ; which will combat that testimony and resist its force, do constitute a sufficient objection to...
Page 436 - To bait fish withal: if it will feed nothing else, it will feed my revenge. He hath disgraced me, and hindered me half a million; laughed at my losses, mocked at my gains, scorned my nation, thwarted my bargains, cooled my friends, heated mine enemies; and what's his reason? I am a Jew. Hath not a Jew eyes?
Page 431 - ... whether the accused at the time of doing the act knew the difference between right and wrong : which mode, though rarely, if ever, leading to any mistake with the jury, is not, as we conceive, so accurate when put generally and in the abstract, as when put with reference to the party's knowledge of right and wrong in respect to the very act with which he is charged.
Page 178 - That before a plea of insanity should be allowed, undoubted evidence ought to be adduced that the accused was of diseased mind, and that at the time he committed the act he was not conscious of right and wrong.
Page 430 - Lordships' inquiries are confined to those persons who labour under such partial delusions only, and are not in other respects insane, we are of opinion that, notwithstanding the party accused did the act complained of with a view, under the influence of insane delusion, of redressing or revenging some supposed grievance or injury, or of producing some public benefit, he is nevertheless punishable according to the nature of the crime committed, if he knew at the time of committing such crime that...
Page 470 - ... of witnesses who have long been conversant with insanity in its various forms, and who have had the care and superintendence of insane persons, are received as competent evidence, even though they have not had opportunity to examine the particular patient, and observe the symptoms and indications of disease at the time of its supposed existence.