Reports of Cases Argued and Determined in the Supreme Court of Tennessee (Volume 91) (Paperback)


This historic book may have numerous typos and missing text. Purchasers can download a free scanned copy of the original book (without typos) from the publisher. Not indexed. Not illustrated. 1892. Excerpt: ... H. Clay King i'. State. Where all that occurred during a separation is fully explained, and it can be clearly seen that there was no opportunity for improperly influencing the jury, or that the communication had with the jury was not calculated to improperly affect them, then to set aside a verdict otherwise sustained would be to sacrifice substance to form and bring the administration of law into just discredit. Greenhm v. State, 4 Hum., 27; Hines v. State, 8 Hum., 601: Riley v. State, 9 Hum., 646; Rowc v. State, 11 Hum., 492: Cartwrigbt v. State, 12 Lea, 625. Having in view these principles governing such trials, we will briefly examine the facts mainly relied on as showing a violation of the rule requiring the jury to be kept together and prohibiting communication: 1. That the jury, during the trial, went beyond the border of the State. The facts are these. This trial took place in midsummer, at Memphis, on the Mississippi Uiver. It lasted thirty-three days. The health and comfort of the jury made it proper that the jury, during so protracted a trial, should, under proper supervision, be given opportunity for exercise. For this purpose, during the adjournments of the Court, they were several times taken for walks and rides in and about the city and suburbs. Upon one of these occasions, accompanied by two specially sworn officers, they were taken on board the ferry-boat which plies between the Tennessee and Arkansas sides of the river. When the boat U. Clay King v. State. made its landing on the western or Arkansas shore, the jury were permitted to walk up on the hank of the river, where they stood for a few minutes, or until the boat was ready to make its return trip. During the entire trip the jury were kept together, and there was no mingling with ot...

R684

Or split into 4x interest-free payments of 25% on orders over R50
Learn more

Discovery Miles6840
Mobicred@R64pm x 12* Mobicred Info
Free Delivery
Delivery AdviceOut of stock

Toggle WishListAdd to wish list
Review this Item

Product Description

This historic book may have numerous typos and missing text. Purchasers can download a free scanned copy of the original book (without typos) from the publisher. Not indexed. Not illustrated. 1892. Excerpt: ... H. Clay King i'. State. Where all that occurred during a separation is fully explained, and it can be clearly seen that there was no opportunity for improperly influencing the jury, or that the communication had with the jury was not calculated to improperly affect them, then to set aside a verdict otherwise sustained would be to sacrifice substance to form and bring the administration of law into just discredit. Greenhm v. State, 4 Hum., 27; Hines v. State, 8 Hum., 601: Riley v. State, 9 Hum., 646; Rowc v. State, 11 Hum., 492: Cartwrigbt v. State, 12 Lea, 625. Having in view these principles governing such trials, we will briefly examine the facts mainly relied on as showing a violation of the rule requiring the jury to be kept together and prohibiting communication: 1. That the jury, during the trial, went beyond the border of the State. The facts are these. This trial took place in midsummer, at Memphis, on the Mississippi Uiver. It lasted thirty-three days. The health and comfort of the jury made it proper that the jury, during so protracted a trial, should, under proper supervision, be given opportunity for exercise. For this purpose, during the adjournments of the Court, they were several times taken for walks and rides in and about the city and suburbs. Upon one of these occasions, accompanied by two specially sworn officers, they were taken on board the ferry-boat which plies between the Tennessee and Arkansas sides of the river. When the boat U. Clay King v. State. made its landing on the western or Arkansas shore, the jury were permitted to walk up on the hank of the river, where they stood for a few minutes, or until the boat was ready to make its return trip. During the entire trip the jury were kept together, and there was no mingling with ot...

Customer Reviews

No reviews or ratings yet - be the first to create one!

Product Details

General

Imprint

General Books LLC

Country of origin

United States

Release date

February 2012

Availability

Supplier out of stock. If you add this item to your wish list we will let you know when it becomes available.

First published

February 2012

Authors

Dimensions

246 x 189 x 9mm (L x W x T)

Format

Paperback - Trade

Pages

166

ISBN-13

978-1-235-69724-1

Barcode

9781235697241

Categories

LSN

1-235-69724-X



Trending On Loot