State v. Parker

• Court: North Carolina Supreme Court
• Writing for the Court: PEARSON
• Citation: State v. Parker, 61 N.C. 473 (N.C. 1868)
• Decision Date: 31 January 1868
• Parties: THE STATE v. WILLIAM W. PARKER.

61 N.C. 473

THE STATE

v.WILLIAM W. PARKER.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

January Term, 1868.

*1 In a case where an indictment for murder was based upon circumstantial evidence tending to show that the homicide had been accompanied by robbery, and the prisoner, in whose possession soon afterwards the things taken were found, denied having inflicted the fatal blow, held that the presiding Judge was correct in charging that the prisoner was guilty of murder, or of nothing.

Where a Judge otherwise administers the law correctly, held not to be error for him to decline using the very words in which an important legal proposition has been accurately laid down in another case: and that sometimes circumstances attending a trial may render it improper for a judge to define a legal principle in the very words that were strictly correct in another case.

There is no “formula” to which judges may resort for guaging the degree to which a jury must be convinced in order to justify a verdict of guilty, and attempts to create such have resulted in no good.

( State v. Sears, 61 N.C. 146; State v. Knox, 61 N.C. 312; cited and approved.)

MURDER, tried before Meares, J., at a term of the Criminal Court of NEW HANOVER, held on the first Monday in June 1867.

The deceased (one William Childress) was killed on Sunday night 29th March 1863, and his body was found shortly afterwards in Smith's Creek, about one mile from Wilmington. On the side of the creek, a few feet off, a large quantity of blood was found, and there were marks of a scuffle. Some twenty wounds were upon the body, two of which had been inflicted by a large knife, and were sufficient to produce immediate death. On the day before, the deceased was wearing a gold watch, which was described, and a considerable amount of Confederate and also of United States currency. He was a subject of Great Britain and had about him a “British protection paper” against conscription. On Sunday afternoon he was at a house in Wilmington, the last towards Smith's creek, occupied by some women, and the prisoner and two other men (Dunn and Runciman) were with him. After frequent invitations by the prisoner and Runciman, the deceased at last about dark consented to take a walk with them, and they went off in the direction of Smith's creek. Deceased then had on the watch, and prisoner had a large bowie knife. About midnight the prisoner and Runciman returned and asked for water, which Dunn went out and gave them, and then they went off, returning again about light with a number of dead chickens, some of them with their heads taken off, the men's clothes having much blood upon them, which they tried to scrape off, saying it was from the chickens.

On Monday the prisoner and Runciman were in a store together under false names, offering to sell a gold watch, and exhibiting Confederate and United States currency, also a “British protection paper,” which prisoner said would prevent him from being “conscripted;” and on the same or the next day Runciman having been wounded in an affray was arrested and the “paper” was found upon him, and he afterwards gave some currency (as above) to a friend. On Sunday night about half-past 11 o'clock, the prisoner and Runciman were at a shop standing by the fire, and prisoner had a watch, which a witness believed was the same exhibited by the deceased on the day before; and this caused that witness to take steps to have the prisoner arrested. On Tuesday succeeding, the prisoner when in jail had a large bowie knife which he said belonged to him, and two physicians testified that there was blood on the handle and blade, and one physician said that in his opinion it was human blood; and the blade being applied to one of the mortal wounds upon the body of the deceased fitted in it. On the same occasion, the sheriff opened the breast of the prisoner's coat, and his clothing beneath was found stained with blood. When asked about this, the prisoner said nothing. At the same time another prisoner produced a watch (identified as that of the deceased) and said that the prisoner gave it to him to keep. This the prisoner denied, but afterwards in same conversation admitted that the watch was his, and that he had brought it from Virginia; and said that he had denied it at first because some one had been there a little before to enquire about it.

*2 The counsel for the prisoner requested the Court to charge the jury that if any reasonable hypothesis could be made out consistent with the prisoner's innocence, they must acquit; and that a presumption could be raised only from a fact, and not from another presumption; that having to presume the prisoner's presence at the murder from the fact that he was seen going in that direction with...