People v. Lee Gam

Foote, C. The defendant was tried upon a charge of murder; from the judgment of conviction thereof in the first degree, and the order, denying him a new trial, he appealed.

It is argued by counsel in his behalf that the court erred in its charge to the jury, in that part referring to the defense made of an alibi, which was as follows:—•

“ Upon this point the testimony is in irreconcilable conflict. The defendant could not have been in these two places at the same time; and in this contradiction of witnesses the jury have to determine for themselves where lies the truth. In so judging, they will take into consideration the appearance and apparent candor and fairness of the respective witnesses; the probability of their statements; its coincidence with other facts or features of the case which they may deem established; and generally those rules of ordinary experience and general [554]observation by which intelligent men decide as to controverted propositions of fact.

“ The effect of an alibi, when established, is like that * of any other conclusive fact presented in a case. Showing, as it does, that the party asserting it could not have been present at the time of the homicide, and therefore did not participate in it, is, when credited, a defense of the most conclusive and satisfactory character.

“ The fact, however, which experience has shown, that an alibi as a defense is capable of being and has been occasionally successfully fabricated; that even when wholly false its detection may be matter of very great difficulty; and that the temptation to resort to this as a spurious defense may be very great, especially in cases of importance;—these are considerations attendant upon this defense which call for some special suggestions upon the part of the court.

“ These are, that while you are not to hesitate at giving this as a defense full weight,—that conclusive effect to which, when established, it is justly entitled, either as entirely satisfying you of the innocence of the defendant or as creating the reasonable doubt which entitles the defendant to an acquittal,—still, you are to scrutinize the testimony offered in the support of an alibi with care, that you may be satisfied that a fabricated defense is not being imposed upon you.”

Taking the charge as a whole, and giving it an unstrained interpretation, it does not appear that the jury were instructed upon the weight of evidence.