Commonwealth v. Colandro

Citations

• 231 Pa. 343
• 80 A. 571
• 1911 Pa. LEXIS 846

Syllabus

<p>Criminal law — Murder—Evidence—Trial—Offer—Blending of admissible and inadmissible evidence.</p> <p>1. The ordinary rule that where an offer blends irrelevant and inadmissible matters with matters relevant and admissible, its rejection as a whole is not error, ought not to be summoned to sustain a ruling prejudicial to the interests of a defendant on trial for murder.</p> <p>Criminal law — Murder—Charge—Self-defense—Burden of proof— Preponderance of evidence — Necessity for accepting version of either side.</p> <p>2. In trying a murder case, the court should have two principles in mind to communicate to the jury for their guidance, namely, (1) that while all the ingredients necessary to prove the commonwealth’s case must be shown beyond a reasonable doubt, (2) this severe rule does not apply in considering an affirmative defense; there a fair preponderance of the evidence in favor of the defendant is sufficient.</p> <p>3. Where a defendant in a murder trial sets up self-defense and undertakes to establish his excuse, the evidence relied upon, whether it comes from his side, or from the commonwealth’s side, or from both, must, when weighed, show by its fair preponderance the extenuation sought to be established, in order to acquit.</p> <p>4. In such a case the trial judge commits no error in saying that the burden of proving self-defense is upon the defendant and that it would have to be shown to the satisfaction of the jury, but he should add that they would only have to be satisfied by the fair preponderance of the evidence.</p> <p>5. In a murder case the jury is not bound to accept the version of the commonwealth or the version of the defense. It is their duty to consider all the testimony and to make up their minds therefrom as to the facts.</p> <p>Criminal law — Murder—Voluntary manslaughter — Terror.</p> <p>6. On a murder trial where self-defense is set up as a defense for the killing, but there is also evidence from which the jury might infer 'that the kill