Commonwealth v. Wright

<p>Indictment for riotously assembling at Charlemont with divers other persons, to the jurors unknown, to the number of ' welve, to break the peace, and, being so assembled, breaking and catering the dwelling-house of Almon Harris and assaulting Laura A. Harris, his wife, and removing her from the house and restraining her of her liberty.</p> <p>Tiial and verdict of guilty in the superior court, before Lord, J., who allowed a bill of exceptions of which the following are the material parts : “ That the offence had been committed by certain persons was not denied; and it was admitted or proved that those who committed the crime did it while masked. But it was ienied that the defendant was present at the time of the commission of the offence, or had anything to do with it. In his argument to the jury, the .district attorney contended that the defendant (who had testified in the case and denied that he was present or had anything to do with committing the offence) would commit perjury and under oath deny all knowledge of the offence, because he had committed the offence under a disguise.</p> <p>“In connection with this point, and for a general application to the case, the defendant requested the judge to instruct the jury that the presumption is in favor of the truthfulness of defendants in their statements and testimony on the stand, as in the case of other "witnesses. But the judge declined to give the instruction as requested, and instructed the jury that there was no presumption either way, as to the truthfulness of defendants’ testimony ; that such testimony was to be considered and weighed by them, taking all the circumstances of the case and all the other evidence offered into consideration, and giving such weight to the testimony as in their judgment it ought to have.”</p>