¶1The incriminating circumstances raise a-grave suspicion of the defendant’s guilt, but are consistent with his innocence. Eor this reason the conviction of the defendant was unauthorized, and a new trial should have been granted.
8 Ga. App. 97
Kemp v. State
Decided July 19, 1910
Court of Appeals of Georgia · decided 1910-07-19
<p>Accusation of gaming; from city court of Swainsboro — Judge Mitchell. March 5; 1910.</p> <p>The evidence for the State consisted of the testimony of two witnesses, who testified, that they were looking for a horse thief, and at night went to a certain shanty, where, on looking through cracks, they saw, by the light of a small fire, the defendant Kemp and four other men playing cards, and heard what they supposed to be money, but did not see any money; one of the witnesses thought he heard money hitting the floor; they heard one of the men say something about dropping a quarter under the. house. The players, on hearing the‘witnesses, stopped, and the witnesses then broke open the door, went in, and arrested the men, but found' no money. They heard no betting, and did not know that the men were gambling.</p>
Decided 1910-07-19