◆ SpookStack

pati.’ FREAD si sas enced ae Of courses, if they rely upon what she told them that is hearsay una should not bs considered by you, because hrs, Rhode3 would be the only person who could testify as to what her records show; but of courss, if they remember the mattor distinotly and remember it Andepencent of their discussion with her, if you find that. ‘thoy do hav such : memory, then of course thoir tasti-ony may te considered | by you, and if you find that their testimony as to ‘the dite rests sntirely upon the information that thoy est from Mrs, ghodas, then J would say to you that thoir testimony is of no velue and should not ba considered by you, Now kr. Doyle, another witness, as you understand is iu, risoned in the Stete srison in Jackson, one of the mon Bdrivtedly who had part » took part in the ‘robbing of this bank; he testifies here that this rospondant wna not one of those that took port in tha rotbery, He refuses to vive you the namas or upy of those that did t’ke yp: rt in the robbery, anc it would appa ur to mo that his testinony is not entitled to great weisht. However, his testimony 1s a matter for you to consider, You ara td pass upon it; you cra to Give it such waight as you think it is antitledto, and rey..Tauloss of whit 1 think about it, doosn't have onything to ao with Jt, you «re the sole jusges of what wadght his tastimony is to racaive. | ee | | The testimony of br, Dehostar of course has no - bearings, as 1 sas it, on the matter at ally ‘Ho wis in the bank, was acquainted with the people of the bank, and ons day when he was in thera, he wis there to show in somo way that he had a resenblunes to one of the robbers, but that in no way connects this situation with this respondent. low besides the testimony of thess witnesses, ~ ~ Craig Rox & Rau tne etuna; sho tsstiiies that although hiya re