48 Vt. 581 | Vt. | 1876
The opinion of the court was delivered by
"We think that the court erred in excluding the testimony offered to be shown by Mr. Tripp as to what he told the respondent at the time he delivered Kefoe to him at the state
It is no good answer to this to say that the respondent had himself testified as to what Tripp told him. He had the right to fortify his testimony by that of Tripp, if he could. The respondent stood in a position where his testimony was open to the criticism of being that of a man strongly interested in the result, and under temptation to exaggerate in his own favor; and that consideration would be quite likely to have an effect upon the jury, even though it might not be urged upon them by counsel.
As to the admissibility of the evidence of the acts of the said Kefoe prior to the time of his being brought to the state prison, as bearing upon the question of his insanity prior to his being assaulted by the respondent, it is a question with which we have some difficulty, and we do not pass upon it.
The result is, the respondent’s exceptions are sustained, and a new trial granted, and the case remanded.