Mitchell v. State

1. A charge that a jury might consider “the feeling or absence of feeling which any witness has . . in any ivay or towards the parties connected with the case, . . if any thing of that kind appears,” was not erroneous merely because there was no direct testimony as to the state of feeling existing between any witness sworn at the trial and another who was a party to or interested in the result of the case. The question whether or not the testimony of a witness was affected by his “feeling or absence of feeling” might be determined, at least to some extent, by his appearance and demeanor on…