The case of the prosecution was clear enough.

The medical evidence proved that the father died of the wounds received on the above-named night.

The fact that the wounds were inflicted by the prisoner, was established by the evidence of his mother and sister, who overheard the quarrel between him and his father, by the flight after commission of the crime, by the discovery of a blood-stained knife dropped on the threshold, by the deposition of the father before death, and lastly, by the confession of the prisoner himself, who admitted the crime, though under extenuating circumstances.

The fact that the sister never heard the knife open, although it had three clasps, was asserted to be evidence that the prisoner entered the room with his knife open and intending to commit the crime.

This charge of _malice prepense_ was supported by the son's refusal to answer his father, by the insolence of his language, and by the number and vehemence of the stabs he inflicted.
The prisoner's defence was also very simple.