Opposed to this statement of Dr. S.'s must be mentioned the facts that were brought out in court, and which led to conviction in the first trial.
The relation of S. to G. had, by reason of its obviousness, given cause for remark by private individuals, as well as by those in public houses. G. spent almost all his evenings with S.'s family, and, finally, came to be quite at home there. They took walks together. Once, while out on such a walk, S. said to G. that he was a pretty fellow, and that he (S.) was very fond of him. On the same occasion, there was also talk of sexual matters, and also of pederasty. S. said he touched on these subjects only to warn G. With reference to the intercourse at home, it was proved that occasionally S., while sitting on a sofa, embraced G., and kissed him. This happened in the presence of the wife, as well as of the servant-girls. When G. was ill with gonorrhea, S. instructed him in the method of using a syringe, and, at the time, took the penis in his hand. G. testified that S., in answer to his question why he was so fond of him, said, "I don't know, myself." When, one day, G. remained away, S., with tears in his eyes, complained of it to him when he returned. S. also told him that his marriage was unhappy, and, in tears, begged G. not to leave him; that he must take the place of his wife.
From all this resulted the just accusation, that the relation between the culprits had a sexual direction. The fact that all was open and known to everybody, according to the complaint, did not speak for the harmlessness of the relation, but more for the intensity of the passion of S. The spotless life of the accused was allowed, as well as his honesty and gentleness. The probability of an unhappy marriage, and that S. was of a very sensual nature, was shown.
During the course of the trial, G. was repeatedly examined by the medical experts. He is scarcely of medium size, pale, and of powerful frame; penis and testicles are very perfectly developed (large).
In consonance with the accusation, it was found that the anus was pathologically changed, in that there were no wrinkles in the skin about it and the sphincter was relaxed; and it was presumed that these changes pointed to the probability of passive pederasty.
The conviction was based on these facts. The judgment passed recognized that the relation that existed between the culprits did not necessarily point to unnatural abuses, any more than did the physical conditions found on the person of G.
However, by reason of the combination of the two facts, the court was convinced of the guilt of both culprits, and held it proved: "That the abnormal condition of G.'s anus had been caused by the frequently repeated introduction of the penis of S., and that G. voluntarily permitted the performance of this immoral act on himself."
Thus the conditions of § 175, R. St. G. B., seemed to be covered. In passing sentence, there was consideration of S.'s education, which
