Slaying in South St. Louis by Vicki Berger Erwin

Author:Vicki Berger Erwin
Language: eng
Format: epub
Publisher: Arcadia Publishing Inc.
Published: 2018-04-09T04:00:00+00:00

9

TRIAL #3

The state appealed the Missouri Supreme Court’s decision granting Joseph Arbeiter a new trial; the motion was denied on November 13, 1966.

The new trial date was set for January 23, 1967, before Judge Robert Aronson. In preparation, Arbeiter was moved from the state penitentiary back to the St. Louis city jail.

The defense filed a motion to suppress Arbeiter’s confession in circuit court on December 19, 1966. Aronson sustained this motion on January 5, 1967, essentially agreeing with the Supreme Court’s ruling in vacating the guilty verdict. In response, the state requested that all juvenile court records pertaining to any statements Arbeiter made outside of his formal hearing be made available.

In the motion, the state said that statements Arbeiter made to juvenile court personnel about the murder “would be admissible as evidence, being ‘relevant and material’ and ‘exceptions to the hearsay rule.’”

This motion led to another prolonged court battle. Judge Franklin Reagan granted the motion, issuing a subpoena for the records on March 17, 1967, and setting the trial date for April 17, 1967. Arbeiter’s defense team filed a motion to prohibit the subpoena and the opening of Arbeiter’s records on March 28, 1967.

The defense’s argument was that, under the Missouri Juvenile Code, all files and records of the juvenile court are confidential and privileged, even if the juvenile is certified for trial as an adult, as Arbeiter was. The opening of the records, the defense argued, “would be in violation of sundry constitutional rights of the juvenile (Federal and State), including due process, the prohibitions against self-incrimination, and the right to counsel.”

The motion again went before the Missouri Supreme Court, which ruled in April 1968, more than a year after the motion was filed, that the juvenile records must be turned over to the St. Louis Circuit Court. One justice, Robert Seiler, dissented.

Notable in the court’s opinion was that it emphasized that it did “not rule, directly or indirectly, upon the admissibility of any admissions or statements which may conceivably be found in the juvenile records. There will be time for mature consideration of that question when and if any such material is offered.”

Reaction to the ruling was mixed. The Globe-Democrat applauded the decision, calling it “refreshing.” In its editorial, the paper said the most important question was not a lasting impact on Arbeiter but “whether the public should suffer any more delay in bringing Arbeiter to justice.”

The Post-Dispatch, on the other hand, found the decision to be “questionable public policy.” The editorial pointed to Seiler’s dissent, which said Arbeiter “had been advised by his lawyer that whatever was said to the juvenile officers could not be used against him in any other place.” Even if the admissions in the file were not allowed in the trial, the Post-Dispatch said that “permitting the prosecutor to prepare for trial by inspecting material gathered under the circumstances present here surely does violence to the constitutional protection against self-incrimination.”

Arbeiter’s new trial began on July 31, 1968, with Judge William Buder presiding. Buder

Download

Copyright Disclaimer:
This site does not store any files on its server. We only index and link to content provided by other sites. Please contact the content providers to delete copyright contents if any and email us, we'll remove relevant links or contents immediately.