The Saga of Tom Horn by Dean Fenton Krakel

Author:Dean Fenton Krakel [Krakel, Dean Fenton]
Language: eng
Format: epub
ISBN: 9781839744624
Google: XbA1zgEACAAJ
Publisher: Barakaldo Books
Published: 2020-01-15T04:23:16+00:00

PART THREE — The Last Mile

My foot’s in the stirrup, my pony won’t stand

Goodbye Old Paint, I’m a-leavin’ Cheyenne.

Goodbye Old Paint, I’m a-leavin’ Cheyenne

Goodbye Old Paint, I’m a-leavin’ Cheyenne.

—Old Paint (Author Unknown).

OCTOBER 29th

The Attorneys for Tom Horn wasted little time in filing a motion for a new trial in the District Court. Judge Scott refused to consider the motion because Prosecuting Attorney Walter Stoll was ill and thus unable to argue the matter before the Court.

However, the plea for a new trial began in earnest on November 8th with both the Prosecution and Defense represented. Attorney Burke presented the arguments for the Defense. Twenty-three reasons were put forward for a new trial.

The most prominent reason cited by Attorney Burke was that the Jury had been unduly influenced by a conversation they had over-heard in the Inter-Ocean Hotel. The Attorney maintained that this conversation was held expressly for the purpose of influencing the Jury—especially for the benefit of one Juror.

Mr. Burke dwelled considerably on the language of Prosecutor Stoll. He said Stoll had been abusive when addressing the Jury. The part considered abusive was quoted to the Court. He read:

“You gentlemen must do your duty. You need have no fear of blood guiltiness on your head. If you should make a mistake there is the Supreme Court that will do its duty, and then the Governor and he will do his duty. But if you make the mistake of freeing the defendant, he may do as another man, who was tried in this Court and because of the contrariness of three Jurors was acquitted; in three weeks killed a whole family in Montana...”

The Attorney then maintained that the Court had refused to give the Jury one instruction, to-wit: If there was any doubt in the minds of the Jury that if the wound in the boy’s body was made by a 30-30 bullet the Defendant should receive the benefit of the doubt.

Burke also maintained that the Court had erred in allowing Joe LeFors to testify in regard to the “confession” Horn was to have made, and though it was later stricken from the Court Record, it no doubt unduly influenced the Jury.

The Attorney for the Defense concluded his rebuttal and rested.

The Prosecution successfully blocked the motion for a new trial. The Defense then filed a petition of error in the Supreme Court of Wyoming on December 31st. The higher Court’s decision was to authorize a stay of execution until the case could be heard and determined by it.

Tom Horn was immediately notified of the action. It was reported the he displayed little concern over the news. Apparently he had been assured that such was the due course of law by his attorneys.

The Legal action was based on the laws of Wyoming providing for the granting of a stay of execution in capital cases. A petition of error filed was all that was necessary, leaving the Court with no other alternative.

The Supreme Court was then to decide whether or not the judgment of the Trial Court was valid.

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.