Appendix — Swenson v. Stidham
Supreme Court brief1973
Ask Donna
What actually matters in this document.
Text
Warr or CenTronanri TO THE Unrrep STATES
Court or APPEALS FOR THE
Excura Cracorr
Joun C, DanrorTH
Attorney General
Kenneto M. RoMInes
Assistant Attorney General
Supreme Court Building N
Jefferson City Missouri 651
314—636-7131
Attorney for Petitioner
a BL, Musrvaurmusn, Inc., 936 Cherry Strest, Kansas City, Mo. 64106, 481-8080
os eX
pas
INDEX
Volume I
Appendix A—Transcript in State v. Stidham, No.
BST cscisuise char cesdasdccontacapacacsncisousbhdebsuessasasasauspsiessniniundnbdaskions Al
Volume II
Appendix B—Transcript in State v. Stidham, No.
EG 2 ascot hid scsien ca este teenie sth veesag cays daesteceneaatadds A561
Appendix C—Transcript in Stidham v. State, No.
STO teins cesseennsseestanessscetsssscensscensennsssenennssesssnnesessenuess A595
Appendix I—Order of United States District Court
Dismissing Reinstated Appeal in Stidham v. Swen-
a | eS. | ee ee ee A759
Appendix J—Opinion of the United States District
Court in Stidham v. Swenson, No. 18771-2 ............ A760
Appendix K—Opinion of the Eighth Circuit Court of
Appeals in Stidham v. Swenson, No. 20685 ............ A765
Appendix L—Order Denying Petition for Rehearing
En Banc Before the United States Court of Appeals
for the Eighth Circuit in Stidham v. Swenson, No.
eisai a sess tiveness senta puas ses esta scactep ae ctgnn dae eoseabasetien A777
Al
APPENDIX A—Transcript in: State v. Stidham,
No. 45537
[1] IN THE
CIRCUIT COURT WITHIN AND FOR THE COUNTY
OF BUTLER, STATE OF MISSOURI
STATE OF MISSOURI, )
Plaintiff, )
Vs. ) No. 3158
JAMES WILLIAM STIDHAM, )
Defendant. )
MURDER IN THE FIRST DEGREE
APPEARANCES:
For the Plaintiff: James T. Riley, Esq., Prosecuting
Attorney, Cole County, Jefferson City, Missouri. Rex A.
Henson, Esq., Prosecuting Attorney, Butler County, Duncan
Building, Poplar Bluff, Missouri.
For the Defendant: Mark Murray Hennely, Esq., At-
torney at Law, Suite 1832-34 Arcade Bldg., 812 Olive Street,
St. Louis 1, Missouri.
{2] STATE OF MISSOURI )
) SS.
COUNTY OF COLE )
BE IT EVER REMEMBERED, That on this the 23rd
day of November, 1954, at the regular September Term,
1954, at the Circuit Court of Cole County, Missouri, begun
and held at the Court House in the City of Jefferson, in
the County and State aforesaid, before the Honorable Sam
C. Blair, Judge of the 14th Judicial Circuit of the State
of Missouri and Judge of this Court, the following, among
other proceedings, were had, to-wit:
,
A2
IN THE
CIRCUIT COURT OF COLE COUNTY, MISSOURI -
SEPTEMBER TERM 1954
: TUESDAY NOVEMBER 23rd, 1954
State of Missouri, )
Plaintiff, )
VS. ) No. 5259
JAMES WILLIAM STIDHAM, DON WIL- )
LIAM DE LAPP, et al., )
Defendants. )
Now at this day Grand Jury Indictment charging Mur.
der is received and filed and capias warrants issued by
the Clerk.
(Which said Grand Jury Indictment is in writing and
appearing in the following words and figures, to-wit: )
“IN THE
CIRCUIT COURT OF COLE COUNTY, MISSOURI
SEPTEMBER TERM, 1954
Filed
Nov. 23, 1954
Guy M. Stone
Clerk
A3
STATE OF MISSOURI )
) SS.
COUNTY OF COLE )
3] State of Missouri, )
Plaintiff, )
vs. ) No. 5259
William R. Hoover, Jackie Lee Noble, Paul )
Edward Kenton, James William Stidham, )
Rollie Laster, Don Wm. DeLapp, and )
Joseph M. Vidauri, )
Defendants. )
INDICTMENT
The Grand Jurors of the State of Missouri, duly sum-
moned from the body of the County of Cole, State of Mis-
souri, and duly impaneled, sworn, and charged to inquire
within and for said County, upon their oaths, present and
charge that William R. Hoover, Jackie Lee Noble, Paul Ed-
ward Kenton, James William Stidham, Rollie Laster, Don
Wm. DeLapp, and Joseph M. Vidauri, on or about the 22nd
day of September, 1954, at the County of Cole, State of
Missouri, did then and there feloniously, wilfully, de-
liberately, premeditatedly, on purpose and of their malice
aforethought, make an assault upon one Walter Lee Don-
nell and then and there with dangerous and deadly weap-
ons, to-wit: a sledge hammer, and a knife, and another
sharp instrument or dagger, the exact nature of which is
unknown to these Grand Jurors, a wooden table leg, and
other blunt instruments, the exact nature of which is un-
known to these Grand Jurors, and their fists and hands and
feet, the said William R. Hoover, [4] Jackie Lee Noble,
Paul Edward Kenton, James William Stidham, Rollie Las-
ter, Don Wm. DeLapp, and Joseph M. Vidauri, did felo-
niously, wilfully, deliberately, premediatedly, on purpose,
and of their malice aforethought, forcibly strike, hit, stab,
A4
cut, beat, and stomp the said Walter Lee Donnell, thus ang
thereby by the means aforesaid and in the manner afore.
said feloniously, wilfully, deliberately, premeditatedly, on
purpose, and of their malice aforethought, giving then anq
there to the said Walter Lee Donnell about his face, heaq
and body, mortal wounds of which mortal wounds the saiq
Walter Lee Donnell on or about the 22nd day of September,
1954, at the County of Cole, State of Missouri, did die.
And so the Grand Jurors, as aforesaid, upon their
oaths, as aforesaid, do say that the said William R. Hoover,
Jackie Lee Noble, Paul Edward Kenton, James William
Stidham, Rollie Laster, Don Wm. DeLapp, and Joseph M.
Vidauri, by the means aforesaid and in the manner and
form aforesaid, at Cole County, State of Missouri, did fe-
loniously, wilfully, deliberately, premediatedly, on pur-
pose, of their malice aforethought, did kill and murder the
said Walter Lee Donnell, against the peace and dignity of
the State.
A True Bill °
(Signed) Victor Witthaus
Foreman of the Grand Jury
(Signed) James T. Riley
Prosecuting Attorney
Cole County, Missouri
[5] Witnesses for State:
G. Donald Shull Thomas Pasley
W.S. Barton J. J. Rouse
John Bauer R. N. Eidson
Walter Eitzman Hugh Waggoner
P. R. Little J.C. Smith
Charles Billings Clarence Dietzel
R. C. Caldwell Jefferson T. Gentry
Jesse Renderer Ben H. Cederburg
Edw. H. Schaaf P. E. Cor]
Joe Lamar Otto S. Atkinson
AS
Otto McDermott Oscar Carrington
E. Brown Thomas Crane
H. M. Fennimore William Steinhauser
John F. Williams Bernard Poiry
James O. Rhoads J. G. Hanchey
Walter Eitzman Sylvester Dulle
Elmer Oberbech James Eynard
Thomas Jenneman Herman Trout
E. V. Nash Richard V. Gonzales
p. M. Inman James Marvin Creighton
Earl E. Barkley Charles Henry Ford
Ralph King William Henry Kauffman
Leon Wade Harry (Woody) Miles
Martin Jenson”
[6] (Which said Capias Warrant as to Defendant
Don Wm. DeLapp is in writing and appearing in the fol-
lowing words and figures, to-wit: )
CAPIAS
STATE OF MISSOURI )
) SS.
COUNTY OF COLE )
THE STATE OF MISSOURI, T@,THE SHERIFF OF
COLE COUNTY,—GREETING: -
YOU ARE HEREBY COMMANDED to take the body
of James Wm. Stidham if he be found in your county, and
him safely keep so that you have his body before the Cir-
cuit Court of Cole County on the First Monday in December
next, then and there to answer unto the State of Missouri
on an indictment for Murder whereof he stands charged,
and have you then and there this Writ, and do you certify
to our said Court how you execute this writ.
IN TESTIMONY WHEREOF, I, Guy M. Sone, Clerk of
said County, have hereunto set my hand and seal of said
scl A AGA AAT Sie SIO
| oe Bey tek en tT ee eae
A6
Court, at office in the City of Jefferson, this 23rd day of
November, A. D. 1954.
(Seal) (Signed) Guy M. Sone, Clerk
SHERIFF'S RETURN
I certify that on the 23rd day of November, 1954 |
read the within Capias to the within named Don William
DeLapp within his hearing and presence.
[7] Witness my hand this 23rd day of November, 1954,
in the County of Cole, State of Missouri.
Ben S. Markway, Sheriff
(Signed) S. H. Smith, Deputy
Fee $1.00
AND THEREAFTER, to-wit, on the same day, to-wit,
November 23rd, 1954, the following further proceedings .
were had herein:
IN THE
CIRCUIT COURT OF COLE COUNTY, MISSOURI
SEPTEMBER TERM 1954
TUESDAY NOVEMBER 23rd 1954
State of Missouri, )
Plaintiff, )
vs. ) No. 5259
James William Stidham, Don Wm. DeLapp, )
et al., )
Defendants. )
Now at this day comes James T. Riley, Prosecuting
Attorney within and for Cole County, Missouri, and come
the Defendants, William R. Hoover, Jackie Lee Noble, Paul
Edward Kenton, James William Stidham, Rollie Laster,
Don William DeLapp, and Joseph M. Vidauri, in open
Court and all defendants duly arraigned.
AT
It is ordered by the Court that the Clerk of this Court
be ordered to furnish each defendant with a certified copy
of the indictment herein within twenty-four hours.
[8] The Court finds alleged offenses and defendants
are not bailable and the Court orders each defendant com-
mitted to the custody of the Warden of the State Peniten-
tiary-
And now, come Defendants James William Stidham,
Joseph M. Vidauri, Jackie Lee Noble and Rollie Laster’ and
request the Court to appoint Mark Hennelly, St. Louis,
Missouri, their counsel, and he is so appointed.
It is further ordered by the Court that John H.
Hendren be appointed to represent Defendant William
R. Hoover.
It is further ordered by the Court that Mark Hennelly
be appointed to represent Don William DeLapp.
It is ordered by the Court that defendant Paul Ed-
ward Kenton be granted time to obtain counsel.
It is further ordered by the Court that S. W. James,
Jr. be appointed counsel for Jackie Lee Noble.
It is further ordered by the Court that Russell T.
Keyes be appointed counsel for Don William DeLapp.
It is further ordered by the Court that Tweedie Fisher
be appointed counsel for Joseph M. Vidauri.
It is further ordered by the Court that H. P. Andre
be appointed counsel for William R. Hoover.
AND THEREAFTER, to-wit, on December 6, 1954,
the following further proceedings were had herein:
A8
[9] IN THE
CIRCUIT COURT OF COLE COUNTY, MISSOURI
DECEMBER TERM 1954
MONDAY DECEMBER 6th, 1954
State of Missouri, )
Plaintiff, )
vs. ) No. 5259
James William Stidham, Don Wm. DeLapp, )
et al., )
Defendants. )
On this 6th day of December, 1954, the Court, exer-
cising the authority vested by Rule 25.06, Rules of Crimina]
Procedure, adopted by the Supreme Court April 14, 1952,
and effective January 1, 1953, determines and orders that
all motions raising defenses and objections, or for pro-
duction of documents or evidence or discovery, except
where issues of fact are involved which are required by
the Constitution or by the Laws of this State to be tried
by jury; shall be filed in this cause on or before Decem-
ber 15, 1954, and shall be presented to the Court on Law
Day, December 20, 1954, or as soon thereafter as the
Court can hear defendants and their counsel.
AND THEREAFTER, to-wit, on the same day, Decem-
ber 6th, 1954, the following further proceedings were had
herein:
A9
IN THE
CIRCUIT COURT OF COLE COUNTY, MISSOURI
DECEMBER TERM 1954
MONDAY DECEMBER 6th, 1954
(10) State of Missouri, )
Plaintiff, )
vs. ) No. 5259
James William Stidham, Don Wm. DeLapp, )
et al., )
Defendants. )
Now at this day, at his request, the Court permits
Mark Hennelly to withdraw as counsel for all defendants
except James William Stidham, owing to what be be-
lieves to be an apparent conflict between the interests of
the several defendants.
AND THEREAFTER, to-wit, on the same day, De-
cember 6th, 1954, the following further proceedings were
had herein:
IN THE
CIRCUIT COURT OF COLE COUNTY, MISSOURI
DECEMBER TERM 1954
MONDAY DECEMBER 6th, 1954
State of Missouri, )
Plaintiff, )
vs. ) No. 5259
James William Stidham, Don Wm. DeLapp, )
et al., )
Defendants. )
Now at this day comes James T. Riley, Prosecuting
Attorney within and for Cole County, Missouri; and come
Defendants William R. Hoover, Jackie Lee Noble, James
Al0
William Stidham, Rollie Laster, Don William DeLapp ang
Joseph M. Vidauri, [11] in their own proper person and
by their attorneys and enter herein a plea of not guilty
to the charge contained in the indictment, with leave to
withdraw the same.
AND THEREAFTER, to-wit, on the same day, Decem.
ber 6th, 1954, the following further proceedings were had
herein:
IN THE
CIRCUIT COURT OF COLE COUNTY, MISSOURI
DECEMBER TERM 1954
MONDAY DECEMBER 6th, 1954
State of Missouri, )
Plaintiff, )
vs. ) No. 5259
James William Stidham, Don Wm. DeLapp, )
et al., )
Defendants. )
Now at this day it is ordered by the Court that all per-
missions for withdrawal of pleas of not guilty is for the
purpose of permitting defendants to file motions in com-
pliance with the Court’s order of this date.
AND THEREAFTER, to-wit, on December 14th, 1954,
the following further proceedings were had herein:
All
IN THE
CIRCUIT COURT OF COLE COUNTY, MISSOURI
DECEMBER TERM 1954
TUESDAY DECEMBER 14, 1954
State of Missouri, )
Plaintiff, )
vs. ) No. 5259
James William Stidham, )
Defendant. )
[12] Now at this day comes defendant, James William
stidham, by his attorney, and files his Motions for Pro-
duction and Inspection, To Dismiss, for a Severance, for a
Polygraph Examination and to Suppress.
(Which said Motion for Production and Inspection is
in writing and appearing in the following words and figures,
to-wit: )
“In the
Circuit Court of Cole County, Missouri
December Term, 1954
Filed
Dec. 14, 1954
Guy M. Sone
Clerk.
State of Missouri, )
Plaintiff, )
vs. ) No. 5259
William R. Hoover, et al., )
Defendants. )
MOTION OF DEFENDANT, JAMES WILLIAM
STIDHAM FOR PRODUCTION AND
INSPECTION
1. Defendant James William Stidham moves the Court
for an order requiring the Prosecuting Attorney to produce
; BH, %,
; patie :
ote,
Al2
and to permit the defendant to inspect and copy at a time
and place set by the Court before trial of this cause aj]
statements claimed by the State to have been made by
the defendant which the State intends to offer into eyj.
dence at the trial of defendant.
[13] 2. That the inspection and copying of the state.
ments are necessary to enable this defendant to prepare
his case for trial and that defendant cannot safely proceed
to trial unless and until he has such information.
(Signed )
Mark M. Hennelly
Attorney for Defendant
James William Stidham,
1832 Arcade Building
St. Louis 1, Missouri
Chestnut 1-2242.”
(Which said Motion to Dismiss is in writing and ap-
pearing the following words and figures, to-wit: )
“IN THE
CIRCUIT COURT OF COLE COUNTY, MISSOURI
DECEMBER TERM, 1954
Filed
Dec. 14, 1954
Guy M. Sone
Clerk
State of Missouri, )
Plaintiff, )
vs. ) No. 5259
WILLIAM R. HOOVER, et al., )
Defendants. )
MOTION OF DEFENDANT, JAMES WILLIAM
STIDHAM, TO DISMISS
Defendant moves the Court to dismiss the Indictment
for the following reason:
Al3
The indictment is duplicitous for the reason that it
[14] purports to charge two crimes. It purportedly charges
both a homicide and an assault with intent to kill.
(Signed)
Mark M. Hennelly
Attorney for Defendant
James William Stidham
1832 Arcade Building
St. Louis 1, Missouri
Chestnut 1-2242.”
(Which said Motion for a Severance is in writing and
appearing in the following words and figures, to-wit: )
“IN THE
CIRCUIT COURT OF COLE COUNTY, MISSOURI
DECEMBER TERM, 1954
State of Missouri, )
Plaintiff, )
vs. ) No. 5259
William R. Hoover, et al., )
Defendants. )
MOTION OF DEFENDANT, JAMES WILLIAM
STIDHAM FOR A SEVERANCE
Defendant, James William Stidham, moves the Court
to grant him a severance from his co-defendants.
1. He has an absolute right to a severance.
9. Evidence in this case will be introduced by the
State which will be prejudicial against him and which
would be inadmissible against him at a separate trial.
bi
Al4
3. The defendant, as well as his co-defendants, wil]
[15] obtain a fairer and more impartial trial if he is trieq
alone.
(Signed)
Mark M. Hennelly
Attorney for Defendant
James William Stidham
1832 Arcade Building
St. Louis 1, Missouri
Chestnut 1-2242.”
(Which said Motion for a Polygraph Examination js
in writing and appearing in the following words and
figures, to-wit: )
“IN THE
CIRCUIT COURT OF COLE COUNTY, MISSOURI
DECEMBER TERM, 1954
Filed
Dec. 14, 1954
Guy M. Sone
Clerk.
State of Missouri, )
Plaintiff, )
VS. ) No. 5259
William R. Hoover, et al., )
Defendants. )
MOTION OF DEFENDANT, JAMES WILLIAM
STIDHAM FOR A POLYGRAPH
EXAMINATION
Defendant, James William Stidham, moves the Court
to appoint an independent polygraph examiner or any other
examiner qualified to administer any other type of “lie
detector” examination described by the Court, for the pur-
Al5
pose of interrogating him relative to the charges set forth
in the indictment in this [16] cause at such time and in
the presence of such people as the Court shall designate
and as grounds for this motion states:
1. Such an examination will assist this defendant in
establishing his innocence of the charge set forth in the
Indictment.
9. Defendant intends to introduce into evidence the
testimony of such examiner and the result of such exam-
jnation.
This defendant further states to the Court that he is
willing to pay the costs of such examination.
(Signed )
Mark M. Hennelly;
Attorney for Defendant
, James William Stidham
1832 Arcade Building
St. Louis 1, Missouri
Chestnut 1-2242.”
(Which said Motion to Suppress is in writing and
appearing in the following words and figures, to-wit: )
= . 4 —
9s Mt in th te Le at
a SOT cise Rh sich Nie SIN CORSA BREDA
ge he = %
sl ta Fn Dee eb ES abe
| 2 eri ch dil Acs s eSB
Al6
“IN THE
CIRCUIT COURT OF COLE COUNTY, MISSOURI
DECEMBER TERM, 1954
Filed
Dec. 14, 1954
Guy M. Sone
Clerk.
State of Missouri, )
Plaintiff, )
VS. ) No. 5259
William R. Hoover, et al., )
Defendants. )
[17] MOTION OF DEFENDANT, JAMES
WILLIAM STIDHAM TO
SUPPRESS
Defendant, James William Stidham, moves the Court
to Suppress as evidence any and all statements claimed to
have been made by this defendant to peace officers of the
State of Missouri, to guards and officers of the Missouri
State Penitentiary and to other officials of the State of
Missouri and as grounds for this motion states:
1. All of the aforementioned alleged statements were
involuntary and as a result of physical force and threats
of physcial force applied against this defendant by police
officers of the City of St. Louis, guards of the Missouri
State Penitentiary and officers of the Missouri Highway
Patrol.
2. The use of any of the aforementioned statements
against this defendant would contravene his right to due
processes of law as guaranteed by the due process clause
of Article I section 10 of the Missouri Constitution and
Amendment 14 of the United States Constitution, and would
Al7
contravene his privileges against self-incrimination and as
guaranteed by Article I Section 19 of the Missouri Con-
stitution.
3 This defendant was further denied the assistance of
counsel by not being permitted counsel at the time of the
alleged statements in violation of Article I Section 18 (a)
of the Missouri Constitution.
(18] (Signed )
Mark M. Hennelly
Attorney for Defendant
James William Stidham
1832 Arcade Building
St. Louis 1, Missouri
Chestnut 1-2242.”
AND THEREAFTER, to-wit, on December 20th, 1954,
the following further proceedings were had herein:
DECEMBER TERM 1954
MONDAY DECEMBER 20, 1994
State of Missouri, )
Plaintiff, )
vs. ) No. 5259
James William Stidham, )
Defendant. )
Now at this day Motion of Defendant James William
Stidham, for a severance is by the Court taken up and
granted.
AND THEREAFTER, to-wit, on the same day, Decem-
ber 20th, 1954, the following further proceedings were had
herein:
RAR BARE
Als
IN THE
CIRCUIT COURT OF COLE COUNTY, MISSOURI
DECEMBER TERM 1954
MONDAY DECEMBER 20, 1954
State of Missouri, )
Plaintiff, )
vs. —) No. 5259
James William Stidham, )
Defendant. )
Now at this day Motion of Defendant James William
Stidham [19] to Dismiss is by the Court taken up and after
hearing argument of counsel, doth overrule said Motion
to Dismiss.
AND THEREAFTER, to-wit, on the same day, Decem-
ber 20th, 1954, the following further proceedings were had
herein:
IN THE
CIRCUIT COURT OF COLE COUNTY, MISSOURI
DECEMBER TERM 1954
MONDAY DECEMBER 20, 1954
State of Missouri, )
Plaintiff, )
VS. ) No. 5259
James William Stidham, )
Defendant. )
Now at this day Motion for Polygraph Examination
by Defendant James William Stidham is by the Court taken
up and after hearing argument of counsel, doth take said
motion under advisement.
AND THEREAFTER, to-wit, on the same date, De-
cember 20th, 1954, the following further proceedings were
had herein:
Al1g
IN THE
CIRCUIT COURT OF COLE COUNTY, MISSOURI
DECEMBER TERM 1954
MONDAY DECEMBER 20th, 1954
State of Missouri, )
Plaintiff, )
v6. ) No. 5259
James William Stidham, ; )
Defendant. )
[20] Now at this day Motion to Suppress by defend-
ant James William Stidham is by the Court taken up and
after hearing argument of counsel, doth overrule said Mo-
tion to Suppress.
AND THEREAFTER, to-wit, on the same day, the
0th day of December, 1954, the following further pro-
ceedings were had herein:
IN THE
CIRCUIT COURT OF COLE COUNTY, MISSOURI
DECEMBER TERM 1954
MONDAY DECEMBER 20, 1954
State of Missouri, )
Plaintiff, )
vs. ) No. 5259
James William Stidham, )
Defendant. )
Now at this day Motion for Production of Statement
on behalf of Defendant James William Stidham is by the
Court taken up and after hearing argument of counsel,
doth take said Motion under advisement.
AND THEREAFTER, to-wit, on the same day, Decem-
ber 20th, 1954, the following further proceedings werc had
herein:
on
SabhEA ane ins 4 SRT RNA
AERA RE Ae atin ass 340
Nine Tee
eit
A20
IN THE
CIRCUIT COURT OF COLE COUNTY, MISSOURI
DECEMBER TERM 1954
MONDAY DECEMBER 20, 1954
State of Missouri, )
. Plaintiff, )
[21] vs. ) No. 5259
James William Stidham, )
Defendant. )
Now at this day it is ordered by the Court that De.
fendant James William Stidham be granted until Decem-
ber 24th, 1954, to file brief herein.
AND THEREAFTER, to-wit, on Monday, December
20th, 1954, the following further proceedings were had
herein:
IN THE
CIRCUIT COURT OF COLE COUNTY, MISSOURI
DECEMBER TERM 1954
MONDAY DECEMBER 20, 1954
State of Missouri, )
Plaintiff, )
vs. - ) No. 5259
James William Stidham, )
Defendant. )
Now at this day it is ordered by the Court that the
State of Missouri be granted leave to endorse the names
of additional witnesses upon the Indictment.
AND THEREAFTER, to-wit, on the same day, Decem-
ber 20th, 1954, the following further proceedings were had
herein: 2
A21
IN THE
CIRCUIT COURT OF COLE COUNTY, MISSOURI
DECEMBER TERM 1954
MONDAY DECEMBER 20, 1954
(22] State of Missouri, )
Plaintiff, )
vs. ) No. 5259
James William Stidham, )
Defendant. )
Now at this day it is ordered by the Court that the
case of James William Stidham be set for trial on January
96th, 1955.
AND THEREAFTER, to-wit, on December 23rd, 1954,
the following further proceedings were had herein:
IN THE
CIRCUIT COURT OF COLE COUNTY, MISSOURI
DECEMBER TERM 1954
THURSDAY DECEMBER 23, 1954
State of Missouri, )
Plaintiff, )
vs. ) No. 5259
James William Stidham, )
Defendant. )
Now at this day it is ordered by the Court that all
applications for Polygraph Tests are overruled as to each
Defendant who has filed same.
AND THEREAFTER, to-wit, on January 3rd, 1955, the
following further proceedings were had herein:
hires URES st Sa hie aA Pea i
eT ee ee ne Te
A22
IN THE
CIRCUIT COURT OF COLE COUNTY, MISSOURI
[23] DECEMBER TERM 1954
MONDAY JANUARY 3, 1955
State of Missouri, )
Plaintiff, )
vs. ) No. 5259
James William Stidham, et al., )
Defendants. )
Now at this day it is ordered by the Court that rulings
on Motions to Produce as per opinion filed this date. (See
opinion )
AND THEREAFTER, on January 13th, 1955, the fol-
lowing further proceedings were had herein:
IN THE
CIRCUIT COURT OF COLE COUNTY, MISSOURI
DECEMBER TERM 1954
THURSDAY JANUARY 13, 1955
State of Missouri, )
Plaintiff, )
vs. ) No. 5259
James William Stidham, et al., )
. Defendants. )
Now at this day comes James T. Riley, Prosecuting
Attorney, and confesses motions for production, hereto-
fore argued on January 12th, 1955, and volunteers to pro-
duce same within twenty-four hours.
And now, the Court reconsiders the Motion of Defend-
ant James William Stidham, and sets aside ruling hereto-
fore made [24] herein. And now, comes the Prosecuting
A23
Attorney and confesses motion of Defendant James William
Stidham for production and volunteers to produce same
within twenty-four hours.
AND THEREAFTER, to-wit, on January 24th, 1955, the
following further proceedings were had herein:
IN THE
CIRCUIT COURT OF COLE COUNTY, MISSOURI
DECEMBER TERM 1954
MONDAY JANUARY 24, 1955
State of Missouri, )
Plaintiff, )
vs. ) No. 5259
James William Stidham, )
Defendant. )
Now at this day comes the defendant, James William
Stidham, by his attorneys, and files his application for con-
tinuance, which is presented and by the Court granted.
It is further ordered by the Court that the cause of
State of Missouri vs. James William Stidham be set for
9:00 A. M. on February 15th, 1955.
AND THEREAFTER, said Motion of Defendant, James
William Stidham for Continuance is in writing and ap-
pearing in the following words and figures, to-wit:
A24
“IN THE
CIRCUIT COURT OF COLE COUNTY,
STATE OF MISSOURI
[25] Filed
1-24-55
Sam C. Blair
Judge
State of Missouri, )
Plaintiff, )
vs. )
William R. Hoover, et al., )
Defendants. )
MOTION OF DEFENDANT, JAMES WILLIAM
STIDHAM FOR CONTINUANCE
Defendant, James William Stidham, moves the Court
to grant him a continuance in the above captioned cause
and as grounds for this motion states:
1. On the basis of a copy of the written statement
given the police by the defendant which was during the
preceding week made available to defendant and his coun-
sel certain depositions of endorsed State witnesses appear
necessary in order that defendant may prepare a proper
defense to the charges against him.
2. Due to the fact that one of defendant’s co-defend-
ants is on trial at this time the attendant publicity and
notoriety surrounding this matter will serve to re-arouse
the citizens of this community and will create bias and
A25
prejudice to such an extent that it will be impossible for
the defendant to have a fair trial.
(26] (Signed)
Mark M. Hennelly
William B. Kelleher
Attorneys for Defendant
1832 Arcade Bldg.,
St. Louis, Mo.”
AND THEREAFTER, to-wit, on February 14th, 1955,
the following further proceedings were had herein:
IN THE
CIRCUIT COURT OF COLE COUNTY, MISSOURI
FEBRUARY TERM 1955
MONDAY FEBRUARY 14, 1955
State of Missouri, )
Plaintiff, )
. vs. ) No. 5259
James William Stidham, )
Defendant. )
Now at this day comes James T. Riley, Prosecuting
Attorney, and comes the defendant James William Stid-
ham, by his attorney, William B. Kelleher, and files his
application for change of venue and presents same to the
Court, and the Court being advised in the matter, does
deny said application for change of venue on ground affi-
davits state no facts and Notice given at 4:45 P.M. on this
date is insufficient, this cause being set for trial at 9:00
AM., February 16th, 1959.
AND THEREAFTER, to-wit, on February 15th, 1955,
the [27] following further proceedings were had herein:
hog bead ea kt WA.GaS SSR Reet cae a
oo Nae ee bl
aha A casa as
A26
IN THE
CIRCUIT COURT OF COLE COUNTY, MISSOURI
FEBRUARY TERM 1955
TUESDAY FEBRUARY 15, 1955
State of Missouri, )
Plaintiff, )
vs. ) No. 5259
James Wm. Stidham, )
Defendant. )
Now at this day comes the Defendant, James William
Stidham, by his attorney William B. Kelleher, and files
his Application for Change of Venue, at 1:45 P.M. this
day, accompanied by affidavits. No notice given the
prosecuting Attorney of intention to file this application
until 1:30 P.M. this date.
And now, comes the Defendant, by his attorney, and
presents his application for Change of Venue to the Court
at 1:45 P.M. this date, which is considered and by the
Court denied for want of reasonable notice.
(Which said Application and Affidavit for Change of
Venue, together with Supporting Affidavits are in writ-
ing and appearing in the following words and figures,
to-wit: )
A27
“IN THE
CIRCUIT COURT OF COLE COUNTY, MISSOURI
RE-FILED
Feb. 15, 1955 Filed
at 4:40 P.M. 9-15-55
Guy M. Sone Sam C. Blair
Clerk Judge
[28] State of Missouri, )
Plaintiff, )
vs. ) No. 5259
William R. Hoover, et al, )
Defendants. )
To: The Hon. James T. Riley, Pros. Attorney, in and
for the County of Cole, Missouri:
Please take notice that the defendant, James W. Stid-
ham, by his attorney, William Kelleher, will file in the
above entitled cause his Application and Affidavit of five
disinterested citizens, residing in different neighborhoods
of this county this 15th day of February, 1955.
AND PLEASE TAKE FURTHER NOTICE
That on the 15th day of February, 1955. at 1 ocicck
in the afternoon or as soon thereafter as counsel may be
heard, the undersigned attorney for the defendant, will
call up for hearing before the Hon. Sam C. Blair, the above
Application and Affidavit of defendant, James W. Stid-
ham.
(Signed)
William B. Kelleher
Arcade Bidg.,
St. Louis, Mo.
Received a copy of the foregoing Notice this Febru-
ary 15th, 1955, at 6:40 P.M.
(Signed) James T. Riley
ee |
pee ee
BPE Ls
Mg Bs
A28
[29] IN THE
CIRCUIT COURT OF COLE COUNTY, MISSOURI
Re-filed , Filed
2-15-55 2-15
@ 4:40 P.M. Sam C. Blair
Guy M. Sone Judge
Clerk
State of Missouri, )
Plaintiff, )
vs. ) No. 5259
William R. Hoover, et al., )
Defendants. )
APPLICATION AND AFFIDAVIT FOR CHANGE OF
VENUE
Now comes James W. Stidham, defendant in the above
entitled cause and states that by indictment of Novem-
ber 23, 1954, charging this defendant with first degree
murder of one Walter Lee Donnell, this defendant will be
tried and held to answer said Indictment as provided by
Law; and by this application and affidavit for change of
venue states that this affiant has good reason and does
believe that he cannot have a fair and impartial trial in
said cause in Cole County, Missouri for the reasons that
newspapers, television, radio, magazines and other man-
ner and means of disseminating stories about this defend-
ant have caused the minds of citizens of Cole County to
be biased and prejudiced against this defendant; that the
outcome and publicity arising out of the trial of State of
Missouri vs. Donald DeLapp, concluded January 28th,
1955, has caused bias and prejudice in the minds of the
citizens [30] of Cole County against this defendant; that
the above facts have become known to this defendant,
first, within the past three days preceding the filing of
A29
this application and affidavit and during all of the above
time this defendant has been confined and in custody at
the Missouri State Penitentiary.
(Signed)
James W. Stidham
STATE OF MISSOURI )
) ss.
COUNTY OF COLE )
James W. Stidham, being first duly sworn, on his oath,
states that he has signed the above Application and Affi-
davit for Change of Venue and that the facts stated therein
are true to his best knowledge and belief and believes
that he cannot have a fair and impartial trial because the
minds of the inhabitants and citizens of Cole County, Mis-
souri, are prejudiced and biased against him.
(Signed)
James W. Stidham
Witness my hand and seal February 15th, 1955.
(Signed)
W. C. Sanders
(Seal) Notary Public.
My Com. Exps. February 15, 1958.
A30
[31] “IN THE
CIRCUIT- COURT OF COLE COUNTY, MISSOURI
Re-filed Filed
Feb. 15, ’55 2-15-55
@ 4:40 P.M. Sam C. Blair
Guy M. Sone Judge
Clerk
STATE OF MISSOURI, a)
Plaintiff, )
vs. ) No. 5259
WILLIAM R. HOOVER, et al. )
Defendants. )
‘ AFFIDAVIT IN SUPPORT OF APPLICATION OF
DEFENDANT JAMES WM. STIDHAM FOR A
CHANGE OF VENUE
Comes now Mrs. H. J. Schulte, a credible disinter-
ested citizen residing in the Marion Township neighbor-
hood of Cole County, Missouri, being duly sworn, deposes
‘ and says that she has discussed with citizens of the neigh-
; borhood in which she resides and has heard discussed by
citizens in the neighborhood in which she resides the
charge or charges made against defendant James William
Stidham in the above captioned case and also other
charges made by the State of Missouri against other in-
mates of the Missouri State Penitentiary at Jefferson City,
4 Missouri, arising out of incidents and events which oc-
curred at said Penitentiary on September 22 and 23, 1954,
and that the comments, opinions and conclusions of citi-
zens residing in the Marion Township neighborhood are
unfavorable concerning the said James William Stidham
and other inmates of the Missouri [32] State Penitentiary
against whom criminal charges have been made for and
arising out of events and incidents which occurred at said
MS REET paees
A31
penitentiary on the dates aforesaid; that, generally, the
citizens of said neighborhood express the opinion or con-
clusion that defendant James William Stidham and other
inmates of said penitentiary charged by the State of Mis-
souri with crimes arising out of said events and incidents
are guilty of the crimes charged and should be severely
punished for said crimes; and that, generally, there pre-
vails among the citizens of said neighborhood hostility
and bias against defendant James William Stidham and
other inmates of said penitentiary charged with crimes
arising out of said incidents and events, with reference
to their guilt or innocence of said charges.
WHEREFORE, your affiant says that he verily be-
lieves that the minds of the citizens of Cole County, Mis-
souri, are so prejudiced against the defendant that the
defendant cannot have a fair trial in said County of the
charges brought against him in the above captioned case.
Your affiant says further that she is not related by blood
or marriage to or of counsel for the defendant James Wil-
liam Stidham.
Dated this 15th day of February, 1955.
/s/ Mrs. H. J. Schulte
Route 5
Jefferson City, Mo.
[33] STATE OF MISSOURI )
) ay
COUNTY OF COLE )
Subscribed and sworn to February 15th, 1955, before
me, a Notary Public in and for Cole County, Missouri.
My commission expires February 15, 1958.
(Signed )
W. C. Sanders
(Seal) Notary Public.”
A32
“IN THE
CIRCUIT COURT OF COLE COUNTY, MISSOURI
Re-filed Filed
Feb. 15, ’55 2-15-55
@ 4:40 P.M. Sam C. Blair
Guy M. Sone Judge
Clerk
STATE OF MISSOURI, )
Plaintiff, )
vs. ) No. 5259
WILLIAM R. HOOVER, et al., )
Defendants. )
AFFIDAVIT IN SUPPORT OF APPLICATION OF
DEFENDANT James Wm. Stidham
FOR A CHANGE OF VENUE
Comes now James H. Brand, a credible disinterested
citizen residing in the Liberty Township neighborhood of
Cole County, Missouri, being duly sworn, deposes and
says that he has discussed with citizens of the neighbor-
: hood in which he resides and has heard discussed by citi-
4 zens in the neighborhood in which he resides the charge
4 or charges made against defendant James William Stid-
ham in the above captioned case and also [34] other
charges made by the State of Missouri against other in-
mates of the Missouri State Penitentiary at Jefferson City,
Missouri, arising out of incidents and events which oc-
curred at said penitentiary on September 22 and 23, 1954,
: and that the comments, opinions and conclusions; of citi-
é zens residing in the Liberty Township neighborhood are
unfavorable concerning the said James William Stidham
; and other inmates of the Missouri State Penitentiary
against whom criminal charges have been made for and
arising out of events and incidents which occurred at said
phils De i Se
ora
A33
penitentiary on the dates aforesaid; that, generally, the
citizens of said neighborhood express the opinion or con-.
clusion that defendant James William Stidham and other
inmates of said penitentiary charged by the State of Mis-
souri with crimes arising out of said events and incidents
are guilty of the crimes charged and should be severely
punished for said crimes; and that, generally, there pre-
vails among the citizens of said neighborhood hostility
and bias against defendant James William Stidham and
other inmates of said penitentiary charged with crimes
arising out of said incidents and events, with reference
to their guilt or innocence of said charges.
WHEREFORE, your affiant says that he verily be-
lieves that the minds of the citizens of Cole County, Mis-
souri, are so prejudiced against the defendant that the
defendant cannot have a fair trial in said County of the
charges brought against [35] him in the above captioned
case. Your affiant says further that he is not related by
blood or marriage to or of counsel for the defendant
James William Stidham.
Dated this 15th day of February, 1955.
(Signed )
James H. Brand
RR #3, Jefferson City, Mo.
STATE OF MISSOURI )
) SS.
COUNTY OF COLE )
Subscribed and sworn to February 15th, 1955, before
me, a Notary Public in and for Cole County, Missouri.
My commission expires February 15, 1958.
(Signed)
W. C. Sanders
(Seal) Notary Public.”
iotebe aac RTL Maa i IRR:
7
A34
“IN THE
CIRCUIT COURT OF COLE COUNTY, MISSOUR]
Re-filed Filed
Feb. 15, ’55 . 2-15-55
@ 4:40 P.M. Sam C. Blair
Guy M. Sone Judge
Clerk ©
STATE OF MISSOURI, )
Plaintiff, )
vs. ) No. 5259
WILLIAM R. HOOVER, ET AL )
Defendants. )
AFFIDAVIT IN SUPPORT OF APPLICATION OF
DEFENDANT JAMES WM. STIDHAM
FOR A CHANGE OF VENUE
[36] Comes now Charles J. Kolb, a credible disinter-
ested citizen residing in the Jefferson Township neigh-
borhood of Cole County, Missouri, being duly sworn,
deposes and says that h® has discussed with citizens of
the neighborhood in which he resides and has heard dis-
cussed by citizens in the neighborhood in which he resides
the charge or charges made against defendant James Wil-
liam Stidham in the above captioned case and also other
charges made by the State of Missouri against other in-
mates of the Missouri State Penitentiary at Jefferson City,
Missouri, arising out of incidents and events which oc-
curred at said penitentiary on September 22 and 23, 1954,
and that the comments, opinions and conclusions of citi-
zens residing in the Jefferson Township neighborhood are
unfavorable concerning the said James William Stidham
and other inmates of the Missouri State Penitentiary
against whom criminal charges have been made for and
arising out of events and incidents which occurred*at said
A35
penitentiary on the dates aforesaid; that, generally, the
citizens of said neighborhood express the opinion or con-
clusion that defendant James William Stidham and other
inmates of said penitentiary charged by the State of Mis-
souri with crimes arising out of said events and incidents
are guilty of the crimes charged and should be severely
punished for said crimes; and that, generally, there pre-
vails among the citizens of said neighborhood hostility
and bias against defendant James William Stidham and
other inmates of said penitentiary [37] charged with
crimes arising out of said incidents and events, with ref-
erence to their guilt or innocence of said charges.
WHEREFORE, your affiant says that he verily be-
lieves that the minds of the citizens of Cole County, Mis-
souri, are SO prejudiced against the defendant that the
defendant cannot have a fair trial in said County of the
charges brought against him in the above captioned case.
Your affiant says further that he is not related by blood
or marriage to or of counsel for the defendant James Wil-
liam Stidham.
Dated this 15th day of February, 1955.
(Signed)
Charles J. Kolb
Rt. #4
Jefferson City, Mo.
STATE OF MISSOURI )
) SS.
COUNTY OF COLE )
Subscribed and sworn to February 15th, 1955, before
me, a Notary Public in and for Cole County, Missouri.
My commission expires February 15, 1958.
(Signed )
W. C. Sanders
(Seal) Notary Public.”
*
¥
4
BY
ee
“ie SR TAY
BPs desiicercnin: Beene
4
A36
“IN THE
CIRCUIT COURT OF COLE COUNTY, MISSouRI
Re-filed Filed
Feb. 15, ’55 2-15-55
@ 4:40 P.M. Sam C. Blair
Guy M. Sone Judge
Clerk
[38] STATE OF MISSOURI, )
Plaintiff, )
vs. ) No. 5259
WILLIAM R. HOOVER, ET AL )
Defendants. )
AFFIDAVIT IN SUPPORT OF APPLICATION OF
DEFENDANT JAMES WM. STIDHAM
FOR A CHANGE OF VENUE
Comes now Norbert Schellman, a credible disin-
terested citizen residing in the Jefferson Township neigh-
borhood of Cole County, Missouri, being duly sworn, de-
poses and says that he has discussed with citizens of the
neighborhood in which he resides and has heard discussed
by citizens in the neighborhood in which he resides the
charge or charges made against defendant James William
Stidham in the above captioned case and also other
charges made by the State of Missouri against other in-
mates of the Missouri State Penitentiary at Jefferson City,
Missouri, arising out of incidents and events which oc-
curred at said penitentiary on September 22 and 23, 1954,
and that the comments, opinions and conclusions of citi-
zens residing in the Jefferson Township neighborhood are
unfavorable concerning the said James William Stidham
and other inmates of the Missouri State Penitentiary
against whom criminal charges have been made for and
arising out of events and incidents which occurred at said
Cm)
A37
penitentiary on the dates aforesaid; that, generally, the
citizens of said neighborhood express the opinion or [39]
conclusion that defendant James William Stidham and
other inmates of said penitentiary charged by the State
of Missouri with crimes arising out of said events and
incidents are guilty of the crimes charged and should be
severely punished for said crimes; and that, generally,
there prevails among the citizens of said neighborhood
hostility and bias against defendant James William Stid-
ham and other inmates of said penitentiary charged with
crimes arising out of said incidents and events, with
reference to their guilt or innocence of said charges.
WHEREFORE, your affiant says that he verily be-
lieves that the minds of the citizens of Cole County, Mis-
souri, are so prejudiced against the defendant that the
defendant cannot have a fair trial in said County of the
charges brought against him in the above captioned case.
Your affiant says further that he is not related by blood
or marriage to or of counsel for the defendant James Wil-
liam Stidham.
Dated this 15th day of February, 1955.
(Signed )
Norbert J. Schellman
52314, Madison Street
Jefferson City, Mo.
STATE OF MISSOURI )
) SS.
COUNTY OF COLE )
Subscribed and sworn to February 15th, 1955, before
me, a Notary Public in and for Cole County, Missouri.
[40] My commission expires February 15, 1958.
(Signed)
W. C. Sanders
(Seal) Notary Public.”
. —
A38
“IN THE
CIRCUIT COURT OF COLE COUNTY, MISSOURI
Re-filed Filed
4 Feb. 15, ’55 2-15-55 -
; @ 4:40 PM. Sam C. Blair
3 Guy M. Sone Judge
; Clerk
ij STATE OF MISSOURI, )
4 Plaintiff, )
: vs. ) No. 5259
5 WILLIAM R. HOOVER, ET AL, )
j Defendants. )
d AFFIDAVIT IN SUPPORT OF APPLICAT@®N OF
DEFENDANT JAMES WM. STIDHAM
FOR A CHANGE OF VENUE
Comes now C. J. Cremer, a credible disinterested
citizen residing in the Moreau Township neighborhood
of Cole County, Missouri, being duly sworn, deposes and
says that he has discussed with citizens of the neighbor-
hood in which he resides and has heard discussed by citizens
in the neighborhood in which he resides the charge or
charges made against defendant James William Stidham
in the above captioned case and also other charges made
by the State of Missouri against other inmates of the
Missouri State Penitentiary at Jefferson City, Missouri,
arising out of incidents and events which occurred at said
[41] penitentiary on September 22 and 23, 1954, and that
the comments, opinions and conclusions of citizens re-
siding ‘in the Moreau Township neighborhood are un-
favorable concerning the said James William Stidham
and other inmates of the Missouri State Penitentiary
against whom criminal charges have been made for and
arising out of events and incidents which occurred at said
A39
penitentiary on the dates aforesaid; that, generally, the
citizens of said neighborhood express the opinion or con-
clusion that defendant James William Stidham and other
inmates of said penitentiary charged by the State of Mis-
souri with crimes arising out of said events and incidents
are guilty of the crimes charged and should be severely pun-
ished for said crimes; and that, generally, there prevails
among the citizens of said neighborhood hostility and
bias against defendant James William Stidham and other
inmates of said penitentiary charged with crimes arising
out of said incidents and events, with reference to their
guilt or innocence of said charges.
WHEREFORE, your affiant says that he verily be-
lieves that the minds of the citizens of Cole County, Mis-
souri, are so prejudiced against the defendant that the de-
fendant cannot have a fair trial in said County of the
charges brought against him in the above captioned case.
Your affiant says further that he is not related by blood
or marriage to or of counsel for the defendant James Wil-
liam Stidham.
[42] Dated this 15th day of February, 1955.
(Signed )
C. J. Cremer
Russellville, Mo.
KG IM
‘yt peak ae RE er
Seine SAR RUACARI AAA ree NA eS at ee
A40
STATE OF MISSOURI )
) SS.
COUNTY OF COLE )
Subscribed and sworn to February 15th, 1955, before
me, a notary public in and for Cole County, Missouri,
My commission expires February 15, 1958.
(Signed)
W. C. Sanders
(Seal) Notary Public.”
AND THEREAFTER, to-wit, on the same day, Feb-
ruary 15, 1955, the following further proceedings were
had herein:
IN THE
CIRCUIT COURT OF COLE COUNTY, MISSOURI
FEBRUARY TERM 1955
TUESDAY FEBRUARY 15, 1955
State of Missouri, )
Plaintiff, )
vs. ) No. 5259
James William Stidham, )
Defendant. )
Now at this day comes the Defendant, James William
Stidham, by his attorney, and files his Affidavit for Dis-
qualification of Judge, at 4:45 P.M. this date.
[43] (Which said Affidavit for Disqualification of
Judge is in writing and appearing in the following words
and figures, to-wit: )
A41
“IN THE
CIRCUIT COURT OF COLE COUNTY, MISSOURI
Filed
Feb. 15, 1955
@ 4:45 P.M.
Guy M. Sone
Clerk.
State of Missouri, )
Plaintiff, )
vs. ) No. 5259
William R. Hoover, et al., )
Defendants. )
AFFIDAVIT FOR DISQUALIFICATION OF
JUDGE BY JAMES W. STIDHAM
Comes now James W. Stidham, and who after being
" first duly ‘sworn, upon his oath, deposes and says that
the Hon. Sam C. Blair, Circuit Judge of the County of
Cole, Missouri, cannot conduct a fair and impartial trial
| in this cause by reason of his interest or prejudice, as
this affiant verily believes. .
Dated this 15th day of February, 1955.
(Signed)
James W. Stidham,
Defendant
*
ct —
A42
\ STATE OF MISSOURI )
) SS.
COUNTY OF COLE )
Subscribed and sworn to before me by. the said James
W. Stidham, this 15th. day of February, 1955.
[44] (Signed)
; Marion J. Stewart
3 (Seal ) Notary Public,
Cole County, Mo.
My commission expires Feb. 1, 1956.”
AND THEREAFTER, to-wit, on the same day, Feb-
ruary 15, 1955, the following further proceedings were
had herein:
od Sima
nt Ne 7
IN THE
; CIRCUIT COURT OF COLE COUNTY, MISSOURI
FEBRUARY TERM 1955
: TUESDAY FEBRUARY 15, 1955
: State of Missouri, : )
‘ Plaintiff, )
‘ vs. ) No. 5259
James William Stidham, )
Defendant. )
Now at this day comes the defendant, James William
Stidham, by his attorney, and refiles his Notice, Ap-
i plication for Change of Venue, together with supporting
‘ affidavits.
ae
(Which said Notice, Application for Change of Venue
and Supporting affidavits are set forth within this —
script and are not re-copied)
$0
3 A43
AND THEREAFTER, to-wit, on February 16th, 1955,
the following further proceedings were had herein:
IN THE
CIRCUIT COURT OF COLE COUNTY, MISSOURI
[45] FEBRUARY TERM 1955
WEDNESDAY FEBRUARY 16, 1955
State of Missouri, )
Plaintiff, )
, vs. ) No. 5259
James William Stidham, )
Defendant. )
Now at this day comes the Defendant, James William
Stidham, by his attorney, and presents his application to
disqualify the regular Judge of this Court and same is
granted.
And now, the Judge of this Court notifies the.Supreme
Court and the Chief Justice thereof that the administra-
tion of Justice requires transfer of a Circuit Judge to
this Court to try this cause, and said cause is set for trial
at 9:00 A.M.; March Ist, 1955.
AND THEREAFTER, TO-WIT, ON February 22nd,
1955, the following further proceedings were had herein:
: =
A44
IN THE
CIRCUIT COURT OF COLE COUNTY, MISSOURI
FEBRUARY TERM 1955
TUESDAY FEBRUARY 22nd, 1955
4 State of Missouri, )
4 Plaintiff, )
: vs. ) No. 5259
4 James William Stidham, )
i Defendant. )
: Now at this day Order of the Supreme Court of Mis-
j souri [46] transferring Hon. George P. Adams, Regular
; Judge of the 11th Judicial Circuit, to this Court to hear
j case of State of Missouri vs. James William Stidham, is
j received and filed.
: (Which said order is in writing and appearing in the
; following words and figures, to-wit: )
i “IN THE
; SUPREME COURT OF MISSOURI
5 EN BANC
i Friday, February 18, 1955
$
j Filed
} Feb. 22, 1955
Guy M. Sone,
Clerk.
In the Matter of the Temporary _)
Transfer of Judicial Personnel )
WHEREAS, the Honorable Sam C. Blair, Judge of the
14th Judicial Circuit of Missouri, has been disqualified to
sit and hear the case of State vs. James William Stidham,
A45
No. 5259, now pending in the Circuit Court of Cole County,
Missouri, and has requested the Temporary transfer of a
Circuit Judge to said Court to hear said cause;
It is therefore ordered, under Article V, Section 6,
Constitution of Missouri, 1945, and Rule 11 of this Court,
that Honorable George P. Adams, Judge of the 11th Ju-
dicial Circuit of Missouri, be and he is hereby temporarily
transferred to said 14th Judicial Circuit, to hear the case
of State vs. James William Stidham, No. 5259, now pend-
ing in the Circuit Court of Cole County, Missouri; and
that such transfer shall [47] remain in effect for the
making of any and all orders or the taking of other pro-
ceedings that may be required of the trial judge in said
cause heard by him.
STATE OF MISSOURI—SCT:
I, Marion Spicer, Clerk of the Supreme Court of
Missouri, do hereby certify that the foregoing is a true
copy of the order transferring judicial personnel on the
18th day of February, 1955, as fully as the same appears
on file in my office. ,
IN TESTIMONY WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my
hand and affixed the seal of said Supreme Court. Done
at office in the City of Jefferson, State aforesaid, this 21st
day of February, 1955.
(Signed )
Marion Spicer,
Clerk.”
AND THEREAFTER, to-wit, on February 25th, 1955,
the following further proceedings were had herein:
A46
IN THE
CIRCUIT COURT OF COLE COUNTY, MISSOURI
FEBRUARY TERM 1955
FRIDAY FEBRUARY 25, 1955
State of Missouri, )
‘ Plaintiff, )
vs. ) No. 5259
James William Stidham, )
Defendant. )
[48] Now at this day Hon. George P. Adams, Judge
of the Eleventh Judicial Circuit of Missouri, and trans-
ferred to this Court for trial of this cause, assumes the
Bench.
And now, comes the Defendant, James William Stid-
ham, by his attorney, William Kelleher, and presents his
‘Notice, Application and Affidavit for Change of Venue,
together with Affidavits in Support of Application for
Change of Venue.
It is ordered by the Court that change of venue be
granted to the Defendant, James William Stidham, to the
Circuit Court of Butler County, Missouri, returnable there
on the first Monday in April, 1955, the same being the
first day of the April Term, 1955, of the Circuit Court of
that County. This order is made on the application of
the Defendant, James William Stidham, and on the ground
he asserts that the minds of the inhabitants of this County
are so prejudiced against him that he cannot have a fair
trial in this County and this order is made during the
Regular February Term, 1955, of this Court.
The Court finds that the Defendant, James William
Stidham, is in confinement and the Sheriff of this County
hereby is Commanded to transfer the Defendant, James
A47
William, to the Butler County, Missouri, Jail, and there
deliver him to the keeper of such jail, together with the
warrant or process by virtue of which the defendant is
held under this charge.
(49| It is further ordered by the Court that the Clerk
shall make out at once a complete transcript of all of the
records and proceedings in this cause, including this order
of removal, and the application for it, and he shall certify
and transmit the same to the Clerk of the Circuit Court
of Butler County, Missouri, and take his receipt therefor.
IN THE
CIRCUIT COURT OF COLE COUNTY, MISSOURI
DECEMBER TERM 1954
TUESDAY JANUARY 18th, 1955
State of Missouri, )
Plaintiff, )
vs. ) No. 5259
James William Stidham, et al., )
Defendants. )
On this 18th day of January, 1955, it is ordered that
a Special Venire issue directing the Sheriff to summon
Thirty (30) additional jurors for service on the present
panel and to supplement the same during the trial to take
place in the above styled cause.
(Signed )
Sam C. Blair,
Judge of the Circuit Court of
Cole County, Missouri.
Ot ae seen
A48
And thereafter to-wit: On the 5th day of March, 1955,
the following order was entered of record:
[50] Miscellaneous Record, Circuit Court, Butler County,
Missouri Saturday, March 5th, 1955, In Recess, (Book 10,
page 382)
—
Now on this 5th day of March, 1955, this cause of
action is filed in this Court on a Change of Venue from
the Circuit Court of Cole County, Missouri.
And thereafter to-wit: On the 4th day of April, 1955,
the following order was entered of record:
Circuit Court Record, Butler County, Missouri (Book 62,
page 268) Monday April 4th, 1955, Regular April 1955
Term
Now on this day, this cause being brought to the at-
tention of the Court, the Court finds the defendant having
previously entered a plea of Not Guilty and now demand-
ing trial therein and counsel for the State and for the de-
fendant having previously indicated their preference for
a setting herein, this cause is by mutual consent set for
April 25th, 1955, for trial.
It is ordered by the Court that a Special Venire of
25 jurors be ordered herein to provide for the panel re-
quired by law.
And thereafter to-wit: On the 19th day of April,
1955, the following order was entered of record:
[51] \Circuit Court Record, Butler County, Missouri
(Book 62, page 310) Tuesday, April 19th, 1955, Regular
April 1955 Term
Now on this day, comes the defendant herein, by
counsel Mark Murray Hennelly, and leave of Court first
had and obtained, moves the Court for Subpoena for
A49
Records of Defendant, Register No. H4H relative to phy-
ical examination of defendant, dated September 29 and
30, 1954, directed to the U. S. Medical Center for Federal
Prisoners, Springfield, Missouri. ‘And the Court after
due consideration, and being now fully advised, does make
the order that said Motion be and the same is hereby sus-
tained, and Subpoena Duces Tecum is ordered thereon.
Now comes the defendant hetein, by counsel Mark
Murray Hennelly, leave of Court first had and obtained,
and files Separate Applications for Writs of Habeas Cor-
pus Ad Testificandum for the following prisoners alleged
to be incarcerated in the Missouri State Penitentiary:
Cecil Lillybridge; William Douglas; Hugh Van Buskirk;
Robert Smedley; Elvin Carroll; Jim Harris; James Black;
Virgil Hacker; Bob Wilkerson; Baldy ‘Holloway; Ben
Griffin; Woody Burnett; Warren Kammer; Louis Miller;
Samuel Norbert Reese; Leon Wade; Donald Lyons; Jolin
Reid; Marion Crabtree; Silas Varner and J. D. Brooks.
Said Application being in due form, it is ordered by the
court that they be sustained and Writ of Habeas Corpus
Ad Testificandum ordered to issue to the Warden of Mis-
souri State Penitentiary [52] for each of the above named
parties, for their Production and appearance herein in
this cause, as witnesses, and the Sheriff of Butler County,
Missouri, is ordered to serve said Writs.
And thereafter to-wit:. On the 25th day of April,
1955, the following order was entered of record:
Circuit Court Record, Butler County, Missouri (Book 62,
page 317) Monday, April 25th, 1955, Regular April 1955
Term :
Now at this time, the Court excuses, for cause, the
following jurors from the ‘panel: Ernie C. Dunn, George
Gregory, William Stephens, and. J. D. Snider and L. T.
Metz, Jr., before the jury is empaneled and sworn and
for reasons stated into the record.
A50
Now on this day, comes the parties herein, Prosecuting
Attorney for the State, James T. Riley, and the defendant
herein, in person, in the custody of the Sheriff of this
County, and in the presence of his counsel, Mark Murray
Hennelly, whereupon both defendant and his said counsel
being present in open Court, defendant waives formal
arraignment, and enters a plea of Not Guilty to the charge
of Murder. And this cause coming on to be heard, the
same being the day on which this cause has been set for
trial, the said parties herein, announce ready for trial and
thereupon issues being joined comes now a jury summoned
herein, to-wit: Hobert Fowler; Marshall Johnson; [53] W.
L. Allison; Floyd Walker; Lydle Beardon; James Hawkins;
Paul Baumgardner; A. C. King, Jr.; Charles Ijames; L. C.
Fuller; Robert Snider and George Williams, (12) good
and lawful men of and from the body of Butler County
who are duly selected, impaneled, and sworn to well and
truly try the issues now joined herein and a true verdict ©
render to the Court in accordance with the law and the
evidence in the case.
Jurors, Irene Eudaley, Allen Garner, Sr., Henry Black-
man, Mrs. G. R. Saracini, C. C. Cope, Ed Forrest, Roy
Bagents, Glen Terry are excused upon Qualifications on
the death penalty. Juror, Eldon Gourley is excused be-
cause of reasons stated to the Court upon Examination.
At this time, -he jury panel is continued during the
Noon Recess and this cause is laid over to 1 o'clock.
The Noon Recess being over, and it now being 1 o-
clock, the trial in this cause umed and now comes
the defendant, by counsel, and leave of Court first had
and obtained, dismisses Louis Miller, Ben Griffin, Leon -
Wade and Jim Harris, as witnesses and for whom Writs
of Habeas Corups Ad Testificandum have previously been
A51
issued and Sheriff is ordered by the Court to notify the
Warden thereof and not to produce said witnesses so dis-
missed therein.
Whereupon, the jury is challenged, selected and sworn
to try the issues herein, and trial by jury proceeds and
progresses in the hearing of the evidence in this cause.
Now [54] comes the Prosecuting Attorney for the State,
leave of Court first had and obtained, and asks and is
granted the rule on witnesses. Opening statement is made
by the State. Now comes the defendant herein and waives
his opening statement.
Now at this time, the Court learns of newspaper being
read by the jury carrying an account of the trial, during
the supper recess, and upon examination of the jury by
the Court, and upon the Motion of defendant, by counsel,
4 mis-trial is declared herein in this cause.
It is ordered by the Court that this cause be continued
for this term and is ordered set for the week of July 18th,
1955, for trial herein.
Now at this time, the defendant being under sentence
to the Missouri State Penitentiary on another charge and
having been sentenced thereto and now being under sen-
tence of confinement therein, and because the Court feels
and determines for security reasons that the jail and
facilities of this county are not, or may not prove to be
adequate, the defendant is ordered remanded to the Mis-
souri State Penitentiary, to await trial herein and upon
orders of this Court for his return for trial, to this Court.
It is further shown that the defendant personally requests
his return to the State Penitentiary to await trial herein.
And thereafter to-wit: On the 5th day of July, 1955,
[55] the following order was entered of record:
A52
Circuit Court Record, Butler County, Missouri (Book 62,
page 389) Tuesday, July 5th, 1955, Regular July 1955
Term
Now on this day, it is ordered by the Court that a
Special Venire of twenty-five (25) jurors be ordered to
complete the panel of jurors in this cause.
4 And thereafter to-wit: On the 14th day of July, 1955,
the following order was entered of record:
Miscellaneous Record, Circuit Court, Butler County, Mis-
souri Thursday, July 14th, 1955, In Recess, (Book 10, page - |
458A )
22 Shas aot
Now on this 14th day of July, 1955, in vacation of
Court, Petitions for Writ of Habeas Corpus Ad Testifican-
dum and by the defendant for Woody Burnett, John Reid,
Donald Lyons and Marvin Crabtree, same is taken up by
the Court, and after due consideration by the Court, it is
ordered that said petitions be sustained and writs are or-
dered to issue therefor to the Warden of the State Peni- a
tentiary for their production in this Court during the trial
of this cause, beginning on July 18th, 1955,
Boe eden Ga ah SRO
= eet ST AMNERAT
Subpoena Duces Tecum for Mr. Joseph Lamar, a cus-
todian of Identification Section of the Missouri State Peni-
tentiary to bring records of Clarence Dietzel and Joseph
Lamar, including [56] days employed and employment
records for October and November, 1954, all payments
made and vouchers of any expense during said months
and all records of Walter Lee Donnell, including personal
records and classification records and his death certificate,
is hereby ordered upon the application of the Défendant.
Pee ee
» aunts
%
j
4
#
§
Sy
4
3
F
TERE
See
yank
A53
And thereafter to-wit: On the 18th day of July, 1955,
the following order was entered of record:
Circuit Court Record, Butler County, Missouri (Book 62,
page 426) Monday, July 18th, 1955, Regular July 1955
Term
IN THE MATTER OF THE JURY:
Now on this day, comes the Sheriff of Butler County,
Missouri, and files his report of Special Venire in the
case of State of Missouri vs James William Stidham, Case
No. 3158.
Now on this day, this cause is called by the Court,
and comes the Prosecuting Attorney of Cole County, Mis-
souri, for the State, and comes the defendant herein, in
person and by his counsel, Mark Murray Hennelly, and
said parties announce ready for trial.
Jurors Flanigan, Cecil Hayes, Belva Hayes, Rhodes,
Pigg, Anderson, Faith and Johnson are excused by the
Court for failure to qualify on the death penalty. Geneva
Arrington excused by the Court upon her request. Oliver
Chambers excused [57] because of a hearing defect and
Troy Pruitt excused because of his health. Venire of 30
Jurors is completed. Thereupon challenges are made of
the jury and comes now a jury summoned herein to-wit:
Orville Clark; Clarence Davidson; T. M. Walton; Eugene
Barker; John Sparkman; Elvis Hinton; Sam Stilley; Clyde
Crawford; James Sentell; Lloyd Surber; Connie Fredwell
and Herbert Gaebler, (12) good and lawful men /from
the body of Butler County who are duly sel , im-
paneled, and sworn to well and truly try the issues now
joined herein and a true verdict render to the Court in
accordance with the Law and the evidence in the case,
and trial by the jury proceeds in the hearing of the evi-
dence.
A54
“
[58] BE IT REMEMBERED, that on the 18th day of
July, 1955, the above entitled cause came on for trial be.
fore the HONORABLE RANDOLPH H. WEBER, Judge
of the Circuit Court of the 33rd Judicial Circuit, Poplar
Bluff, Missouri, and a Jury, and the following proceedings
were had:
An opening statement was made by Mr. Riley.
MR. HENNELLY: The Defendant will reserve an
opening statement [59] until the close of the State’s Case,
THE COURT: The record may show that Defend-
: ant’s opening statement is reserved until the close of the
| State’s Case. Who do you have first?
MR. RILEY: Call Sergeant Nash.
‘
SERGEANT E. V. NASH,
| BEING SWORN, TESTIFIED:
Direct Examination, by Mr. Riley
Q. Will you state your name please? A. E. V.
Nash.
Q. By whom are you employed? A. State ad
Patrol of Missouri.
Q. What is your rank sir? A. ocasant.
Q. Where are you stationed? A. At General Head-
quarters at Jefferson City, Missouri.
j Q. How long have you been on the Patrol Sergeant?
_ A. Thirteen years.
Q. Were you in the Penitentiary on the morning of
September 23, 1954? A. Yes, sir.
Q. Were you in B Basement? A. I was.
Q. What was your employment prior to going on the
Patrol Sergeant?
{[60] MR. HENNELLY: Object to that Your Honor,
that would be totally irrelevant—
A55
THE COURT: What would be the purpose Mr.
Riley?
Q. Just to identify him, it don’t make any difference.
THE COURT: All right, sustained. I thought may-
be it was in connection with some discussion.
Q. Will you mark this Exhibit 1?
Reporter marked Exhibit 1, a plat.
Q. Sergeant, I show you what has been marked as
State’s Exhibit No. 1, and I will ask you to identify that.
A. That is a drawing I have made of the B basement of
the State Penitentiary.
Q. And that correctly shows the physical setup there
inthe basement? A. Yes, it does.
Q. Does it show-the various windows and doors? A.
~ Shows the various doors. I eliminated the windows from
the sides.
Q. Is that the physical make-up of B basement on
the morning of September 23, 1954? A. Yes, it does.
Q. If the Court please, at this time, we offer Exhibit
1 into evidence.
MR. HENNELLY: Object and except to the intro-
duction of the exhibit, State’s Exhibit 1, because it is hear-
say and no proper [61] foundation has been laid for its
introduction at this point, and it contains certain elements
of hearsay and there has been no foundation laid as to the
time; place and circumstances under which it was made,
and there is certain writing and indications on the exhibit
which in and of themselves are hearsay, and to introduce
it under this situation would be a violation of the Con-
stitutional rights of this Defendant.
THE COURT: I believe the exhibit should be further
identified as to directions and measurements and matters
conteined in these legends here and notations, so that this
witness, this Court may determine whether or not this
witness knows those things to be a fact, and then I will
further consider the acceptance in evidence of this exhibit.
: aa a
:
A56
Q. Did you make the measurements in the base
ment? A. Yes, sir, I did.
Q. And at the time you made these measurements,
the physical structure was the same as it was on Septem-
ber 23rd? A. Yes, sir.
Q. Now, are those measurements reflected that you
made, are they reflected on this chart? A. Yes, sir, they
are. .
Q. And you have some figures here, 17, 18 and some
on up to 32, what do they represent? A.- That indicates
the numbering of the cells.
THE COURT: Are those the numbers they bore on
that date?
[62] A. Yes, sir.
THE COURT: All right.
MR. RILEY: And do you have notations here?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Does that represent the separations between the
cells? A. Yes, it does.
Q. Is that correctly shown jn this writing down here?
A. Yes, sir, it is.
THE COURT: Does that nena the separation
between all of them?
A. Yes, sir. :
Q. Separating the same? A. The separation is the
same, yes, sir. :
Q. And you have a notation here, now does this, as
to cell bars, is that the same entire length? A. Yes, it is.
Q. And you have a notation here as to metal screens,
are they the same measurements on all cells? A. Yes,
sir, they are.
Q. You have a number here, No. 1, 2 and 3, are they
explained here in your writing below? A. Yes, sir, they
are.
Rex.
A57
MR. HENNELLY: Certainly object to that section
as being a conclusion, if Your Honor please, and object to
the form of that question, whether or not they explain it,
ang it invades [63] the province of the jury, and it is hear-
say.
: THE COURT: May I see it please? I didn’t read
what was on there. Well, I think the information ought to
be testified about, rather than— He can tell whether he
put that on this plat.
Q. All right. Now Sergeant, as you look at this plat,
in this direction, which way is that facing? A. Generally
east.
Q. And which way is this? A. That would be south.
) Q. Andthis? A. North.
Q. Andthis? A. West.
Q. Anything else?
THE COURT: Yes, the, objection was made to his
statement with reference to the legend which he hasn’t
testified about. There are statements there as to the
measurements, etc., and he hasn’t testified about those
measurements, what is contained in that legend on the
bottom.
Q. Now, this legend down here Sergeant, did you de-
termine the information contained in Item 1 on this
legend? A. Yes, I have had occasion to go through each
of the gates and I know it takes a different set of keys to —
go through.
Q. Now, on Item No. 2, did you measure the doors?
A. Yes, sir, I measured them both opened and closed, and
also the area that is stable, that is not movable.
[64] Q. Now, on Item No. 3, did you measure the
distance from the steel bar enclosure, to the entrance wall?
A. Yes, sir, I did.
Q. Did you measure—
THE COURT: What is that distance?
A58
A. That is four feet sir.
Q. On Itern No. 4, did you measure the distance from
the front of the cell door to the exterior wall? A. Yes,
sir.
Q. What is that distance? A. Nine feet and four
inches.
Q. And on Item No. 5, did you measure the cells?
A. Yes, sir, they are nine feet deep and seven feet and
three inches wide.
Q. Now, is that all the information that is contained
in this writing down here? A. Yes, sir, it is.
MR. HENNELLY: I am renewing my objection for
the reasons heretofore stated. I think it was totally un-
necessary for the officer to make the writing on here that
he made. I think he could have looked at the exhibit with-
out this and told them what the differences was, by just
giving the measurements. However, under the circum-
stances, when he. put down his own conclusions, and not
only with respect to the keys, but with respect to every-
thing else, that is only an attempt to [65] bolster his own
testimony and his writing becomes immaterial and irrele-
vant to any point in the case.
4 THE COURT: Overruled, and it may be received in
evidence.
* Exhibit 1, being a plat, having been sennived in evi-
dence, and same being too large to attach to this transcript,
a photostatic copy of same-is attached to the original of
this transcript.
MR. RILEY: Will you mark this Exhibit 2?
: Reporter marked Exhibit 2, a photograph.
: Q. Sergeant, I will show you what has been marked
as State’s Exhibit No. 2, and ask you if you can tell the
Court what that is? A. That is the entranceway from
B and C Halls down to the basement of B basement.
PT Le a ee TN ee
Ss
Si ng AA ARENA SEA IAL EER
rake
A59
MR. HENNELLY: I don’t mean to interrupt you,
put could you speak a little bit louder please.
A. All right, sir.
Q. Is that photograph a fair representation of what it
portrays there? A. Yes, it is.
Q. And is that, does it show the scene as it existed
on September 22nd and 23rd, 1954, in the penitentiary?
A. The physical structure is the same, but the debris and
water that was on the floor has of course been cleared
away.
Q. We offer this exhibit in evidence.
(66] MR. HENNELLY: May I, for the purpose of the
record, and for saving time, may I ask you to hold up.
introduction of them and I can make a general objection
“to all of them. I will make it now, if you want me to,
but I thought it would save time.
Q. All right. Mark this Exhibit 3, and this Exhibit
4, and this Exhibit 5, and this Exhibit 6, and this Exhibit
7.
f
Reporter marked Exhibit 3, a photograph.
Reporter marked Exhibit 4, a photograph.
Reporter marked Exhibit 5, a photograph.
Reporter marked Exhibit 6, a photograph.
Reporter marked Exhibit 7, a photograph.
Q. Hold it down so they can’t see what is on the back.
Sergeant, I hand you what has been marked as Exhibit
3. and can you tell the Court what this is? A. Yes, that
__is the main gate entrance to B basement.
BS: Q. Does that photograph show, correctly show that
gate? I mean as it exhibited on September 23, 1954?
A. Yes, it does.
Q. Sergeant, I show you what has been marked
State’s Exhibit No. 4, and can you identify that? A.
A60
Yes, that is the gateway leading into the Death Row side
of B basement.
Q. Does that correctly show that gate and all its
physical features? [67] A. Yes, it does.
Q. At the time of September 23, 1954? A. Yes,
it does. |
Q. I show you Exhibit No. 5. A. That is a pic.
ture of the area outside of the barred steel cage that is
surrounding the cells on Death Row side of B basement.
Q. Does that ‘correctly show that area as it existed
on the morning of September 23, 1954? A. Yes, sir, it
does. :
Q. I hand you Exhibit No. 6. A. That is the gate
or the doorway leading down inside of the cells of Death
Row in B basement.
Q. Does that correctly show the physical features
of what it portrays there? A. Yes, it does.
Q. As of the time September 23, 1954? A. Yes, sir.
Q. I now hand you Exhibit No. 7. A. That is a pic-
ture of the area inside the steel barred cage that surrounds
the cells on Death Row in B basement.
Q. Does that correctly show the physical features of
that area that it portrays there as it existed on the morning
of September 23, 1954? A. Yes, sir, it does.
[68] Q. At this time we offer in evidence, Exhibits
2, 3, 4, 5, 6 and 7,
MR. HENNELLY: The defendant will object and ex-
cept to the introduction of State’s Exhibits 2, 3, 4, 5, 6
and 7, for the reason that they are hearsay and a proper
foundation has not been laid for their introduction and
to introduce them under these circumstances would be
a violation of the Constitutional rights of the defendant,
particularly in the light of the testimony of the officer that
they do not represent the condition as it existed on the
night in question, for the reason that they fail to show
A61
certain debris and things which were then present on the _
night in question.
Q. The fact that the debris is not shown in the pic-
tures doesn’t change the physical structure, if that is the
of this. :
THE COURT: The objection may be overruled and
they may be received in evidence.
Exhibit 2, being a photograph, having been received
in evidence, is attached to the ofiginal of this transcript.
Exhibit 3, being a photograph, having been received
in evidence, is attached to the sae of this transcript.
Exhibit 4, being a photograph, having been received
in evidence, is attached to the original of this transcript.
Exhibit 5, being a photograph, having been received
in evidence, is attached to the original of this transcript.
[69] Exhibit 6, being a photograph, having been re-
ceived in evidence, is attached to the original of this tran-
script.
Exhibit 7, being a photograph, having been received in
evidence is attached to the original of this transcript.
THE COURT: Now gentlemen, are you going to
hand these to the Jury now?
G. You, ae.
THE COURT: In looking at these exhibits here that
are going to be handed to you, just a minute, the pictures,
there are some legends on the back, and that is not in
evidence, that information is not in evidence, so don’t turn
them over, just look at the picture part of them. If there is
any further objection to that, I could have those legends
taped over, but the notations have nothing to do, at this
particular time, with this trial, and they are only being
introduced for the actual picture side. I wonder, inasmuch
as Exhibit 1 is already in evidence, as you hand these ex-
hibits to the Jury, if the witness might designate on the
chart where the particular picture is that is being intro-
A62
duced into evidence, for instance Exhibit 1 I believe js,
2 I mean, is the stairway to B basement, as it has been
identified now, can you point out on this Exhibit 1, the
chart over there where that stairway is that is repre
sented in this picture?
A. Yes, sir, I can.
THE COURT: All right.
[70] A. The picture that you see will be of this stair-
way that is to your left and to my right, leading into B
basement area.
THE COURT: All right, hand that to the Jury. |
believe you might identify the location of the next one.
A. The next one has been described as the main door
into B basement. This area is that area in which this
main gate or main doorway of B basement is located.
THE COURT: All right, hand that to the Jury.
A. Exhibit 3, this picture that you have, will be a
picture of this gateway that leads into Death Row side of
B basement right here.
THE COURT: All right, you may hand it to the Jury.
A. The next picture is a picture of the area outside
of the steel barred area, it runs the entire area of the cell
block clear down to the end of the cells. It is outside of
the barred area. This next picture is the gate or the cell
door that permits entrance to the area inside of the barred
area so that you could get to each of the individual cells
on Death Row side.
THE COURT: All right, you may hand it to the Jury.
A. This last picture shows the area on the inside of
this barred area, and it also shows a mesh hardware cloth
that extends two feet out from the front of the cell into
the—and the entire height of the cell block there. That is
inside [71] of this barred enclosure.
THE COURT: All right, you may hand it to the Jury.
Be seorms 5 al abt i nie A SE ha RR MERE RRS ii CLT TENE :
PPE SIE OAS
is
A63
MR. RILEY: Sergeant, I direct your attention to this
up here on Exhibit No.1, will you tell the Jury what this
line is made up of?
A. This line here which is on the picture here, dots
and dashes, is made up of steel bars that extend the height
of the cell areas and they extend from this gate entrance
the entire length of the cell block area, and to this point
here where they connect onto the concrete abutment.
Q. Now, on the top side or the north side of this—
what are those, what is that Sergeant? A. This side of
the cell block is made up of the same number of cells, six-
teen cells, and on this side are segregated the negro in-»
mates during the time of inncculations and until they are
put out into the population of the prison.
Q. Now, this whole area as is referred to as B base-
ment, is it actually underground? A. No, sir, B base-
ment is not underground. There is a basement under-
neath B basement.
Q. I believe that is all at this time.
Cross-Examination by Mr. Hennelly
Q. Sergeant Nash, on the night in question, the night
of the riot, that you went into B. basement, when was the -
last time [72] prior to that time that you had been in B
basement? A. I was not in the basement the night of
the riot.
Q. You didn’t go down there at all the night of the
riot? A. The night of the 22nd, no, sir.
Q. So that you cannot testify then of your own
knowledge with respect to what the conditions were on
the night of the riot, can you? A. As of the night of the
22nd, no, sir.
Go Ya A.. Bo, oe.
Q. Did I understand you to say that the State’s Ex-
hibit 1 reflected the conditions as they existed on the night
Vent MARA Rani UN aa tO, Caches az Mae
sabe
SD REO aaa ae
Beans: binphelegt ge
A64
of the 22nd? A. Just the physical structures of the build-
ing.
Q. You weren’t there the night of the 22nd, were
you? A. I was at the penitentiary, but not at B basement.
Q. This State’s Exhibit is supposed to portray the
conditions as they existed in B basement and you weren't
, down there, is that right? A. -I was not down in B base.
ment that night.
Q. Under the circumstances, I am going to ask that
it be withdrawn and I renew my objection for the reason
that no proper foundation has been laid for its introduction.
THE COURT: The witness, as I understood him to
testify, said he was there on the morning of the 23rd, is
that correct? ‘
A. Yes, sir.
[73] THE COURT: And had you ever been in there
before?
A. I-have been in the penitentiary prior to the 22nd.
THE COURT: InB basement before?
A. Yes, sir.
THE COURT: You had been in there befor2> and you
were there the day after?
A. Yes, sir.
THE COURT: And the physical structures of B base-
ment were the same on the 23rd as it was the time you were
in there before?
A. Yes, sir.
THE COURT: In other words, the building, they
didn’t tear the building down or change the walls or any-
thing of that kind, did they?
A. The general physical structure of the basement
was the same.
THE COURT: The same as it was, the same as you
found it on the morning of the 23rd, and the same as it had
been as you had found it once before?
a
A65
A. Yes, sir.
THE COURT: When you were there?
A. Yes, sir.
THE COURT: The objection is overruled.
MR. HENNELLY: When was the last time, prior to
the morning of the 23rd, that you were in that basement?
(74] A. Several times prior to then. I had a case to
go to the penitentiary to secure records to complete our files
at General Headquarters.
Q. The basement Sergeant, had you been in B base-
ment prior to that time? A. As to the exact date, I do not
remember.
Q. Had you ever been in B basement prior to that
time? A. Yes, sir, I had.
Q. Now then Sergeant, you indicated that this pic-
ture properly reflected the conditions as they existed, at
least this State’s Exhibit 1, as it existed on the morning of
the23rd? A. Yes, sir.
Q. I am going to call your attention to that office
which is marked here “Christian Science Chapel”, was
there a Christian Science Chapel office in there on the
morning of the 23rd? A. That room is designated for that
particular use.
Q. Was it, was that what it was used for on the morn-
ing of the 23rd? A. It wasn’t being used for that purpose
that morning, there wasn’t any office in use that morning
down there.
Q. As a matter of fact, that which you have now
marked as the Christian Science Chapel office was on the
night of the 22nd, and the morning of the 23rd, and for
sometime prior to [75] the 22nd, 1955, 1954, really a clas-
sification room, wasn’t it? A. They sometimes use one
office or another. I don’t know specifically which one they
used all the time.
BE ace ee wae
A66
Q. Well now, when did you make this up? A* That
picture was made up sometime prior to the Ist of June, as]
remember it.
Q. Sometime prior to the Ist of June, of 1955? A.
Yes, sir.
Q. Would you say that it was made at least six
months after the night of the 23rd, 22nd rather? A. Ap-
proximately.
Q. Now then Sergeant, on the morning of the 23rd,
what time approximately did you arrive there? A. The
morning of the 23rd? :
Q. Yes, sir. A. I had been there all night.
Q. On the night of the 22nd, were you outside of B
basement? A. Yes, sir, I was the night of the 22nd,
Q. All right. Now, on the night of the 22nd, when
was the first time that you arrived on the scene of the riot
itself? A. Five minutes after seven.
Q. Five minutes after seven, and who did you arrive
there with? A, Trooper Volkmer.
Q. And you at no time prior to midnight, got into
B basement? [76] A: No, sir, I did not.
Q. And when in the morning of the 23rd did you get
into B basement? A. It was prior to noon, I would say
maybe ten-thirty or eleven-thirty.
Q. At that time, had all the inmates been cleared out
of there? A. What do you mean by cleared out?
Q. Were there any inmates in B basement at all when
you first arrived on the morning of the 23rd? A. There
may have been some of the trustees, most of the inmates
had been put back in their proper cells.
Q. Well, when you indicated that there was some
difference with reference to debris and rubbage, was that
all there on the morning of the 23rd? A. Yes, sir.
Q. Was it still there at ten-thirty and eleven when
you got there? A. Yes, sir.
Q. I want to call your attention to these cells which
you have marked on here, going from 17 at the rear of
ae, eta
A67
State’s Exhibit 1, and going to 32, which would be the cell
which would be near the front door, am I not correct in
stating that Sergeant? A. Yes, sir.
(77] Q. I will ask you if you can tell the Court and
Jury to the best of your knowledge, how many inmates
were in those cells when you arrived about ten-thirty on
the morning of the 23rd? A. I did not go down Death
Row, that side, that morning.
Q. You didn’t go down Death Row side? A. No, sir.
Q. Did you go down, proceed at any point past that
front door on the morning of the 23rd? A. I didn’t go past
this front gate entrance here.
Q. Well now then, with respect to the condition as it
existed on the morning of the 23rd, in the back of this front
door, you don’t know, because you weren’t back there? A.
I did not go back in there.
Q. Did you go back there at anytime prior to the time
that you made this picture, this exhibit? A. Yes, sir, I
have.
Q. When was the first time that you went back there?
A. Iam not certain as to how soon after the 23rd. I was
in and out of there several times. I wouldn’t remember.
Q. Now then, when you told the’ Court that this
State’s Exhibit 1 reflected the conditions in B basement as
they existed on the morning of the 23rd, that isn’t exactly
accurate either, is it? A. Yes, it is to the best of my
knowledge. :
Q. You weren’t back there though, were you? [78]
A. I was in B basement, and that is a picture of the B
basement area. x
Q. Were you back in anywhere past cell No. 32? A.
No, sir.
Q. You didn’t go back there, did you? A. No, sir.
Q. So that whatever was back there on that morning,
you didn’t see it, did you? A. No, sir, not in the cells.
A68
Q. Your Honor, I am again going to renew that ob-
jection.
THE COURT: This witness has testified now two or
three times that the plat that he has made which is Ex.
hibit 1, is the physical characteristics of the building. Now,
he has indicated on there the thickness of the walls and
where the doors were and things of that kind. Those mat-
ters don’t change. That is part of the building. The ob-
jection is overruled.
MR. HENNELLY: Save an exception. ©
THE COURT: Now he has testified there was debris
and rubbage and things of that kind on the morning that
he got down there, but this plat is being received in evi-
dence and the Jury and the Court and the witnesses might
better enable themselves to follow the testimony of the wit-
nesses, as to directions and places that are being and will be
referred to in evidence. Certainly the exhibit can’t do any-
thing but be helpful in the [79] explanation and the un-
derstanding of the testimony. Now the witness hasn’t tes-
tified as to what condition the doors were in or what the
: condition of the bars may have been or whether anything
was torn up and things of that kind, but as to the physical
3 characteristics, Exhibit 1, as I understood this witness, it
j actually reflects the floor plan of that building.
7 A. That is right, sir.
THE COURT: Overruled.
Q. Your Honor, might I say this, I certainly want the
Jury to have everything that is helpful also.
THE COURT: All right, proceed then.
Q. On the other hand—
THE COURT: I have overruled your objection Mr.
Hennelly.
Q. Now, when you got there on the night in question,
where did you first go at the Penitentiary? A. Are you
‘referring to the night of the 22nd?
pyr
PE EN ee ee Re Peas te
A69
Q. The night of the 22nd. A. When I first arrived
at the penitentiary I stopped at the main intersection lead-
ing into the penitentiary to clear the traffic way there for
other cars that were approaching. After a few moments
there directing traffic I placed Trooper Volkmer in charge
of the traffic assignment and I went up on the wall, No. 3
gate at the penitentiary.
Q. (Out of the hearing of the Jury) I am going to
ask the [80] Court to strike from the record, and instruct
the Jury to disregard the Court’s remarks with respect to
the purpose for which Exhibit 1 was being introduced, for
the reason that it may have left the Jury with the impres-
sion that I was attempting to keep something from them
which was going to be helpful and it puts the defendant in
a bad light with the Jury and it was made certainly in
good faith, and in light of the continued statements of the
officer that he wasn’t back there, and my understanding
was that the Exhibit must reflect the conditions as it ex-
isted at the time the crime was committed, my objection
was certainly made in the best of faith, and I think that the
_ Court’s statement might leave the impression that I was ~
\trying to be sharp and trying to keep something from them
and under those circumstances, I don’t think it should have
been made in the presence and hearing of the Jury and I
ask that it be stricken and the Jury instructed to disregard
it, and that a mistrial be declared. »
THE COURT: Well, of course Mr. Hennelly, you
made your objection in the presence of the Jury, and you
have made that same objection three times, and the Court
was merely explaining why he was overruling your objec-
tion. Any inferences in your statement as to what the
Court’s intentions were, of course, without foundation, and
this Court didn’t have any intention of implying to this
Jury or to anybody else that there [81] were any sharp
practices being used by anybody. I was merely answering
. a
7
°
A70 ©
_your objection. I will make an explanation to the Jury at
this time. Your objection and request is overruled.--Gen-
tlemen of the Jury, during the trial of a lawsuit theré are
many matters of evidence and procedure which come up
from time to time which parties have a right to object to
through their counsel, and the fact that,the Court may sus-
tain or overrule an objection is not any reflection upon any
one party participating in this lawsuit, and the rulings that
the Court makes regarding any of these matters are not
9 to be considered by the Jury as any reflection or any in-.
timidation or any reprimand or any denial of any of the
rights of any of the parties. I ruled a while ago upon an
objection and. attempted to explain to counsel my reasons
for that ruling. and I want to state at this time that the
: Jury is not to draw any inferences from the statement
made by the Court. If there is any direction to the Jury,
;
7
‘ I will call your attention to it at the time, and of course
will direct the Jury in the matter of instructions at the
q conclusion of the case, so with that explanation you may
proceed Mr. Hennelly.
Q. Now Sergeant Nash, I want you to take your little
ruler. To what scale have you set that State’s Exhibit 1?
A. Approximately one inch to eight feet.
Q. One inch toeight feet? A. Yes, sir.
> . * [82] Q. ‘Now, I want you to take that and tell the
“Court and Jury what is the distance from the first door as
one. comés down those steps until one gets immediately in
' _ front of the first door which would lead in? A. You have
: reference to this gate here?
Q. Yes. A. Taking from the stairway to the center
of that first entrance way, approximately eighteen feet.
Q. So that taking the shortest possible distance, one
entering that front door and going to the first gate, the first
place where there is a lock, would have to walk approxi-
mately eighteen feet? A. That was taken from the center
A7l
of the stairway, not the edge, the edge would make it
shorter.
Q. When you say center of the stairway— A. That
‘js from this point to the center of the stairway placing the
ruler there and placing it to the center of the gate.
Q. Taking your answer with respect to eighteen feet,
have you already come down the steps then? A. Yes, I
am leaving the bottom step going to the gate, ©
Q. How far do you have to walk coming down the
steps? A. That is approximately eleven feet. f
Q. Now then, how—hold it up so the Jury. can see it
Sergeant, will you show the Court and Jury, after one gets
into [83] that first door, where would one have to go to to
get to the second door? A. Go from No. 1 doorway to the
No. 2 doorway.
-Q. Now Sergeant, with respect to the method in
which your exhibit is drawn, if one were standing in front
of door No. 1, which direction would you be looking? A.
You would be looking, if you were looking toward the cell
area, you would be looking generally east..
Q. And if one were standing in front of door 2, and
just looking straight ahead, in which way would one be
looking? A. Standing in front of door No. 2 and looking
down toward the bottom of the picture, you would he look-
ing generally south.
Q. Now, tell the Court and Jury the distance that
one would have to go to go from door 1, to door 2? A. The
center of door 1, to the center of door 2 approximately
eight feet?
Q. Eight feet? A. Yes, sir.
Q. Now, door 1, is that opened with just a large key,
or how. many locks are on door 1? A. Door 1 is opened
with a large key.
Q. Door2? A. Two is opened with a large key.
Q. Now,thereisathird door? A. Yes, sir.
¥
S
+e
PEPER PI LORE ee Sm
EP en Se Re aa
. P i alga aah ti
BPeievive SPADES LA IONS B05 SIE PODS AD
: 4
A72
Q. How far would one have to walk to.go from the
second door [84] to the third door? A. Distance from No.
2 to No. 3 is approximately ten feet.
Q. Now, at the time that you arrived there approxi-
mately 10:30 on the morning of the 23rd, where was the
first place that you found an attendant of the penitentiary
guarding a door, was it at door 1,2 or 3? A. The night of
the 22nd?
Q. You weren’t there the night of the 22nd Sergeant,
the morning of the 23rd? A. The morning of the 23rd,
I don’t femember ever finding an attendant from the pen-
itentiary.
Q. Who was with you when you got down there?
A. Thege was.approximately fifty to seventy-five officers,
St. Louis Police and other officers from different surround-
ing places.
Q. How did you get in then, did someone have a key?
A. I didn’t go in past this area here.
Q. Very well. Now then Sergeant, i want you to look
at a point which you have marked on there as a wash basin,
would you point out to the Court and Jury and tell them
where that is? A. Right over here is the toilet and
shower room. There is no wash basin pictured on there.
Q. Do you know of your own knowledge now whether
or not there was a wash basin of any kind, after one gets
past either door, [85] 1,2 or3? A. Yes, there is one.
Q. Point it out to the Court and Jury. A. There is
a wash basin located approximately at this point, after
you come inside of Gate No. 2. It is sitting right about
there at the end of the rule.
Q. Now, can you. give us any description of that
wash basin? A. Nothing other than it is just a wash
basin. :
Q. Well, is there a light in there of any kind? A.
T don’t remember if there is or not.
A73
Q. Now then, with respect to the cells themselves,
numbering from 17 to 32, are those all cells Sergeant, or is
there something besides inhabitable cells there? .A. I
think that they have made cell 22, as I remember, I may
be wrong, but I believe that it is cell 22 that they made
into a shower room. ;
Q. Now, have you indicated on this picture anything
about a shower room? A. No, sir, I was just drawing
the general structure of the building.
Q. Was there a shower room there when you were
there, the last time you were there? A. Yes, sir.
Q. And is it a shower room, which is the general
type of shower room, with the general plumbing fixtures
of ashower [86] room? A. AsI remember it, yes.
Q. And I believe you indicated that that was in, to
the best of your knowledge, in 23? A. 22.
Q. 22,Iamsorry. A: As Iremember, yes.
Q. Do you know whether or not it was in working
order on the night of the 22nd, and the morning of the
93rd? A. I had no occasion to check it sir.
Q. Now Sergeant, I am going to ask you with respect
to your investigation of this case, when was the first time
after the night of the 22nd, or the morning of the 23rd,
that you saw the defendant, James Stidham? A. I think
that I saw Stidham the evening of the 23rd. °
Q. Theevening of the 23rd? A. Yes, sir.
Q. Where was he at that time? A. He was brought
to the classification office, which is across from the
Deputy Warden’s office.
Q. That is not in B basement is it? A. Administra-
tion Building. :
Q. Administration Building proper? A. Yes, sir.
Q. Did you at anytime see the body of Walter Lee
Donnell? A. I did not.
[87] Q. Now, when he was brought to the classifica-
tion room of the Administration Building, did you bring
A74
him or did one of the guards or one of your fellow officers
bring him, if you recall? A. As I remember, I think that’
he was brought by prison authorities. I do not remember
for sure.
Q. Now, how far is the Administration Center Build-
ing, if you can recall, from the B basement? A. It is
approximately a hundred yards.
Q. In which direction? A. East of the Administra-
tion Building.
Q. What was the purpose of brining him to that
point, if youknow? A. We knew that he, as well—
Q. This part Your Honor is going to be hearsay, |
will withdraw the question. ‘The officer was going to in-
corporate—
THE COURT: All right.
Q. Did you question him at that time? A. We
talked with him. .
Q. Who was with you at that time? A. There was
Lieutenant Barton and myself and there may have been
another officer present.
Q. Was there an officer there by the name of Curtis,
out of Kansas City? A. Not at the time I was talking
with Mr. Stidham, no, sir.
[88] Q. And do you know how long he was ques-
tioned on the night of the 23rd, in that classification room?
A. Fifteen or twenty minutes.
Q. Was he handcuffed at that time? A. As I re
member, I don’t beleve he was. I am not for sure though.
Q. You know who did the questioning? A. Pxjma-
ily, Lieutenant Barton.
Q. And after that questioning was completed, where
did you take him? A. He was turned again over to the
prison authorities.
Q. And you don’t know whether or not he went back
to his regular cell from where he came or not? A. I don’t
know where he was taken, no, sir.
5 9 te ee a it
a A ede RAR aed Se
A75
.Q. When was the next time after the night of the
93rd that you saw the Defendant Stidham? A. I think
it was at their arraignment in Jefferson City.
Q. You had nothing to do then with any subsequent
questioning of this defendant, is that right? A. That
is right.
Q. You weren’t present at any of the subsequent
questionings? A. No, sir.
Q. No further questions Your Honor.
THE COURT: Any further questions by the State?
MR. RILEY: I think that is all.
[89] MR. HENNELLY: I want to ask one more ques-
tion. You recall testifying here in this case here in this
court room in April of this year, you recall the last time
you were on the stand here in this Court House?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. You recall at that time whether or not you testi-
fied that you questioned him after the night of the 23rd,
that you had questioned him on the 25th and 26th, do you
recall whether or not you testified to that? A. I don’t
remember the dates that I might have mentioned.
Q. Let me ask you this, did you question him on the
morning on one occasion? A. No, sir, I did not.
Q. I have no further questions.
Redirect Examination by Mr. Riley
Q. Sergeant, do you recall Mr. Hennelly even asking
you about questioning Stidham the last time you were here? -
A. As I remember the question asked me on the pre-
vious time, was he asked me when I had seen Mr. Stid-
ham and as I remember, I testified then it was at his ar-
raignment in the Cole County Court.
Q. That is all.
[90] Recross-Examination by Mr. Hennelly
Q. I will ask you if it isn’t a fact that the last time
you testified here in this case in this Court Room, that
A76
you did testify No. 1, that you had. questioned him in the
classification room, and that you had questioned him more
than once in the classification room? A. No, sir, I do not
remember making that statement.
Q. Do you say today Sergeant that you did not tes-
tify that you questioned him at all in the classification room?
A. No, I didn’t say that. We did talk to him in aes clas-
sification rcom.
Q. I am sorry, do you say today that you did not
testify in this Court, before this Court the last time, that
I questioned you about the matter, that you questioned him
in the classification room after the night of the 22nd? A.
It is possible that I might have, but I don’t remember that
statement. .
Q. No further questions. That is all
MR. RILEY: Thank you sir.
LIEUTENANT W. S. BARTON,
BEING SWORN, TESTIFIED:
Direct Examination by Mr. Riley
; Q. Would you state your name please? A. W.S.
Barton.
Q. And you are a Lieutenant in the eon State
; Highway Patrol? [91] A. Yes, sir.
Q. How long have you been with the Missouri State
= Highway Patrol? A. Something over fifteen years now.
; Q. How old are Lieutenant? A. Forty-five.
3 Q. What was your occupation befcre— |
1 MR HENNELLY: _I object—
: Q. I withdraw the question if he is going to object.
THE COURT: All right.
Q. I will ask you if you went to the Missouri State
Penitentiary in Cole County, Missouri, on September 22nd,
% 19542 A. Yes, sir, I did.
_—
AT7
Q. What time did you arrive there? A. Ten P.M.
MR. HENNELLY: Iam sorry officer. ,
A. Ten P.M. .
Q. Did you go to the area in the Penitentiary known
as B basement? A. Yes, sir.
Q. What time approximately? A. Ten-thirty.
Q. What did you find? A. I found a building and
the doors considerably damaged, and a lot of debris lying
around and some of the cells open and some closed and some
men in them, and I found a body.
[92] Q. Where did you find the body? A. Cell 18. _
Q. Is that Cell 18 in Death Row? A. Yes, sir.
Q. Will you mark this Exhibit 8.
Reporter marked Exhibit 8, a photograph.
Q. Sergeant, will you describe the body that you
found there?
MR. HENNELLY: I didn’t get that Mr. Riley.
Q. Will you just describe the condition of the body
that you found? A. I found a body, a man’s body lying
in Cell 18 on the back, with the head to the north and
northeast corner of that cell, feet toward the door, which
would be the southwest direction. The head was con-
siderably mutilated, large indentation in thé right side of
the head near the temple. The eyeball was completely
out of the socket.
Q. Which eye was that? A. The right eye setting
out on.top of the socket and the clothes were disturbed or
torn or cut or something of that nature, and considerable
blood all over the area, cell, the walls and the individual
clothing also. I felt of the pulse to see if the subject had
any life in him, and at that time it had become stiff and
rigor mortis had set in, at least the body was beginning
to get stiff, and I was then unable to determine any life in
the subject, and so I left the cell at that time.
A78
[93] Q. Did you check the serial number, and how
was this subject dressed? A. All of the inmates—
Q. No, how was this one dressed? A. I checked his
serial number of his clothes with the serial number of the
officials of the Penitentiary.
MR. HENNELLY: I object to that, that will be hear-
say, and ask that it be stricken and the Jury instructed to
disregard it.
THE COURT: As I understand this witness’ testi-
mony, he is just telling what he did.
Q. That is right. You say you checked—
MR. HENNELLY: Your Honor is right, he hasn’t yet
said what happened as a result of—I withdraw the objec-
tion.
A. I checked the number on his clothing with the
record, the official records of the Penitentiary, and re-
vealed who the subject was. That is the way they kept
track of all of that.
THE COURT: Go ahead and ask your next question.
Q. I will ask you Lieutenant, take a look—what was
the number that was on the clothing of this subject found
in the cell? A. 64078.
Q. And I will ask you to take a look at State’s Ex-
hibit No. 8, and can you identify that?
[94] MR. HENNELLY: Excuse me, I am certainly
going to object to—you are only asking him to identify it?
Q. Yes.
MR. HENNELLY: Iam sorry, go ahead.
A. Yes, this is a picture of the subject I found in Cell
18 the night of the 22nd of September.
Q. Will you tell the Court that that is the same man?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. At this time we offer in evidence State’s Exhibit
:
4
e
i
2
wa deine
A79
MR. HENNELLY: Object and except to the intro-
duction of State’s Exhibit No. 8 for the reason that it is
hearsay and no proper foundation has been laid for its in-
troduction and to introduce it under these circumstances
would be a violation of the Constitutional Rights of the De-
fendant, and is totally immaterial and irrelevant to any
int at issue in this case.
THE COURT: Overruled, it may be received in evi-
dence. You may hand it to the Jury.
Exhibit 8, being a photograph, and not being in the
hands of the Reporter at the time this transcript is being
prepared, will either be attached to the transcript, if same
is furnished the Reporter before the transcript is com-
pleted, or else same can be had from counsel for Plaintiff.
Q. Will you mark this Exhibit 9.
Reporter marked Exhibit 9, a sledge hammer.
Q. Lieutenant, I will ask you to look at State’s Ex-
hibit 9, and [95] tell the Court and Jury, you know what
that is? A. Yes, sir.
Q. When was the first time you saw that? A. I
found this in Cell 18 in Death Row, alongside of the body
that I found down there the night of September 22nd.
Q. Alongside of the body of the man you just iden-
tified as being in this photograph? A. Yes, sir.
Q. Now, do you know the weight of that sledge ham-
mer? A. Sixteen pounds.
Q. How large was the indentation on the skull of
Walter Lee Donnell? A. Oh, it was, covered an area of-
two or three inches in diameter, in this area here, maybe
more. I would say it was larger than that. Three to four
inches in area. The whole side of his face there was muti-
lated.
Q. Mark this Exhibit 10.
Reporter marked Exhibit 10, a photograph.
Q.. I hand you what has been marked Exhibit 10, and
will ask you if you know what that is? A. Yes, sir.
A80 ~
Q. Were you present when that photograph was
taken? A. Pardon?
Q. Were you present when that photograph was
taken? A. Yes, sir, I was.
[96] Q. It wasn’t taken in September, 1954? A. No,
taken afterwards, after that date.
Q. Lieutenant, can you tell the Court and Jury
whether or not that photograph, what that is a photograph
of? A. This is a photograph of Cell 18 in Death Row,
and also shows some others, but shows a very good picture
of the front part of the front door and only door rather of
Cell 18. . sO
Q. Now, does that show, correctly show the condi-
tions as they existed at 10:30 on the night of September
22nd, 1954? A. No, sir, it does not.
. Q. Now, what is the difference, show the Court if
you will Lieutenant. A. The Jury?
Q. No, the Court first.
THE COURT: No, me.
A. The partition of each cell out from the wall im-
mediately in front of the cell, there is a partition with a
heavy galvanized wire on it that protrudes out at the wall
to keep anything from being handed from one place to the
other, from one cell to the other. Now, that night there
was a large hole in this screen wire and it was torn down
and hanging down. That has since been removed, since
this picture was taken.
Q. Now,— A. Before this picture was taken.
Q. Now, except for the fact that this photograph
doesn’t show [97] all the screen there, and on the night of
September 22nd, this photograph would have shown, had
it been taken on that night, would have shown the screen
in there, but torn down? A. Yes, that is right.
Q. Now, is that the only thing in the physical
structure there? A. Yes, I believe that about covers it, ©
A81
outside of the water and debris and other things laying
around on the floor.
Q. At this time we offer State’ s Exhibit No. 10.
MR. HENNELLY: Defendant will object and except
to the introduction of Exhibit 10, for the reason it is hear-
say and for the reason that no proper foundation has been
laid for its introduction, and for the reason that there exists
on the picture a—some person who apparently is placed in
a particular position, and that is leading and suggestive
and is hearsay, and it may tend to confuse and mislead
the Jury and under the circumstances, I object to it.
THE COURT: Does this figure of a man have any
particular significance in this case? There is a picture of
aman on Exhibit 10.
A. ‘Yes.
Q. And at this particular point that man is standing
infront of Cell— A. 18.
‘Q. 18? A. Yes.
[98] THE COURT: All right, the objection is over-
ruled, and it may be received in evidence.
Exhibit 10, having been received in evidence, being
a photograph, is attached to the original of this transcript.
Q. Lieutenant, at the time this photograph was
taken, where were you? A. I was in Cell 17.
Q. Now, will you explain to the Jury, hold that
photograph up, and tell the Jury how much of the screen
there could you see from Cell 17?
MR. HENNELLY: Object to that if Your Honor
please, for the reason that that is totally irrelevant, im-
material to any point in issue, and invades the province of
the Jury, and is a conclusion.
Q. That is af right, I will show it at a later time.
THE COURT: All right. The Court would permit
this witness to testify what he can see from Cell 17 if he
wishes.
Cfo ttle BLAS LAAT PIPER
A82
Q. Allright, go ahead. A. This is Cell 17 over here.
This is Cell 18 here, with the man standing directly in
front of it. And by getting up next to the bars and laying
your head close to the bars, you can see the back portion
of this man, the back of his shoulders and his shirt and
trousers, on down to his feet. Now, he is standing with
his toes within twelve inches of—or fourteen inches of the
door itself, into the cell. These [99] partitions that pro-
trude out from the wall of the cell block there are two
feet wide, which this screen wire is fastened onto. Now,
if he was to move back any distance at all—
THE COURT: That would bea conclusion.
Q. Weask that that be withdrawn Your Honor.
THE COURT: He can tell what he saw at that par-
ticular place.
MR. HENNELLY: Under those circumstances, I am
going to ask that all that testimony be stricken and the
Jury instructed to disregard it, and a mistrial be declared
up to the point where Your Honor stopped him, for the
reason it was a conclusion, it is hearsay, totally irrelevant
and immaterial to any point in the case, and invades the
province of the Jury, and don’t take into consideration a
lot of other factors that was in there.
THE COURT: This witness is testifying that stand-
ing in the cell, just what on this particular picture he
can see, and he has stated where his position was, and
what he was able to see as shown on this picture, and I
think he is entitled to that testimony, and that testimony
is admissible in evidence, and that objection will be over-
ruled.
MR. RILEY: (Out of the hearing of the Jury). I
want the record to show that I have refrained from asking
this witness who was in Cell 18 at the time this photograph
was taken.
THE COURT: Cell what?
A83
MR. RILEY: 18, at the time this photograph was
taken, for the [100] reason that-at that time, the Defend-
ant, James William Stidham was in that cell, and that he
was celling in there at the time this photograph, particular
photograph was taken. J will ask the witness that and
make that offer of proof now. I don’t want it to go to the
Jury.
MR. HENNELLY: I say that don’t make any differ-
ence, who the man was in that cell. That is not the part
of my objection.
MR. RILEY: It certainly can’t be hearsay.
MR. HENNELLY: The heart of my objection is that
the whole thing is totally irrelevant and immaterial. You
are proving what somebody else saw.
THE COURT: I don’t know what they are going to
try to prove. There may be other testimony that is intro-
duced. I don’t know. I presume that as testimony de-
velops there will be some significance connected with
this. It can’t all come in at one time. And this witness
may testify and explain the matters as he has already ex-
plained it, and the Court has already ruled on it, and the
objection is overruled.
Q. Who else did you find in Death Row that night?
A. The subject of Sammy Reece, Doc Booker, and a man
by the name of Eaton, and a man by the name of Ford,
and a man by the name of Creighton.
Q. Where was Creighton? A. He was in Cell 17,
the eastern most cell of that tier of cellblocks.
Q. Wiil you turn around Lieutenant to Exhibit No. 1
on that [101] chart, and point to Cell No. 17? A. Right
here is Cell 17.
Q. And where was Cell 18? A. Right next to it.
Q. Cell 18 is where you found the body? A. That
is right, sir.
Q. 17 is where Creighton was? A. That is right, he
was in this cell here, the end cell.
A84
Q. Now, was the door to Cell 18 open or closed? A.
It was open.
Q. And how did you find the door to Cell 17? A.
It was locked.
Q. And did you finally get into Cell 17? A. Yes,
sir.
Q. How? A. I got the keys from a subject by the
name of Ford, who was in his cell locked up, and I don’t
know which one it was, but it was up in here.
Q. What time, about what time was it when you got °
Creighton out? A. It must have been eleven o’clock,
maybe later, that I got him out of there. I would say in the
neighborhood of eleven. It took quite a little bit to get the
lock undone.
Q. Going back to the sledge hammer, what did you
do with the sledge hammer? A.. I took the sledge hammer
and locked it up in the Deputy [102] Warden’s office. |
later taken it to our laboratory and turned it over to our
laboratory.
Q. Who did you turn it over to? A. Sergeant
Rhodes.
Q. And was Lieutenant Williams there at the time?
A. Yes, Lieutenant Williams was there.
Q. And is that sledge hammer in the same condi-
tion now as it was at that time? A. Except that it
doesn’t have as much blood on it as it had at that time.
Q. Now, did you go through all of the cells in Death
Row that night? A. Ichecked them. I didn’t go in them.
Q. Did you find Rollie Laster? A. No, he wasn’t in
there.
Q. Did you find the Defendant, James William Stid-
ham? A. No,sir, he wasn’t in there.
Q. Did you find any other wounds or marks on the
body, other than the injury to his skull? A. Well, I
didn’t take any of his clothes off to look, no, sir.
A85
~ Q. Well, as to the parts of the body that was ex-
posed? A. The part that I could see was his head.’ That
didn’t have clothing on it.
Q. What about his neck? [103] A. Well, I mean this
part above his shirt, yes, I could see his neck.
Q. Was there an injury to his throat and neck? A.
Yes, his throat had been cut.
Q. You will have to speak louder. A. His throat
had been cut, yes, sir.
Q. How large? A. Quite a gash across there.
Q. Well, indicate to the Jury. A. I would say three
or four inches across here.
Q. Onwhich side? A. It was on this side.
MR. HENNELLY: The left side?
A. I believe it was this side, the right side, the best
of my memory.
Q. You said right, and you are pointing to the left.
A. Well, I still say it was this side.
MR. HENNELLY: I am going on for the purpose of
clarification Your Honor, so we know which side—
THE COURT: Hehas pointed to the left side.
MR. HENNELLY: Pointed to the left side.
Q. That is all at this time.
Cross-Examination by Mr. Hennelly
Q. Lieutenant, you have been in the State Highway
Patrol for some years now, is that right? [104] A. A few
years.
Q. In the course of that time, I suppose you have had
reason and opportunity to see a number of people who have
suffered violent death, have you? A. Yes, sir.
Q. You have seen a number of people who were de-
ceased, and you have examined a number of dead bodies,
have you? A. Yes, sir.
Q. In the course of your vast experience with the
Department? A. That is right.
A86
Q. I understand that at the time you found this body,
that the body was stiff and rigor mortis had set in? A.
I am no specialist in that, but he had begun to get stiff,
Q. He had begun to get stiff? A. Yes, sir.
q Q. Based on your experience that you have had, in
’ examining other bodies, and having seen other bodies,
where rigor mortis had set in, is it your opinion that rigor
: mortis had set in to this body?
: MR. RILEY: If the Court please, this man is not a
F doctor, and for rigor mortis to set in, in some bodies takes
; longer than others. I don’t know that this man can—
THE COURT: Sustained. The witness has stated
that he wasn’t an expert, except that the body had —
to get stiff. He didn’t know what it was.
: [105] MR. RILEY: A body may begin to get stiff and
: still not be rigor mortis.
; * MR. HENNELLY: -I ask that that be sisitin, if
: Your Honor please.
4 y
THE COURT: All right, it may be stricken. As pre-
viously stated, remarks of counsel that are not connected
with questions that are being asked the witness, are not
testimony in the case, Gentlemen of the Jury.
Q. Now then Lieutenant, I believe that you arrived
there about ten o’clock that night? A. In front of the
Penitentiary.
Q. In front of the Penitentiary? <A. Yes, sir.
\ Q. And looking, if you will Lieutenant, at State’s Ex-
4 hibit 1, which is that plat in back of you there, when was
: the first time that you entered that building? A. I judge
4 it was around ten-thirty.
Q. Around ten-thirty? A. Yes, sir.
Q. And I will ask you Lieutenant, looking, if you
will, at the front part of State’s Exhibit 1, which indicates
some steps next to a plumber’s room, and steps next to the
Protestant Chapel, Protestant Chapel office, were there
Pete Ba
A87
any State Patrolmen outside of that door, or those doors
which lead down those steps? A. Outside of the building?
[106] Q. And would you say whether or not they
had set up something of a barricade out there? A. No, the
officers set up no barricade. The steps were barricaded
by the inmates.
Q. Now, tell us what you mean by the barricade, and
where was it situated? A. This shows steps going down
from ‘the first floor level to the basement. It doesn’t indi-
cate the steps coming from the B and C cell blocks lobby
outside. That would be in this area if it was so indicated.
Q. Excuse me, do I understand that there are some
steps which are not reflected on this State’s Exhibit 1?
A. Yes, sir, from the lobby, as I stated before, from B and
C cell blocks, coming to the outside part of the building.
This shows the steps coming down into the basement.
Q. So that those steps which you refer to are not
steps which would be on this section of the plat at all, is
that right? A. What do you mean by section?
Q. Well, would those steps, would those steps come
down into any point which is shown on State’s Exhibit 1?
A. They would come down to an area right here, right
even with where these start down.
Q. So that the end of those steps are the beginning
of these, is that right? [107] A. You have to turn after
you come down these, you turn to the right or to the left,
to get in on these steps here to get into the basement.
Q. Now, which way would those steps run? A.
They would go from the north to the south upward.
Q. From the north to the south upward? A. Yes,
sir.
Q. Now, were those steps barricaded? A. Yes, sir.
Q. Who had barricaded them? A. I don’t know, the
inmates I presume. They were the only ones in there.
A88
Q. Now then Lieutenant, when you arrived there,
who did you have with you? A. I had, I didn’t have any-
one with me when I arrived at the Penitentiary.
Q. When you arrived at_B_ basement, who did you
have with you? A. Trooper Finney Ward.
Q. And at that time, were there any inmates outside
of those who were locked in their cells, were there any
inmates in the outer section of the vestibule there? A. No,
sir, there was not an inmate in this area.
Q. Now, as you come down those steps, were there
any lights on down there? A. Not in this area right here.
[108] Q. Where was the first place that you saw a
light after you got in there? Did you see any lights? A.
Yes, there was, I believe there was a light on right in
this area right here. I believe there was a light there
screwed into the wall, as I remember it. And I don’t recall
of any other lights being on back in this area. However, it
was very light.
Q. Was it necessary for you to proceed witha flash-
light? A. I used a flashlight.
Q. Now then, these doors, looking at Door No. \ was
that open when you got there? A. Yes, sir.
Q. And door 2, was that open? A. That was open.
Q. And 3, was that open? A. It was open.
Q. So that you had proceeded without being molested,
or without any stop of any kind, into those three doors?
A. Outside of debris and stuff of that nature, and water, I
wasn’t stopped.
Q. Was there a considerable amount of water and
debris? A. Lots of watermelons and sticks and chairs
and everything.
Q. Lot of broken chairs? A. I wouldn’t say a lot of
them, but there were pieces of.that sort of stuff laying
around.
A89
[109] Q. And was there pieces of that cluttering up
that area way as one comes down from 32 to 17? A. No,
there was a lot of water in this area here.
Q. Did you at anytime that evening, investigate the
source of that water? A. Not there.
' Q. Sir? A. No,not there.
Q. Was it a condition which indicated to you that the
water was still running when you got there? A. No. I
am sure it didn’t accumulate anymore after the high rise.
Q. Can you give the Court and Jury any idea as to
how deep that water was? A. It would vary because of
the fact that the floor isn’t level all the way through, and
some places it is worn off more than others, and there
would be deeper spots.
Q. Very well. At the deepest point would it be above
your ankles? A. No, I wouldn’t say it was. I wouldn’t
say it was that deep. I got my feet wet, but I don’t believe
I went over my shoes.
Q. Now then, I believe that you indicated that the
keys were missing when you first got in there, is that right?
A. What do you mean by missing?
Q. I mean you had to get the keys from somebody,
didn’t you? [110] A. Yes, I made an inquiry as to who
might have the keys.
Q. Now, you got the keys from Mr. Ford, is that right?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Acolored inmate? A. Heis.
Q. Did you have some difficulty in getting them
fromhim? A. No.
Q. Did he tell you at first that he didn’t have them?
A. That is right.
Q. And did you persuade him to give them to you?
A. Isaid I had information that he had them, and I wanted
them.
|
3
i
¢
=
&
4
4
A90
Q. And he just handed them over to you? A. He
gave them to me.
Q. Isthatthe way itwas? A. Yes, sir.
Q. Now then, it wasn’t necessary for you to use any
other type of persuasion? A. No, sir, none whatsoever.
Q. Now then Lieutenant, where was the first place
you went after you got those keys? A. I went back and
tried to get Creighton out of his cell. He was in such a
condition, I felt like it was necessary to get him to a hos-
pital.
Q. All right. Now then, I want you to look at
State’s Exhibit 1, which is this plat, and I believe you indi-
cated previously that [111] Creighton was in Cell 17, is
that right? A. That is right.
Q. Look, if you will, at this exhibit Lieutenant, and
tell us where in that cell you first saw Creighton? A. |
went down in the cell that he was standing hollering and
yelling for help, and he was right up next to the bars, next
to the front.
Q. Would you say at that time, let me ask you this.
Strike that. In the course of the time that you have been
with the State Highway Patrol, I suppose yqu have had
plenty of opportunity to see people in hysteria, have you?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Would you say that Creighton was in a hysterical
condition when you arrived there? A. He was injured,
he was hurt.
Q. All right. Now, did you see some marks on him
which indicated that he had been hurt? A. Yes, sir.
Q. Where was he marked? A. On his head and
teeth and jaw and hand.
Q. Based on your experience in the Department, and
bodies that you have seen, and people that you have seen
that were injured, would you say that he had sustained
a
Rat
ers
A91
considerable injury prior to the time that you had arrived
there? A. Yes, I would say he had.
[112] Q. Very well. Now then, did you first get
Creighton out of his cell before you did anything else
Lieutenant, or did you go to Donnell’s cell before you got
Creighton out? A. I, on my way down the corridor inside
the cell cage in here, I checked the other cells to see that
they were locked first, and then I found this one, naturally,
because I come to it before I did Creighton’s, and then I
checked Creighton’s and couldn’t get him out, because I
couldn’t get the door open, and had nothing to open it with,
and then I returned back here and checked this other side,
which is the isolation ward, more or less, for new prisoners,
and then returned back here. I didn’t want them to rush
me from the rear or something of that nature, and I seen
that these were all secured, and I came back, immediately
back here and got the keys from Ford and proceeded to
let Creighton out.
Q: Do I understand that before you left, even knew
Creighton was there, you had first looked into Cell 18? A.
I knew somebody was back there because I could hear him
holler and hollering for help, and that was my aim, as I
proceeded down here, checking all these cells before I got
to him, I run onto Donnell’s body.
Q. So that you stopped at least and looked at Don-
nell’s body before you ever found Creighton, is that right?
A. That is right.
Q. Did you spend some time there at Donnell’s body
[113] A. Didn’t take very long. I don’t think I was in
there over thirty seconds.
Q. You were in there thirty seconds? A. Yes, sir.
Q. Now, at that time, where was Creighton? A.
Still in his cell.
Q. Was he back in his cell? A. Oh, he was up there,
you could tell by then that it was an officer.
A92
Q. Now, after you came:back, did you first get Don.
nell’s body out of there before you did anything about get-
ting Creighton out? A. I didn’t remove Donnell’s body
from there at all. While I was getting Creighton out of his
cell, Donnell’s body was removed.
Q. Would you say that all in all, you only spent those
thirty seconds in Donnell’s cell? A. I don’t believe over
thirty seconds, or a minute at the most. I had no reason
to spend any more time in there.
Q. And that was, did you ever see that body after
that time? A. No. I seen it to the front.
3 Q. That is the last time you saw that body? A. Yes,
i sir.
; Q. You saw it for thirty seconds, and that the eyeball
was hanging out there and that ther€-was a big gash on the
head, and [114] the lights were out, because you had to
use a flashlight, and you tell the Court and Jury that there
isn’t any question in your mind, but what that man, that
the man that you saw there was the man whose picture
is shown in State’s Exhibit 8? A. That is right.
Q. Isthatright? A. That is right.
Q. In that thirty seconds—you—is that when you
looked at his neck and these other marks on him? A. That
is right. It didn’t take any time to do that.
Q. Still had the flashlight, did you? A. That is right,
but there was other lights. I didn’t take—
Q. Was there any other lights that was on back there
either in the vicinity of cell 17 or 18? A. Not that I recall,
in the building, but there was lights coming from the fire.
Q. Coming from the fire? A. Yes, sir.
Q. But you did have your flashlight on didn’t you?
A. Yes, that is right, I had my flashlight.
Q. Now then, did you incorporate any of your find-
ings with respect to the condition of that body, in any re-
port which was given to the Vital Statistics Bureau for
Cole County? A. I don’t know whether they got it or not.
US OTS eta
A93
[115] MR. RILEY: Ifthe Court please, I presume that
Cole County has got a Vital Statistics Bureau, and the
records would be the best evidence.
THE COURT: Sustained.
Q. I am sorry, I withdraw it. .I will rephrase the
question. You were the first man to find the body and
you were in charge there’ that night, weren’t you? A. I
don’t know, no, I wasn’t in charge.
Q. Well, let me ask you this, did you at anytime
submit to any authorities in Cole County, either to the Pen-
itentiary authorities or to the Vital Statistics Bureau, any
information with respect to.the condition of the body when
you found it? A. No, sir.
Q. You did not? A. No, sir.
Q. Did you at anytime make out a report indicating
that the man had been shot? A. No, sir.
Q. You did not? A. No, sir.
Q. Did you at anytime after the time that you had
found that body, have reason and opportunity to inspect
a death certificate on that body? A. No, sir.
Q. Very well. Now then, how long did you stay there
that night Lieutenant? A. I was inside the Penitentiary
all night.
[116] Q. You were in there all night? A. Yes, sir.
Q.: And when was the first time, after you had
arrived there on the night in question, that you saw the
Defendant, James Stidham? A. I saw him, oh, it was
during the night, I don’t know what time it was.
Q. And where did you see him? A. He was stand-
ing out just off of the lobby on the same floor level, on the
B side of the cell blocks.
Q. And would the position you saw him be indicated
on State’s Exhibit 1 there? A. I can’t do it there.
Q. You mean— A. That isn’t what I am talking
about. That isn’t the floor level I am referring to.
PPtvtictrr ce ccs:
5
A94
Q. Tell us with respect to that State’s Exhibit 1,
where was he, was he upstairs or outside? A. He was
upstairs above this.
Q. All right. Did you question him or talk to him
at that time? A. I had no reason to.
Q. Did you question or talk to him at anytime after —
the night of the 22nd? A. I talked to him on the night of
the 23rd.
Q. Now, where was that questioning, where did that
questioning [117] take place? A. In the Classification
Room, just off of the large tunnel across from the Deputy
Warden’s Office.
Q. You know what time of the day or night that was?
A. Well, I judge it to be around about—between eight and
nine, somewhere in that neighborhood, sometime after we
had gone to work. i
Q. Now, the Classification Room Lieutenant, is there
furniture in there? A. Yes, there is seven or eight chairs
and a table.
Q. I would defer for a moment to the State, if they
want to offer this, and won’t object to it Your Honor.
THE COURT: Are you intending to offer it?
MR. RILEY: I might as well, and let the Jury see it.
THE COURT: You might have it identified, was it
marked?
MR. RILEY: Mark it Exhibit 11.
Reporter marked Exhibit 11, a photograph.
Redirect Examination by Mr. Riley
Q. Lieutenant, I will show you what has been marked
as State’s Exhibit 11, and will you tell the Court and Jury
what that is? A. Yes, this is a photograph of the Clas-
sification Room.
Q. Does that correctly show the physical features of
that room? A. Yes, sir.
kA
A95
[118] Q. On September 23, 1954? A. Yes, sir, it does.
Q. We at this time offer Exhibit No. 11.
_MR. HENNELLY: No objection.
THE COURT: It may be received in evidence.
Exhibit 11, being a photograph, having been received
in evidence, is attached to the original of this transcript.
THE COURT: I believe we will take a recess at this
time Gentlemen. Now during the recess, you will be taken
up to your Jury Room, and don’t discuss this case among
yourselves. Of course nobody is supposed to talk to you
and there won’t be anybody able to get to you up in this
Jury Room, in the Jury quarters. They are available for
the Jury, but during the recess of this Court, and when
you go to the J ury,Room, don’t discuss the case with any-
one or permit anyone to talk with you about it. Now,
I think we have a pitcher of ice water and the Sheriff’s
office, one of the deputies will bring some ice water up
to you, for you. I think they have some cups up there
and you can have a drink of ice water. The Court will
be in recess for a few minutes.
The Court recessed at 3:00 P.M. until 3:15 P.M.
Recross-Examination by Mr. Hennelly
Q. Now Lieutenant, I am going to show you what has
been accepted in evidence as State’s Exhibit 11. At the time
you [119] questioned the Defendant Stidham, was it in
that room that is reflected on State’s Exhibit 11? A. That
is right.
Q. And at the time he was brought in was he seated
- at that table? A. Yes.
Q. And at that time was he handcuffed, if you know?
“A. No, sir.
Q. And how many men were there questioning him
at that time? A. Well, I don’t recall, five or six of us.
Q. And was he sent back to his cell then? A. That
is right.
Peas aes
Bak << par
vote one,
Beh 9)
FORE ns
ities TE |
«aus
Ne :
A96
Q. And when was the next time that you questioned
him? A. I never did talk to him anymore.
Q. You never did question him again? A. No.
Q. Was that the last time you had anything to do with
Stidham personally, with respect to your handling of this
case? A. Outside of conveying him back and forth to Cole
County Court House.
Q. Aside from that? A. Yes.
Q. Very well. Now then, with respect to this, which
has already been accepted in evidence as State’s Exhibit—
THE COURT: I don’t believe it has been referred
to as an exhibit.
[120] MR. RILEY: Exhibit 9.
Q. Is it your testimony that that was found in one
of the cells on the night of 22nd? A. Found in cell 18.
Q. Incell 18? A. Yes, sir.
Q. Taking into consideration the front part of the
cell, where did you find it? A. As I stated before, the
body was lying on its back in a northeast southwest direc-
tion, which would put his head-closer to the east wall
and “the sledge hammer was right near his shoulder and
the wall. Just a very short space there.
Q. Now, I believe there was considerable blood on
this, isn’t that right? A. Yes, sir.
Q. And considerable blood all over the walls in that
cell, is that right? A. I don’t know about all over the
walls, it was particularly on the back wall and east wall.
Q. Back wall and east wall? A. Back wall and east
wall.
Q. Was there blood on the ground? A. Well, there is
no ground there.
Q. Imean— A. That is the floor.
Q. On the basement? A. Tile floor, and it was
covered with [121] water and partly covered with water
and blood in there on the floor and water together.
A97
Q. Now, can you tell the Court and Jury, is there a
bed in that cell? A. I believe that cell just had a mat-
"tress in it at that time.
Q. As a matter of fact, all those cells only had a
mattress on the floor? A. No, that isn’t right.
Q. Thatisn’t right? A. No.
Q. In that cell, he was on a mattress? A. Best I
can recall, it was a mattress in there, but there could have
been a bed, a very low bed, but I don’t believe so.
Q. Now, I believe that you indicated that you took
this out of here, you took this, which has already been
marked Exhibit 9, out of the cell, and that you then put it
in the Deputy Warden’s office? A. Taken it up there
and locked it up in a locker after marking it for identifica-
tion.
Q. Isn’t it the custom and the practice of the State
Highway Patrol to take evidence over to the Headquarters?
A. When they get it together.
Q. Well, you had that didn’t you? A. That is right,
but I had other things to do besides lugging [122] that
sledge hammer around all night.
Q. When was the next time you went and got it
Lieutenant? A. It was the following day, I believe it
was, that I took it to, could have been a day or two later.
I knew where it was, because it was locked up. I wouldn’t
say just whether it was the next day or not.
Q. Was it locked up with a number of other sledges?
A. No, sir.
Q. Was it ina place all by itself? A. Yes, sir.
Q. Where was it? A. In the Deputy Warden’s office.
Q. Was it in a cabinet of some kind? A. Yes, sir,
a cabinet or a little safe.
Q. Sort of a cabinet or safe, whatever you want to
call it? A. Yes, sir.
Q. Was there a combination on it? A. No, a padlock
on it.
AE SORE LIAS ON ain ee |
A98
Q. Padlock? A. Yes.
Q. Then you took it over to Headquarters, is that
right? A. That is right.
Q. Now, that is a section of the State Highway Patrol,
which is given over to laboratory analysis of things, isn’t
that right? A. Yes, sir.
Q. And I believe that the State Highway Patrol has
a section [123] for the handling of the identity, identifica.
tion of blood and blood specimens and finger prints and
things of that kind? A. Yes, there is a laboratory.
Q. Now, Iam going to ask you what is the physical
difference on this exhibit besides the blood, from the night
that you first saw it? A. I put two pieces of paper on it,
and wrapped this here tape around it, because handling
it, this handle was splintered, and I didn’t want to get
splinters in my hands.
Q. Was it splintered or broken when you first saw
it? A. Yes.
Q. Iamsorry? A. Yes.
Q, And this, was it all in one piece when you found
it? A. Just like that, with exception of that, which I in-
dicated.
Q. All right. When did you put the tape on it
Lieutenant? A. When I taken it from the Deputy Ward-
en’s office to the Penitentiary.
Q. When you took it— A. From the Deputy Ward-
en’s office to the lab I mean.
Q. You know what date that was? A. I won't say
for sure, but it couldn’t have been but a day or two, after
I found it.
Q. No further questions.
{124] Redirect Examination by Mr. Riley
Q. Lieutenant, when you got the keys from Ford,
where was he? A. Where was Ford?
A99
Q@. Yes. A. He was in one of these cells right in
here. I couldn’t tell you positively which cell he was in.
Q. Was his door open or closed? A. No, sir, his
door was closed and locked.
Q. Now, Lieutenant, you said that you could see
down in there, how could you see?
MR. HENNELLY: Object to that, that question is
too vague and indefinite and speculative, and calls for a
conclusion. ,
Q. You said you had a flashlight? A. Yes, I used
a flashlight part of the time. It wasn’t necessary for me
to use the light to get around with, but to look.
Q. Was there any other lights down there? A. Yes,
there was considerable light coming into the building, but
as I stated before, I believe there was one light burning
right up here, was all that I recall. There could have
been another dim light down in there somewhere, but I
don’t recall it.
Q. Well, was there any other light coming from any-
place? A. Yes, sir, there was. The back of the building
here, the [125] cellblock which is the east end of it, twenty-
five feet I would say to a building that was burning, and
it threw light into the building here and back in this area
back up here, there was a building burning which was
reflecting considerable light in these windows along here.
There was windows along in there, and that reflected right
into the cell.
MR. HENNELLY: Object to that, and ask that that
be stricken and the Jury instructed to disregard it, and a
mistrial declared. It is a conclusion and self-serving state-
ment.
THE COURT: Do I understand your testimony, you
are testifying where the light was and where it came in?
A. Yes, sir.
THE COURT: As you saw it and observed it on this
particular night?
A100
A. That is correct.
THE COURT: Overruled.
Q. Now, what are the floors made of in the hal].
ways there? A. The floors in there are tile, white tile.
The walls are white, glazed brick, and all around the floors
and the walls are white tile.
Q. Mark this Exhibit 12.
Reporter marked Exhibit 12, a photograph.
Q. Lieutenant, I hand you what has been marked
as State’s Exhibit No. 12, and ask you if you can tell the
Court what that is? [126] A. Yes, sir. This is a hole, or
part of a hole dug in the side of the wall.
Q. Is that a picture of the wall? A. This is a pic-
ture of the wall in B basement.
Q. Now, did you examine that wall that evening?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Thatnight? A. Yes, sir.
Q. I will ask you if that photograph correctly repre-
sents the condition of that wall as you saw it that night?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Now, will you indicate on Exhibit No. 1, where
that wall is? A. This wall in this photograph is this wall
right here known as the Christian Science Chapel office,
this wall right here, and this photograph is just about the
middle of it, right in here.
Q. Lieutenant, will you tell us whether or not that
photograph, which side of the wall is that photograph
taken from? A. This photograph was taken from inside
of this small room, and it would be the west side of this
wall here.
Q. Be the part of the wall that is outside of B base-
ment? A. That is right.
Q. I believe that is all sir.
[127] Recross-Examination by Mr. Hennelly
Q. Just one question Lieutenant, this State’s Exhibit
10, which you have already identified, and which has been
A101
introduced into evidence, do I understand correctly that
with you standing in the corner of cell No.—which one
were youin? A. 17.
Q. Of Cell 17, which was the cell that you found
Creighton in, isn’t that right? A. That is right.
Q. That all you could see from the man, of the man
who was standing in that position in front of Cell 18, was
his back, is that right? A. That is right, the back portion
of him.
Q. The back portion? A. Standing like this man is
here.
Q. There was nobody poking at you, you were just
standing there? A. That is right, I was up here looking in.
Q. And you were at that time in good physical condi-
tion, you didn’t have any broken jaw or anything like that,
did you? A. No.
Q. No further questions.
MR. RILEY: That is all. Call Sergeant Rhodes.
[128] SERGEANT JAMES RHODES,
BEING SWORN, TESTIFIED:
Direct Examination by Mr. Riley
Q. Will you state your name ‘please? A. James
Rhodes.
Q. Mr. Rhodes, you are a Sergeant of the Missouri
State Highway Patrol? A. Yes, sir, that is right.
Q. How old are you sir? A. Twenty-nine.
Q. How long have you been with the Missouri State
Highway Patrol? A. Little over six years.
Q. And where are you stationed? A. Jefferson City,
Missouri.
Q. And in the general headquarters? A. Yes, sir.
Q. Are you in the laboratory there? A. That is cor-
rect.
ere |
ar Ae es
Licks nh thin ND
A102
Q. Where did you go to school Sergeant? A. I went
to Westminister College at Fulton, Missouri.
Q. How long did you go to Westminister? A. Foy
years.
Q. What did you majorin? A. Chemistry.
Q. Did you receive your degree in Chemistry? [129]
A. Yes, sir.
Q. After you graduated from Westminister, what did
you do? A. I worked for approximately six months with
Presnite Engineering Company at St. Louis.
Q. What kind of work did you do? A. I worked ina
laboratory.
Q. What type of work are you now doing for the Mis-
souri State Highway Patrol? A. I am assigned to our
technical laboratory in Jefferson City.
Q. You make various examinations? A. Chemical
analysis.
Q.” Chemical analysis? A. Yes, sir.
Q. Have you had any experience in analyzing blood-
stains? A. Yes, sir. ;
Q. Have you read any text books on that question
since you graduated from school? A. Yes, sir.
Q. What textbooks have you read?
MR. HENNELLY: For the purposes of the record, |
will admit his qualifications in the field in which he con-
cerns himself with in the laboratory.
THE COURT: They can be admitted unless counsel
wishes to further qualify him.
Q. If he admits it, admits that he is qualified for that
[130] purpose.
THE COURT: Do you admit that he is qualified for
making surrological tests?
MR.HENNELLY: Yes. sir.
Q. I hand you what has been marked as Exhibit No.
9, and ask you if you have ever seen that instrument be-
fore? A. Yes,I have.
A103
Q. Do you recall when you first saw that? A. Yes,
I first saw that on September 30 of last year when Lieuten-
ant Barton brought it to the laboratory.
Q. Did you make an examination of that sledge ham-
mer for the presence of bloodstains? A. Yes, sir.
Q. What, can you tell this jury what you found? A.
I found there were extensive red colored stains present on
the head of the sledge hammer, and I made examination of
those and they were identified as human bloodstains.
Q. Did you analyze those stains according to chemical
analysis? A. Yes, sir.
Q. And they were human bloodstains? A. That is
correct.
Q. Did you make any identifying marks on that ham-
mer? A. Yes, sir, I did.
Q. That is the same hammer you examined? A. Yes,
sir.
[131] Q. That is all.
Cross-Examination by Mr. H ennelly
Q. Sergeant Rhodes, how long have you been with the
‘laboratory? A. Well, ever since I began working for the
Highway Patrol.
Q. Now Sergeant, does the Police Laboratory of the
Highway Patrol in Jefferson City, does it concern itself
also with fingerprint identification? A. Yes, we do
fingerprint work.
Q. And I believe you make chemical analysis of vari-
ous materials which would be subjected to you for the
purpose of identification? A. That is right.
Q. Now, I will ask you in this case, did you have an
opportunity to make an examination of any materials un-
der the fingernails of one Walter Lee Donnell? A. No, sir.
Q. Now, with respect to your findings, that there was
human blood on this exhibit Sergeant, that is the first step
in any analysis of any instrument or exhibit, which might
: Se otal fa ts a ih gs aaa
EL Ne 3 OER GA
A104
be given to you with material on it which appears to be
blood, isn’t that right? A. Yes, sir, that is right.
Q. The first thing you do is to determine whether or
not it is human blood? [132] A. Well, first, we deter-
mine whether or not it is blood, and then if it is, whether
it is human blood.
Q. That is right. Now after you determined it was
Human blood, am I correct in stating that there are Steps
which are taken after that in breaking down the blood into
the various types under a certain system which you have
in the State Highway Patrol? A. Yes, we can check
stains to determine the blood group.
Q. Now, what system do you use in determining that,
the International Grouping, Sergeant? A. Yes, in group-
ing the stains, we group them according to the four main
blood groups.
Q. Tell, the Court and Jury what those four are? A.
The most common group is Group O, and then Group A,
and Group B, and Group AB.
Q. Now, within those four classifications, within
your experience in the laboratory, in dealing with blood
specimens, you can break that down still further, can’t you?
A. That is the only breakdown that we make on the dry
blood stains.
Q. Well, is there such a thing as an M factor, within
one of those groups? A. Yes, sir, there are M and N
factors.
Q. MandN factors? A. Yes, sir.
[133] Q. So that one might be a type O with an M
or an N factor, either present or absent, isn’t that right?
A. I believe that is correct.
Q. So that would give you, enable you to break it
down more than just by making a general analysis with
respect to the fact that one might be one of those four
groups, isn’t that right? A. Yes, sir, that is correct.
A105
Q. All right now, I will ask you with respect to the
M and N factors, are there any other methods whereby
you could break it down? A. Well now, it depends on the
condition of your blood specimen. Now, as I say, we just
group on the dry stains as to the four main blood groups.
Now on your blood, dry stains, there is the RH factor, and
PN factor, and they can’t be accurately determined on dry
stains, so we just group our four main blood groups.
Q. Do you at anytime, do you ever forward blood
either to Dr. Gradwahl in St. Louis to proceed further with
a blood examination? A. I don’t recall of any cases right
offhand sir, no.
Q. Let me ask you this, has it ever been, within your
experience that you have broke down a dry bloodstain, be- |
yond the four broad classifications? A. No, sir, I have not.
[134] Q. Can that be done by anybody in your
laboratory? A. Not that I know of. We don’t do that.
Q. Who is the Lieutenant in charge of the laboratory?
A. John Williams.
Q. Does he do blood work also? A. Yes, sir.
Q. Now, I will ask you this, was there ever at any-
time in the course of this case, any blood forwarded to you
from the body of one Walter Lee Donnell? A. No, sir.
Q. So that your examination of this instrument tells
us that there is, first of all, that it is human blood, did you
break it down further, can you tell us, can you tell this
Court and Jury what blood type is on that hammer, was
on that hammer? A. Of the blood grouping determina-
tion, it indicated that it was Group O.
Q. GroupO? A. Yes.
Q. But you didn’t break it down any further with
an M and N factor, or anything like that? A. No, sir.
Q. And you didn’t forward that to anybody else for
the purpose of proceeding further with that? A. No, sir.
np Sant oe esa
A106
Q. Thank you very much Sergeant. No further ques.
tions.
[135] MR. RILEY: That is all.
JOE LAMAR,
BEING SWORN, TESTIFIED:
Direct Examination by Mr. Riley
Q. Will you state your name please? A. J.G. Lamar,
Q. Mr. Lamar, will you speak as loud as you can, be-
cause with the fans, it is difficult to hear. Mr. Lamar, you
are employed by the Missouri State Penitentiary? A. |
am.
Q. And what capacity? A. Superintendent of
Identification Records.
Q. Do you have under your control and supervision
all of the records pertaining to inmates in the Missouri
State Penitentiary? A. Ido.
Q. Do you have there the record as to the time they
come in? A. Ido.
Q. Fingerprints? A. Ido.
Q. Photographs? A. Right.
Q. And the time they goout? A. Right.
Q. Are those records that are required to be kept by
law? A. They are.
Q. I show you what has been marked State’s Exhibit
No. 8, and [136] will you tell this Jury what that is? A.
That is a photograph of one Walter Lee Donnell.
Q. Did you know Walter Lee Donnell personally? A.
I did.
Q. What was his record number? A. 64078.
Q. Did you see Walter Lee Donnell on the night of
September 22nd, 1954? A. I did.
Q. Where was he? A. Across the hall from the
Deputy Warden’s office in the Classification Room.
A107
Q. And what was his condition? A. He was dead.
Q. How did you determine that he was dead? A.
Well, his body was beginning to be stiff already. I knew
that he was dead.
Q. You say that was across the hall from the Deputy
Warden’s office, is that inside of the Missouri State Peni-
tentiary? A. It was.
Q. InCole County, Missouri? A. Right.
Q. And describe what you observed about Walter
Lee Donnell’s body at that time? A. His throat was cut
in two places.
Q. Now, just what two places were they? [137] A.
One on each side of the throat.
Q. Now, you say it was cut, now just describe the
wound, will you? A. There was a gash, inch and a half
or two inches long on each side, and the flesh was wide
open.
Q. What else? A. There was a large hole under the
right ear.
Q. What else? A. Right side of the head was
mashed in as if it had been hit by a heavy instrument.
MR. HENNELLY: Object to that last section as be-
ing a conclusion on the part of the witness, no foundation
laid for it.
THE COURT: Well, sustained, as to what caused it.
Q. Just describe what you saw, how big was this area
that was mashed in? A. Oh, about three or four inches
in diameter.
Q. Just show the Jury what area of his head was
mashed in? A. The entire right side, from the cheek
bone on up past the ear. It was completely mashed in.
Q. And what about his right ear? A. I described it
as a hole under the right ear.
Q. What else did you notice about him? A. Three
fingers of the right hand was broken, the tip of the index
finger was completely severed and mashed away.
ee eT Re 4
ee
AERUAE SEES
oer yr
ad Ane Ms
Wome
Al0dé .-
Q. Did you take his fingerprints? [138] A. I dig
Q. What was the purpose of taking his fingerprints?
A. For identification purposes.
Q. What print did you use? A. I used the left index
finger.
Q. Do you have the print you took at that time sir?
A. Ido.
Q. Will you mark this Exhibit 13?
Reporter marked Exhibit 13, fingerprints.
Q. Mr. Lamar, I show you what has been marked as
State’s Exhibit No. 13, and will ask you if you know what
that is? A. Ido.
Q. Is that exhibit a part of the official records of the
Missouri State Penitentiary? A. It is.
Q. And is it made in the regular course of business?
A. It is.
Q. Is it made at or about the time of the date stated
in there? A. It is.
Q. And is it a correct record? A. Yes, sir.
Q. Those records are made and kept under your su-
pervision? A. They are.
Q. At this time we offer State’s Exhibit-No. 13.
[139] MR. HENNELLY: The Defendant will object
and except to the introduction of State’s Exhibit 13, for the
reason that it is hearsay and it is in violation of the Con-
stitutional Rights of the Defendant to introduce it in evi-
dence at this time. I do not think, in making this objec-
tion, that this is the type of evidence that one can bring
under the Uniform Business Records Act, and that this is a
type of a technical matter which would leave the door open
to all types of hearsay and calls for expert testimony. In
addition to that, there are some other matters as conclu-
sions on there, which would be grossly hearsay on the right
hand side.
THE COURT: Are you offering it for the pupose of
identification?
A109
Q. All purposes, all information shown.
MR. HENNELLY: (Out of the hearing of the Jury)
This is a dangerous piece of evidence.
MR. RILEY: You subpoenaed it.
MR. HENNELLY: Where is the original, this is a
copy:
MR. RILEY: Yes, the original is in Washington. I
withdraw my offer at this time.
MR. HENNELLY: Is the original of this exhibit in
Washington on file with the Federal Bureau of Investiga-
tion?
Q. Mr. Lamar, is the original.copy of this exhibit on
file with the F.B.I. in Washington? A. It is.
[140] Q. You sent it there? A. Yes, sir.
Q. This writing on here, is that on the original copy?
A. Yes, on the original, that is the carbon copy of it.
Q. Judge, I will withdraw my offer at this time.
THE COURT: This matter here, where I have my
finger is what?
A. A print of the left index finger of Walter Lee Don-
nell.
MR. HENNELLY: I want to ask that that be stricken
for the reason that that incorporates certain sections of
hearsay as to whose it is, and I think that is hearsay and
I think that the Jury having heard it, if they heard it—
MR. RILEY: He testified he put it on there.
THE COURT: The last part of it may be stricken at
this time as to whose it is. What is it, that is what I want
toknow. A. A fingerprint.
Q. It is a fingerprint? A. Yes, sir.
THE COURT: Now, who put that fingerprint on
there? A. I did.
THE COURT: You did?
A. Yes, sir.
tb age cae re |
A110
THE COURT: And frem whose hand did you make
the print? :
A. Walter Lee Donnell’s.
THE COURT: And you knew Walter Lee Donnell]
personally? [141] A. I did.
THE COURT: And then is this the fingerprint of
Walter Lee Donnell that you put on there? A. It is,
THE COURT: All right.
2 MR. RILEY: Mr. Lamar, are you acquainted with
Dr. Shull? A. Yes, sir.
Q. At anytime did you identify the body of Walter
Lee Donnell to Dr. Shull?
MR. HENNELLY: Object to the form of that ques-
tion for the reason that is leading and suggestive, and con-
tains certain elements of hearsay and is a conclusion, and
ask that it be stricken and the Jury instructed to disregard
it and a mistrial declared.
THE COURT: Overruled, and I think the time and
place should be fixed.
Q. On September 25, 1954, in Nashville, Tennessee,
did you identify the body cf Walter Lee Donnell for Dr.
G. Donald Shull?
' MR. HENNELLY: Object, if Your Honor’please, for
the reason that this is hearsay and that this is a matter
which is something done, not in the presence of this De-
fendant, and while use of the word identify is a conclusion,
and it has been held in other cases that it is a matter which
has to be done in the presence of the Deféndant, and he
has to acquiesce [142] in it some way. I think they may
show it in a different way, but to use it under those terms,
it is very bad form, and I think it is illegal and improper,
and I ask that it be stricken.
THE COURT: The objection is overruled. I think
more of your circumstances ought to be shown before your
question is asked. Was this witness there? He has testi-
Alll
fied that he knows, or knew during his lifetime, Walter
Lee Donnell. Now, was Donnell’s body there, did he see
it and identify it, I think those ought to be asked before the
designation to anybody else is made.
Q. On September 25, 1954, in Nashville, Tennessee,
did you go to Nashville, Tennessee, on that date? A. I
did.
Q. And who was with you? A. Dr. Shull, Mr. Riley,
the Cole County Prosecutor.
Q. Now, did you see a dead body there? A. I did.
Q. And whose dead body was it? A. Walter Lee
Donnell.
Q. And is that the only body you saw? A. That is
right.
Q. And when you were there and observed that
body, where was Dr. Shull? A. He was present.
[143] Q. Did he view the body? A. He did.
Q? Were you with Dr. Shull at all times? A. I was.
Q. And whose body was it that Dr. Shull viewed?
A. Walter Lee Donneli’s.
MR. HENNELLY: Object to that as being a con-
clusion.
THE COURT: Overruled.
Q. Whose body was it that Dr. Shull viewed? A.
Walter Lee Donnell’s.
Q. Did you observe Dr. Shull doing anything to the
body of Walter Lee Donnell? A. I did.
Q. What did he do? A. Assisted in holding an au-
topsy.
Q. And did you see him cut the body open? A. I
did.
Did you see him examine the head? A. I did.
Was that opened? A. It was.
Were you there all the time? A. I was.
OOO
wae
ee a
SSA St A IRL CODER BPE
be
All2
Q. Dr. Shull there doing the work? A. He was,
Q. And you say it was the body of Walter Lee Don-
nell? [144] A. It was.
Q. Is that the same Walter Lee Donnell that you saw
dead in the Deputy Warden’s office in the Missouri State
Penitenti
This text is long and has been trimmed here. Open the source document for the complete record.
This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.