Massie v. Commonwealth

Citation24 S.W. 611
PartiesMASSIE v. COMMONWEALTH.
Decision Date11 January 1894
CourtCourt of Appeals of Kentucky

Appeal from circuit court, Owen county.

"Not to be officially reported."

J. L Massie was convicted of murder, and appeals. Reversed.

E. E Settle, Lindsay & Botts, J. A. Scott, and J. C. S. Blackburn for appellant.

W. J Hendrick, for the Commonwealth.

HAZELRIGG J.

In July, 1893, in the Owen circuit court, the appellant was tried and convicted of the crime of murder, and sentenced to the penitentiary for life. The chief reasons assigned for a reversal of the judgment below are that the court refused to instruct the jury on the law of self-defense, of voluntary manslaughter, and of the law applicable to insane persons also in refusing to admit as evidence the communications of the witness James Hanna, made to the appellant shortly before the killing; and in refusing to admit the testimony of divers witnesses, experts and nonexperts, on the alleged insanity of the accused. The court gave two instructions only,-one on the subject of murder, and the other as to reasonable doubt. The facts attending the homicide, briefly stated, are these: The accused was a reputable physician, in active practice, living, with his wife and six children, on Cedar creek, in Owen county. He was a quiet, law-abiding citizen, and his high character is testified to by many, and questioned by none. There had also lived with him during the winter before the homicide two nieces from Indiana, who were engaged in teaching school in the neighborhood, and who were orphans, and under the protection and in the care of the appellant while in Kentucky. The arrival of one of them at Frankfort to resume her work was expected, and the accused sent his tenant, James Hanna, to meet her, and bring her out. On the road to that city, Hanna met Honaker, (afterwards killed by the accused,) who, after learning the purpose of Hanna's trip, detailed to him a horrid story involving the chastity of the young ladies, and in a measure that of the doctor's wife; charged the appellant in fact with keeping a house of prostitution, in language too foul for repetition. When upbraided and cautioned by Hanna, Honaker flourished his pistol and said that he would tell Massie the same thing; and, if he denied it, he would give him the contents of the pistol. This so weighed on the mind of Hanna that on the next day he sought the appellant at his house, and related the story to him. It threw him into a state of frenzy. He ordered Hanna to go home, and wait there until he came. He seized his gun, mounted his horse, and started out to find Honaker, to have him, as he testified, right the great wrong he had done him. He rode rapidly, throwing the gates wide open as he passed through them, and reached Honaker's house in a few minutes. We give what follows in his own language: "Have an indistinct recollection of what occurred there, [Honaker's.] Don't know what purpose I had, except to see Honaker, and get him to right the great wrong. I think his wife told me he had gone to Monterey. I told her he had been talking scandalously about me. My feelings were awful. I think I rode fast. Have no recollection of seeing any one or meeting any one after I left Honaker's house until I saw Honaker. I met Honaker and Richardson at Stevens' barn, above Stevens' house. Have no recollection of going below Stevens' house. I told Honaker I wanted him to go with me, and right the wrong he had done in talking about me and mine. I told him he had ruined me and my family. He said he didn't have to go; that he was not afraid of me and my guns and pistols; that he didn't have to go. I told him that when he got drunk he let his mouth go off. He turned round, and put his hand back of him as though he was going to draw a pistol, and said, 'You are a d_____d lying son of a b_____;' and I shot. I thought he was going to shoot me, and carry out his threats, and, believing so, I shot. I told him that Hanna had just told me that he [Honaker] had told him the day before that I was keeping a whorehouse, and that my wife was assisting me; that I was *** my two cousins; and that he had pulled out his pistol, and threatened to give me the contents of it. *** My purpose in going to see him was for him to straighten up what he had started. I knew he was a dangerous man, and I took my gun to protect myself. He called me a son of a b_____ and a liar, and, I thought, was attempting to draw his pistol. He said he would face Hanna, and what he said first he would say last. He never denied at any time the slanderous things he had said. *** It was not my intention to shoot him when I met him, until the shot was fired." Richardson, who was by far the most important witness introduced for the state, as he alone was immediately with the parties at the time of the killing, was a brother-in-law of Honaker, but testifies on cross-examination as follows: "We met Massie 40 yards below Charles Stevens' stiles. (It was five hundred yards from where we first met Massie to the place of the...

To continue reading

Request your trial
14 cases
  • State v. Flory
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Wyoming
    • April 3, 1929
    ...... State, (Ala.) 11 So. 424; People v. Webster, (N. Y.) 34 N.E. 730; Shipp v. Com. (Ky.) 99 S.W. 945; Martin v. State, 51 S.W. 912; Massie v. Com. (Ky.) 24 S.W. 611; State v. Young, (Mo.) . 24 S.W. 1038; State v. Welch, (Mont.) 55 P. 927;. Gardom v. Woodard, (Kan.) 25 P. 199. ......
  • Thomas v. Commonwealth
    • United States
    • Court of Appeals of Kentucky
    • November 21, 1922
    ...... within the personal knowledge of the witness, and deposed to. by him before the jury, that it may know what weight to. attach to the opinion. Abbott v. Com., 107 Ky. 624,. 55 S.W. 196, 21 Ky. Law Rep. 1372; Phelps v. Com.,. 32 S.W. 470, 17 Ky. Law Rep. 706; Massie v. Com., 24. S.W. 611, 15 Ky. Law Rep. 562; Wright v. Com., 72. S.W. 340, 24 Ky. Law Rep. 1838; Buchannon v. Com.,. 86 Ky. 110, 5 S.W. 358, 9 Ky. Law Rep. 411; Brown v. Com., 14 Bush, 398. The new witnesses concur in deposing. that they will state that they have often seen the accused. under ......
  • State v. Punshon
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Missouri
    • November 5, 1894
    ...444; People v. Moyer, 43 N.W. 928; Sharp v. State, 10 S.W. 228; People v. Willard, 28 P. 585; People v. Wood, 27 N.E. 365; Massie v. Commonwealth, 24 S.W. 611; Kelley v. State, 24 S.W. 295. (3) The court erred in not admitting the evidence of Batcheller as an expert in firearms, as it was d......
  • Eaton v. Commonwealth
    • United States
    • Court of Appeals of Kentucky
    • May 31, 1929
    ...... immaterial how much surplus or unconsumed liquor they had,. and, on the whole, we do not see anything in the treatment of. defendant's counsel by the court that amounts to. prejudicial error. When we compare this treatment with that. treatment criticized by this court in the case of Massie. v. Com., 24 S.W. 611, 15 Ky. Law Rep. 562, the. difference is very evident. There the court said that he was. getting tired of being humbugged and bamboozled by the. counsel for the defendant, and that he had stood this as long. as he intended to. Nothing occurred on this trial which came. ......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT