Campbell v. People
Decision Date | 22 November 1895 |
Citation | 42 N.E. 123,159 Ill. 9 |
Parties | CAMPBELL v. PEOPLE. |
Court | Illinois Supreme Court |
OPINION TEXT STARTS HERE
Error to circuit court, Hamilton county; C. C. Boggs, Judge.
Indictment of John Campbell for murder. Defendant was convicted, and he brings error. Reversed.T. B. Stelle, for plaintiff in error.
Maurice T. Maloney, Atty. Gen., and Isaac H. Webb, State's Atty. (T. J. Scofield and M. L. New ell, of counsel), for the People.
John Campbell, the plaintiff in error, and Nancy Cook, the prosecuting witness, were jointly indicted at the February term, 1894, of the Hamilton circuit court, for the murder of the newly-born babe of said Nacy. Campbell alone was tried. He was convicted, and sentenced to imprisonment for 14 years in the penitentiary, principally upon her testimony, there being little or no other evidence tending to fasten the crime on him. She testified in substance as follows: cried directly after it was born, and before it was separated. He took it out and wrapped it up. Saw him go out of the door, with his back towards me. That was the south door. I lay with my head north, and he went out at the south door. Not a word was said betwixt us. I had no idea what defendant was going to do with child when he took it. Child was born naturally, but it come too quick. After defendant went out with child, he came back, in about thirty minutes, and asked if I wanted anything. Told him no, and he went to bed. My little boy was in bed with me when the child was born. He was asleep. Defendant made fire next morning at about 4 o'clock, and told me to tell his wife I had a chill. I got up at 11 or 12 o'clock next day. Told defendant's wife had chill. She went to her mothers that day. Afterbirth came from me while she was at her mother's. I was walking around in house, and it dropped, and I picked it up and put it in the heating stove. After the afterbirth dropped I lay down awhile, and then got up and got supper. Bedclothing did not get soiled. Was nothing on the sheets. Was nothing about the bed. I had on several undergarments. I had talk with Thomas Campbell once. Did not tell him that it was just a little wad of something that came from me, and that there was no more life in it than a stick of wood. I told him John Campbell had accused me of concealing my child, and had kept Uncle Joe from going on my bond. I had conversation with Sheriff Crouch. Never told him child was born dead. The trouble between me and Mrs. Campbell was, she was jealous-hearted, and quarreled and kept up a fuss, and was determined to carry news betwixt me and John. She got mad at me first about Jimmy. I got mad at her because she had a high temper and would fuss and quarrel. I did not state on my trial before justice of the peace what I stated here. I testified there. Don't have to tell to whom I first told it. I never told any one that I was going to swear against John Campbell. I told Van Winkle about it. I know I am charged with the murder of my child. Rosina Campbell did it. She got out writ for that, I understand. Mrs. Campbell stated in court that I was in a family way. I understood they were trying me for the murder of my baby, and therefore I went before the grand jury to tell them the true facts. I understand I am indicted for the murder of my baby. I did not harm it. He carried it out. I never saw the child. I only saw the bulk of it, wrapped up in a quilt. When I got up I looked, and the sheet was not soiled. Nobody promised to dismiss my murder case if I would testify in this case. I did not tell this before because I did not want to tell all I knowed. Van Winkle said I could acknowledge to it. I did not want to tell it before the justice of the peace. Defendant told me once that when the child was born he would take it where I would not see it. Never spoke to him since about it. Defendant said that if I thought I was going to be sick he would send for some one. He came in and asked me if I wanted anything, and I told him no; that is all. I never could get a word of secret talk with him after that. I did not tell about this at my first trial. They did not ask me about it. Never got mad at defendant. He got mad at me. It was his wife that was the trouble. Don't think there would have been any trouble if he had not got any wife. His wife has stirred up trouble ever since she has been in it. I want to punish the one that helped do the work. Mrs. Campbell kept trotting back and forth to her mother's. She went every morning. I do not know exactly what the nature of an oath is. Do not know the consequences of swearing a lie. Have no idea of any punishment but cross-examination. Do not know the nature of an oath.' Said that before giving her evidence she heard the state's attorney say that her evidence should not be used against her on her trial. Testified with that understanding, and on advice of her counsel. Understood that she was to be protected. Other witnesses testified that in October Nancy Cook appeared to be pregnant; also that plaintiff in error had said that he believed she had had a bastard child and concealed it; also that he testified before the justice of the peace that on the night in question he heard a noise; that his wife called his attention to it, and said, ‘Dick has got her baby,’ but that he replied that he thought it was a cat; that he always talked freely about it, and told the same story; that search had been made, but no trace of the child was found.
On behalf of defendant below, Willie Williams testified: ...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
McCue v. State
......This question was specifically passed on in the case of Campbell v. State, 8 Tex. App. 90, and the valise and contents held admissible on the question of identity of deceased. See, also, Wharton's Crim. Law, § ...And this rule is the rule also in other states: Douglass v. State, 91 Ark. 492, 121 S. W. 923; High v. State, 12 Ariz. 146, 100 Pac. 448; People v. McDonell, 47 Cal. 134; Liggett v. People, 26 Colo. 364, 58 Pac. 144; Long v. State, 42 Fla. 612, 28 South. 855; Watson v. State, 118 Ga. 83, 44 S. ......
-
Government of Virgin Islands v. Harris
...... Instead, she arrived on August 14, carrying with her a number of packages for several people in St. Thomas from their relatives in St. Kitts. Raphello Harris, Jr. was unaware that his mother was arriving a day earlier than she had told him. ... was having sex with defendant's wife; red stains were found on mattress and trunk of defendant's car although blood tests were negative); Campbell v. State, 500 N.E.2d 174 (Ind.1986) (defendant admitted to crime on tape; accomplice testified that badly beaten victim was held under water and was ......
-
People v. Williams
...... The King v. Hindmarsh, 2 Leach 569; 168 Eng.Rep. 387 (1792); United States v. Williams, No. 16707, 28 Fed.Cas. 636 (1858); State v. Lamb, 28 Mo. 218 (1859); Campbell v. People, 159 Ill. 9, 42 N.E. 123 (1895). More modern decisions likewise rejected the "no body-no corpus [422 Mich. 390] delicti" argument: Commonwealth v. Lettrich, 346 Pa. 497, 31 A.2d 155 (1943); Warmke v. Commonwealth, 297 Ky. 649, 180 S.W.2d 872 (1944); People v. Cullen, 37 Cal.2d 614, ......
-
People v. Ehlert
......Obviously, this has never been the rule. As the majority must know, the State is not even required to produce the victim's body to prove corpus delicti. Campbell v. People, 159 Ill. 9, 22-23, 42 N.E. 123 (1895); People v. Faulkner, 186 Ill.App.3d 1013, 1026, 134 Ill.Dec. 683, 542 N.E.2d 1190 (1989) ; People v. Avery, 88 Ill.App.3d 771, 777, 44 Ill.Dec. 1, 410 N.E.2d 1093 (1980) . Obviously, in cases where the body is not recovered there can be no ......