Hawk v. Commonwealth

• Decision Date: 29 October 1940
• Citation: 284 Ky. 217
• Parties: Hawk v. Commonwealth.
• Court: United States State Supreme Court — District of Kentucky

284 Ky. 217

Hawk v. Commonwealth.

Court of Appeals of Kentucky.

October 29, 1940.

1. Homicide. — In a homicide case, proof of the corpus delicti necessitates proof both of a death and of a criminal agency as the cause thereof.

2. Criminal Law. — The commission of a crime may be proven by circumstantial evidence, subject to general rule that proof as consistent with absence of a crime as with the perpetration of one is insufficient.

3. Criminal Law. — A "confession" is a voluntary statement acknowledging the confessor's guilt of an offense or disclosing the evidence of the act and his participation therein.

4. Criminal Law. — An "admission" is distinguished from a "confession" in that the former is only a self-incriminating statement, short of acknowledgment of guilt, such as a statement of an isolated or independent act tending only to show guilt or criminal intent.

5. Criminal Law. — Where the only probative evidence presented by the commonwealth of the commission of offense charged, and of the accused's participation therein, was testimony as to alleged extra-judicial statement by accused detailing his participation in the slaying, trial court's failure to instruct jury in accordance with statute providing that unless a confession be made in open court, it will not warrant a conviction unless accompanied by other proof that such an offense has in fact been committed, was reversible error (Criminal Code of Practice, sec. 240).

6. Criminal Law. — Where aside from finding of dead body the only probative evidence of the commission of offense charged and of accused's guilt was the alleged statement by accused as to his participation in slaying, such statement constituted a "confession" within meaning of statute providing that unless a confession is made in open court it will not warrant a conviction unless accompanied by other proof that such an offense has in fact been committed as against contention that the statement was only an admission (Criminal Code of Practice, sec. 240).

Appeal from Pulaski Circuit Court.

Kennedy & Kennedy for appellant.

Hubert Meredith, Attorney General, and Jesse K. Lewis, Assistant Attorney General, for appellee.

Before J.S. Sandusky, Judge.

OPINION OF THE COURT BY STANLEY, COMMISSIONER.

Reversing.

The case presents a mystery. It remains clothed in grave doubt notwithstanding the verdict of the jury.

In the morning of Thanksgiving day, 1939, the body of a man was found hanging to the limb of a tree on the side of a private lane leading from the Parkers' Mill Road about a quarter of a mile from U.S. Highway No. 27 in Pulaski County. It was hanging by a piece of barbed wire. The limb was parallel with, above and about a foot over from a fence from which the strand had been taken. There was red mud on the top wire and a post and a mark of the wire on similar mud on the soles of the man's shoes. The fence was about four feet high and the body was two and one-half feet above the ground.

The body was identified as being that of Jack Guffey who had lived in Cleveland, Ohio. On Wednesday, the day before, he had left home ostensibly to go to work, but his wife felt that he was going elsewhere, one of the reasons being that he had awakened his two and a half year old child and kissed her goodbye. She received a letter from him postmarked at Medina, Ohio, at 12:30 p.m., that day. It was addressed to both his wife and child and began: "I am all broken up and awfully sorry for what I have brought on you and the baby and myself." It continued with an expression of remorse over his marital infidelity and the suggestion of a venereal disease. He stated that he was enclosing his "pay stubs," saying that would be enough to keep his baby and wife until she could withdraw some savings the next month, and he told her where she could find $125 concealed at home. He expressed regret over the necessity of having to take "that cash," but felt it was necessary for his use until he could find work, and stated that when he did he would start "sending to you and the baby." He felt "awfully sorry about everything and my job at the shop" and over having told something about "Uncle Joe," which had been done because he was "easily swayed." The letter continued:

"I feel so bad about how the boys treated me at the shop for I am really not bad at heart and anyone who knows me will say so. I must close and get this mailed so take good care as you can of Margaret and I know my folks will help you all they can."

Another letter was received by the wife postmarked Columbus, Ohio, at 5 p.m., the same day. He had forgotten to enclose the "pay stubs" in the first letter and was sending them. He wrote:

"I can always get by somehow alone but its lots harder for you with the baby. I am missing you both more and more. I guess I will go by home for awhile and see how they are. You know I won't never let you and Margaret down. Tell Chick and John we will probably get together some more sometime. Bye both of you until later. With love, Jack."

His widow testified on the trial of the appellant, Monroe Hawk, charged with the murder of Guffey, that there was never any trouble at home and that her husband had not seemed worried over anything. He had enclosed $40 with the second letter. His parents lived at Athens, Tennessee, which could be reached by Highway No. 27.

There were a few superficial wounds or marks on the body, none of which could possibly have caused his death. One of these was a slight wound on his wrist which had bled some, but was not deep enough to have been dangerous. There were some marks on his arm which could have been made by a hypodermic needle. There were two or four small wounds or lacerations in his neck, but no blood around them. These were apparently caused by the wire and a barb in it. The coroner testified there was a little bruised place on the man's face, but other witnesses had not seen it. No autopsy was performed. His hands were not tied and the situation gave no indication of any sort of struggle either of the body or by anyone around the place. The body was slightly warm when discovered. In the man's automobile about 100 yards away were found a small pen knife with a little blood on it; two dram glasses, but without odor; a bill-fold and some change scattered on the seat of the car amounting to a little over a dollar.

Dr. Spradlin, who had seen the body at the undertaker's shop, was not asked about the extent or character of the wounds in the neck but only whether or not "if deep wounds were made on the neck of a living person" they would bleed. He answered that they would profusely, but if made on a dead body they would not bleed because of the absence of circulation. He and two other doctors expressed the opinion that from the way the body was hanging, as shown in the photographs, death would not have resulted from strangulation or immediately but from exhaustion and it would have been a matter of an hour or two. Dr. Wahle thought there might be some doubt whether death could have been caused in this manner, judging by the photographs. He stated that even if committing suicide the body would have shown some involuntary resistance or struggle. Dr. Cundiff testified that it was possible the man's head and neck changed positions from the moment "he took the leap" until the photographs were taken. He further testified without objection that a man could not have stood on the wire fence and adjusted the noose although the doctor saw where some steps had been made on the wire and a dirt stain on the man's shoes. Thus the evidence of the commonwealth tended to establish contradictory causes, namely, that the hanging was not the cause of the man's death and that there was nothing on or about the body that could have caused it. Yet, here was a dead man.

The evidence tending to connect the defendant with the death of Guffey is equally unsatisfactory. Everett Jones testified that on that Wednesday night he and Hawk and his sister had been to a roadhouse and when they had returned to Somerset the defendant who was drunk got out of the car at a certain point about 11 o'clock, which was convenient to his home. On Friday night the three of them again went out to that roadhouse. On the return trip, in discussing the finding of Guffey's body, about which there had been a great deal of talk around town, Hawk, who was drunk, said:

"He was coming back toward town, and that when he got along about where the old bank used to be, down here on Main Street, a Ford car come along, and they said to him, `Boy, do you want to take a ride,' and he said he got in the car — he said there was four men and a woman in the car — and he said they come on down to Johnson's Block, and there was a car with an Ohio license come along, and they followed it. He said it was a Chevrolet Car — he said they went on out to the lane there that goes to Parkers' Mill, and went on out there to where this man was hung — and he said they took the man out of the car, and took him over there and hung him."

Hawk told them that they had hung the man for a "little over $100.00" and left some change of a little over a dollar on the automobile seat. He had related that on the return from the murder they had told the...