People v. Jackson

• Decision Date: 30 May 1905
• Citation: 182 N.Y. 66,74 N.E. 565
• Parties: PEOPLE v. JACKSON.
• Court: New York Court of Appeals Court of Appeals

182 N.Y. 66

74 N.E. 565

PEOPLE

v.JACKSON.

Court of Appeals of New York.

May 30, 1905.

Appeal from Court of General Sessions, New York County.

Charles Jackson was convicted of murder in the first degree, and appeals. Affirmed.

Hal Bell and Phil Waldheimer, for appellant.

William Travers Jerome, Dist. Atty. (Howard S. Gans, of counsel), for the People.

BARTLETT, J.

The indictment is in the common-law form, containing three counts, and in substance charges that the defendant on the 10th day of July, 1903, did willfully, feloniously, and of his malice aforethought, beat, strike, and wound one Charles W. Roxbury with a club, or some instrument unknown, upon his head, causing divers mortal wounds and fractures, from which he died on the 11th day of July, 1903. A jury convicted the defendant, a colored man, of murder in the first degree, and we are now called upon to review the record of the trial.

The evidence of the people discloses a case of highway robbery, in which the assailant inflicted upon the deceased fatal wounds, causing his death in about four hours after the assault. The murder was committed between half past 8 and 9 o'clock on Friday evening, July 10, 1903; the victim dying at about one o'clock the next morning. The deceased is described as a middle-aged man, rather slight, and at the time of the assault in good health. The scene of the tragedy was on River avenue, in the borough of the Bronx, city of New York, at a point where 166th street, as shown on the city map, intersects it, but at the time of this occurrence was not opened through. The locality is described as lonely, imperfectly lighted, and to a great extent unimproved. On the evening in question the deceased, accompanied by a young woman (Miss Thomasch), left the elevated train at McComb's Dam Bridge (the new Central Bridge), walked across it and down the steps from the bridge into 161st street, and through that street to Gerard avenue, then through Gerard avenue to 165th street, and thence to River avenue. Miss Thomasch was the only witness of this assault, and was sworn on the trial by the people. She thus testified upon her direct examination: ‘Then we walked north on River avenue-on the west side of the avenue. Mr. Roxbury was on my left, and I was on his right. Mr. Roxbury was on the inside, and I was on the outside, or the curb side, of the street-Mr. Roxbury near the fence, and I nearer the curb. There were no people on River avenue at that time. As the street was deserted, we turned to go south on River avenue, and we saw a man and woman walking north about a block away; and, when Mr. Roxbury and I saw this man and woman coming toward us, we turned around and walked north again on River avenue. There were no lights on River avenue. It was a bright night. River avenue is about a block away eastwardly from Jerome avenue. The country about there is open. There are electric lights on Jerome avenue. As we proceeded north on River avenue (as I have stated, Mr. Roxbury was on my left side, and I was on the curb side), a man came from behind me, struck me on my right arm, faced me with a club in his hand, and went to strike Mr. Roxbury. Mr. Roxbury fell back. I saw the man, and see him now. He is sitting in front of me. (Indicating the defendant.) * * * When this man came from behind, around in front of me, hitting my right arm, and with a club raised, going to strike Mr. Roxbury, as I have stated, I ran for assistance north on River avenue to 167th street, and found two men that I didn't then know. I spoke to them. They left me sitting on the stoop, and they went down on River avenue. They came back, and I had a further conversation with them, and then I went with the two men down on River avenue to the place of assault. * * * When we reached this spot one of the men put his hand on the fence. He showed me his hand, and it was red, and the fence was wet with blood. The other man struck a match. We could not find Mr. Roxbury, and we turned, and they brought me back to Jerome avenue. They put me on a car. * * * I went home. The assault took place between half-past 8 and 9 o'clock. * * * What I have described as a club in the hands of the assailant, I merely noticed as club; one that might be a policeman's club-about that thickness and length. It appeared to be a wooden club, and of a dark color. It was a foot and a half long, or about two feet.’ The witness testified that she proceeded toward the east side of the city, where she resided with her mother, and had no knowledge of what occurred subsequently during this night.

It was proved that the deceased walked over a mile to his residence, No. 1817 Crane place, in the Bronx, notwithstanding a profuse hemorrhage, which left drops of blood from the place of the assault to the steps of his house. The surgeon who conducted the autopsy testified that the skull on the left side was ‘fractured in so many different directions that one of the pieces of bone could be lifted right out.’ On his arrival home the deceased was placed in bed, soon became unconscious, was attended by two physicians, and died about 1 o'clock the next morning, without regaining consciousness. So far as this record discloses, he gave no account of the manner in which he received his injuries.

Miss Thomasch was cross-examined at great length, and admitted that at the time of the assault she did not know whether the assailant was white or colored, and that she had but a ‘passing glance,’ as the incident was very brief. She also testified that the assailant's hat was drawn down nearly to his eyes, and that the collar of his coat was turned up around his throat, and only a portion of his face was visible. She further testified that it was the man's build, his general appearance, his soft hat, and his expressive eyes that led her to subsequently identify him. She also swore that it was a bright night, and one could see distinctly, and that the moon was rising. As to the place of the assault, she said that it was deserted, but not particularly dark.

The learned recorder, who tried this case with great fairness, seeking to guard the defendant's rights in every way, cross-examined Miss Thomasch at considerable length; confining his inquiries as to the accuracy of her identification of the defendant at the time of the assault. In the course of this inquiry she added to her original statement that she heard the assailant utter the word ‘you’ as he approached the deceased. The court impressed upon the witness again and again that she stood in a position of terrible responsibility, and that her answers were likely to be matter of life and death to the defendant, and asked her if she was perfectly certain of his identity. On each occasion she said, in substance, that she clearly identified the defendant. The court then asked this question: ‘Q. Is there anything about this whole matter, Miss Thomasch, that you have failed to state-anything now known to you, on your conscience, under the obligation of your oath-that you have failed to state to the jury? A. Nothing. Q. Have you stated every atom of knowledge in your possession? A. Everything; yes.’ The learned judge closed his examination with this question: ‘Q. Now, if you have any lurking doubt in your mind as to the defendant being the man, I want you to state it now? A. My conscience is perfectly clear, and I feel I am not doing the man an injustice.’

The defendant was arrested on the 17th of July, one week after the assault, at his residence, No. 538 West Fiftieth street. He was then taken to the Tremont Police Station, where it was arranged that Miss Thomasch should be brought into a room where the defendant was standing with other men, and ascertain if it was possible for her to identify him. Miss Thomasch thus states: ‘The next time I saw the defendant after the assault was at the Tremont Police Station. There were eight men-four white and four colored men. I was brought into the room where they were, and picked out this defendant, and identified him as the man that I saw attack Mr. Roxbury. I picked him out from among eight men-four white and four colored. I had not seen any picture of the defendant prior to that, or heard any description of him.’ The police officials confirmed this statement on the stand.

The case of the people rests not only upon the evidence of Miss Thomasch relating to the time of the assault, and her subsequent identification of the defendant, but upon the fact, conceded at the trial, that the defendant was in possession of the watch and pocketbook of the deceased the morning after the murder. The defendant, while admitting this fact, sought to explain it; he having been sworn as a witness for the defense.

At this point it leads to a more orderly development of the facts to refer to the testimony of Lucy Mitchell, the mistress of the defendant, with whom he was living on the 10th day of July, 1903. She testified that the defendant had been in the city for some three days prior to July 10, 1903; that he told her that he had been in Buffalo; that he had been taking care of horses out there. She stated that he left his house at about half-past 5 on the afternoon of July 10th, and did not return until about a quarter to 10 that night. She also testified to a conversation she had with the defendant that day in regard to money matters; that she informed him they owed the landlord for rent; also on furniture bought on the installment plan, and claims for clothes purchased for him and herself, and some other matters; that she cried over the matter, and, in substance, expressed her dissatisfaction; that he told her he would try and borrow the money. Referring to the defendant's return the night of the murder at about a quarter to 10, she said that she admitted him to the house; that the light in the room was very dim, and she neither spoke to him nor touched him, but went to bed; that she arose between 9 and 10 the next morning, and when she came...