People v. Jayne

Decision Date02 September 1977
Docket NumberNo. 59168,59168
Citation52 Ill.App.3d 990,10 Ill.Dec. 827,368 N.E.2d 422
Parties, 10 Ill.Dec. 827 PEOPLE of the State of Illinois, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Silas JAYNE, Joseph LaPlaca and Julius Barnes, Defendants-Appellants.
CourtUnited States Appellate Court of Illinois

George C. Howard, Patrick A. Tuite, and Chester Slaughter, Chicago, for defendants-appellants.

Bernard Carey, State's Atty., Chicago (Laurence J. Bolon, Larry L. Thompson, Renee G. Goldfarb, Chicago, of counsel), for plaintiff-appellee.

BUA, Justice:

Defendants, Julius Barnes, Silas Jayne, and Joseph LaPlaca were indicted for the murder of George Jayne (Ill.Rev.Stat.1969, ch. 38, par. 9-1) and for conspiracy to commit the murder of George Jayne (Ill.Rev.Stat.1969, ch. 38, par. 8-2). On April 28, 1973, following a jury trial in the Circuit Court of Cook County, defendant Barnes was convicted of murder and defendants Jayne and LaPlaca were convicted of conspiracy. No other verdicts were returned by the jury. Defendant Barnes was sentenced to 25 to 35 years imprisonment and defendants Jayne and LaPlaca were each sentenced to six to twenty years in the penitentiary. From the judgments of conviction and the sentences thereon, the defendants appeal. No issue is raised regarding the sufficiency of the indictments.

The major issues presented for review, and applicable to all defendants unless otherwise specified, are: 1) whether the guilty verdicts of defendants Jayne and LaPlaca are legally consistent and responsive to the issues at trial; 2) whether the court erred in instructing the jury as to the elements of conspiracy; 3) whether the court erred in denying the motions for severance of defendants Jayne and LaPlaca; 4) whether it was error to admit into evidence post-conspiratorial statements by defendant Barnes; 5) whether the court properly denied defendant Barnes' motion to suppress his confession; 6) whether it was error to admit into evidence proof of prior threats made by defendant Jayne; 7) whether the court erred in allowing proof of the corpus delicti of the murder and the facts of death from different witnesses; and, whether certain prosecutorial references during examination of witnesses as to the cause and fact of death were so prejudicial as to constitute reversible error; 8) whether the court properly applied People v. Nuccio (1969), 43 Ill.2d 375, 253 N.E.2d 353 and People v. Burbank (1972), 53 Ill.2d 261, 291 N.E.2d 161 in sustaining prosecution objections to certain questions propounded a State's witness on cross-examination; 9) whether it was error to allow the State to impeach a witness when the witness had previously testified on behalf of the prosecution; 10) whether the trial court improperly admitted into evidence certain expert testimony regarding the growth potential of corn; 11) whether the court erred in denying defendants Jayne and Barnes' section 72 petition (Ill.Rev.Stat.1969, ch. 110, par. 72) seeking an evidentiary hearing on the issues of the possible use of illegally seized wiretapping evidence against them and on the purported suppression of evidence favorable to them by the prosecution; and, finally, 12) whether defendants Jayne and Barnes were respectively proved guilty of conspiracy and murder beyond a reasonable doubt.

At approximately 8:15 p. m. on October 28, 1970 George Jayne was shot and killed. The incident occurred while the deceased sat in the basement of his home, located in the Inverness section of Palatine, Illinois, playing cards with his wife, Marian, his daughter, Linda Wright, and his son-in-law, Mickey Wright. Earlier in the evening the family had gathered to celebrate George Jayne Jr.'s sixteenth birthday.

Officer Michael McDonald of the Palatine Police Department was the first officer to arrive at the scene. Officer McDonald testified that he proceeded to the basement and observed the victim lying on the floor in a pool of blood. He attempted mouth-to-mouth resuscitation and heart massage. Shortly afterwards, a doctor and ambulance arrived and removed the victim from the basement. At this time Officer McDonald observed a bullet hole in a basement window directly above the card table. He "sealed off" the basement and went outside to inspect the area around the window. There he observed footprint impressions in the grass near the window. He secured the area and remained there until help arrived.

Palatine Police Detective Richard J. Sikorski testified that he arrived on the scene at 10:15 p. m. with a third officer. According to Sikorski, they both observed the foot impressions, which, because of their "larger gait", appeared to be those of someone running "back towards the street".

Early the following morning, Timothy Dixon, a criminalist for the State Crime Laboratory, arrived at the Jayne residence. Dixon took photographs of the area, and found fabric impressions and a partial fingerprint in the mud near the window through which George Jayne was shot. However, the fingerprint later proved insufficient to either identify or eliminate the maker.

At trial, the State called Melvin Adams, an accomplice to the murder who had been granted immunity from prosecution. Adams testified that in November, 1969, while employed by Darling & Co. in Chicago, he met with Edwin Nefeld at the Hub Restaurant, in Markham, Illinois. Nefeld was an officer of the Markham Police Department and the owner of the South Suburban Auto Shop. During their conversation, Nefeld told Adams that he had been hired to kill a man but that he could not locate him. Believing that Adams had "syndicate connections" Nefeld asked him if he knew any "hit men." Adams replied that he did not know any "hit men", but with further details he might agree to make the "hit" himself. Nefeld told him that it was Silas Jayne who wanted the "hit" made, and he explained who Silas and George Jayne were. Adams agreed to take the "hit" if he could talk to someone first. About one week later Nefeld called Adams to tell him he had arranged a meeting with "Si's man." After meeting at the Hub Restaurant, Nefeld and Adams went to the Flare Restaurant about a mile away. There, Nefeld introduced Adams to defendant Joseph LaPlaca. They discussed the details, including the existence of a feud between the brothers. Before agreeing to take the "hit," Adams requested "front money." LaPlaca told him that because "Si had given front money before to some other guy * * * (who) had run out on him * * * " none would be forthcoming. Adams and LaPlaca then agreed to the sum of $10,000 as a "reasonable price" for killing George Jayne. (Nefeld subsequently was indicted for conspiracy and pleaded guilty thereto.)

Several days later, Adams met LaPlaca at a prearranged site in Elgin. LaPlaca drove Adams around the area, pointing out places George Jayne frequented. Adams and LaPlaca together made a total of approximately six such trips to familiarize Adams with the area. In February, 1970, Adams began making the trips alone.

In either late February or early March, 1970, LaPlaca, at Adams' urging, arranged a meeting with Silas Jayne. The meeting took place in the parking lot of the Blue Moon Restaurant in Silas Jayne's car. According to Adams, Silas told him he had had other men on the job, that he had been trying for ten years to kill his brother, and that there would be two other "hits" after George. Silas also promised that Adams would always be working for him, and that he would provide everything Adams would " * * * need, you know, a string of lawyers, money, anything." At the meeting, Adams suggested George's house as the best location for the killing, and that, if necessary, he would kill any witnesses. Jayne then supplied Adams with a .38 revolver and a .30 Enforcer and two ammunition clips. Jayne told Adams he had filed the serial numbers off of the .38 so that "you don't have to worry about it," but that if Adams used the .30 Enforcer, "make sure you get rid of it" because it could be traced to him.

Thereafter, Adams continued his trips to the Elgin area in search of George Jayne. Occasionally he would meet with LaPlaca. They would discuss the progress being made, and LaPlaca would reimburse Adams for his toll and gas expenses, and collect the receipts for the same. Fearing Adams' car, a 1969 white over red Ford LTD, would be spotted and traced, LaPlaca, on approximately fifteen occasions, provided Adams with rental cars from an area dealership.

In April, 1970, Adams and LaPlaca decided to travel to out-of-state horse shows in their efforts to locate George Jayne. George and Silas were rivals in the horse show business, wherein horses are trained and presented at shows throughout the country. Witnesses testified at trial that prize money is awarded at the shows, and that there is a lucrative market for championship horses.

Thereafter, Adams and LaPlaca flew to Texas where they observed George at a horse show in San Antonio. Two weeks later, both men drove to New Orleans in Adams' car for another horse show. They registered in a motel, Adams as "Merle Evans" and LaPlaca as "Joe Donato." Adams rented a car in his own name, and they attended the show. Again Adams was unable to make the "hit." LaPlaca flew back to Chicago and Adams drove.

In June, 1970, Adams told LaPlaca he wanted to get out of the "hit." LaPlaca told him Silas would go to $20,000, and Adams continued his search for George.

In July, 1970, Adams told LaPlaca the job would require two men. LaPlaca, after checking with Silas, agreed and raised the price to $30,000 for the "hit." Thereafter, for $10,000, Adams recruited defendant Julius Barnes, a fellow employee at Darling & Co., whom he had known for approximately eight years, to make the "hit."

Driving a rental car obtained from LaPlaca, Adams and Barnes made several trips to the Inverness area. On the second trip, after parking near the George Jayne residence and viewing the house, Barnes told Adams they would need a high...

To continue reading

Request your trial
26 cases
  • People v. Forcum
    • United States
    • United States Appellate Court of Illinois
    • November 7, 2003
    ...to do violence to the person eventually slain is admissible to show malice and criminal intent. People v. Jayne, 52 Ill.App.3d 990, 1007, 10 Ill.Dec. 827, 368 N.E.2d 422, 434 (1977); People v. Wood, 72 Ill.App.3d 919, 29 Ill.Dec. 47, 391 N.E.2d 206 (1979). However, in the case at bar, the c......
  • People v. Barrow
    • United States
    • Illinois Supreme Court
    • October 25, 1989
    ...admissible to the extent it is "necessarily involved in the proper presentation of the State's case." (People v. Jayne (1977), 52 Ill.App.3d 990, 1010, 10 Ill.Dec. 827, 368 N.E.2d 422. See also People v. Cunningham (1984), 130 Ill.App.3d 254, 266, 85 Ill.Dec. 138, 473 N.E.2d 506; People v. ......
  • Universal Outdoor, Inc. v. City of Des Plaines, 1-91-2589
    • United States
    • United States Appellate Court of Illinois
    • September 11, 1992
    ...433 N.E.2d 253; Brockmeyer, 18 Ill.2d at 505, 165 N.E.2d 294; Glenn, 9 Ill.2d at 340, 137 N.E.2d 336; People v. Jayne (1977), 52 Ill.App.3d 990, 1015, 10 Ill.Dec. 827, 368 N.E.2d 422. A section 2-1401 petition is not intended to provide for review of an order from which a party could have t......
  • People v. Lampkin, 52676
    • United States
    • Illinois Supreme Court
    • November 10, 1983
    ...or criminal intent. For support, the State cites People v. Lion (1957), 10 Ill.2d 208, 139 N.E.2d 757, and People v. Jayne (1977), 52 Ill.App.3d 990, 10 Ill.Dec. 827, 368 N.E.2d 422, which held that prior threats of an accused to do violence to the person eventually slain are admissible as ......
  • 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