People v. Wesley

Decision Date18 November 1959
Docket NumberNo. 35300,35300
Citation18 Ill.2d 138,163 N.E.2d 500
PartiesPEOPLE of the State of Illinois, Defendant in Error, v. Robert B. WESLEY, Plaintiff in Error.
CourtIllinois Supreme Court

Eugene J. Babiarz, Chicago, for plaintiff in error.

Grenville Beardsley, Atty. Gen., and Benjamin S. Adamowski, State's Attorney, Chicago (Fred G. Leach and William H. South, Asst. Attys. Gen., and Francis X. Riley, and William W. Winterhoff, Asst. State's Attys., Chicago, of counsel), for the People.

DAVIS, Justice.

The defendant, Robert B. Wesley, was indicted in the criminal court of Cook County for the murder of George Washington and waived a jury trial. The court found him guilty, denied his post-trial motions and sentenced him to confinement in the penitentiary for a term of 14 years.

Defendant admitted that he stabbed Washington in the chest with a screwdriver and it is undisputed that Washington died within a short time thereafter and that his death was caused by a stab wound near the upper edge of the sternum which produced a rent in the ascending aorta and pulmonary artery.

Defendant claims that he struck the blow in self-defense and that the killing was therefore justified; that the evidence did not establish his guilt of the crime charged beyond a reasonable doubt, in that there were no facts or circumstances denoting malice aforethought; that he was denied a fair trial by certain conduct of the trial judge; and that the court erred in its rulings on the admission and exclusion of evidence.

The three principal occurrence witnesses for the People were Pauline Wesley, Florence Brown and Audrey Williams, married women who went to the Off Corner Tavern together on the evening of August 10, 1956, at about 11:00 p. m. Mrs. Brown and Mrs. Williams stated that they were out for the evening with the permission of their respective husbands. Mrs. Wesley, who was then pregnant, married defendant in December, 1955, but had been separated from him since March, 1956. After arriving at the tavern they met Washington, who, according to Mrs. Williams, was a mutual friend of her husband and herself. The four sat at a table drinking beer. Later, Washington introduced a man named Roosevelt who joined the party. When the Off Corner Tavern closed at 2:00 a. m. Washington suggested that they go to the C & C Lounge which was located at the corner of South Cottage Grove Avenue and 65th Street in the city of Chicago. The party of five drove there in Roosevelt's car and arrived at about 3:00 a. m.

There were two entrances to the lounge, one at 6517 and the other at 6519 South Cottage Grove. The first led to a bar room and the next to an adjoining restaurant. A corridor connected the rear of the restaurant with a large ballroom and a check room. The ballroom was located back of the tavern and restaurant. It was equipped with tables and space was reserved for dancing. An orchestra stand was at the rear of the ballroom and a ladies restroom was located to the left of it.

Mrs. Wesley testified that when the party arrived there were no seats; that she and the two men stood in the tavern waiting while Mrs. Williams and Mrs. Brown went to the restroom, and that she finally took a seat at the bar. After she had been there five or ten minutes she saw her husband enter with a man named Kenny. Washington and Roosevelt were standing nearby at the time. Mrs. Wesley further stated that defendant came over and said that he wanted to talk to her; that she told him she had nothing to say whereupon he jerked her off the stool and pulled her outside; and that, after some conversation, he told her that he would give her some money but had to cash a check and they re-entered the building through the restaurant door for that purpose.

Defendant was unable to cash the check in the restaurant, and finally obtained the money from a girl employee at the bar. Mrs. Wesley and defendant then went through the corridor and into the ballroom. They sat with Kenny at a table at the back of the room near the entrance. Defendant ordered three bottles of beer and told Mrs. Wesley that he wanted her to accompany him when he left the premises. She replied that she would leave with her friends who had brought her.

Meanwhile, Mrs. Williams, Mrs. Brown, Washington and Roosevelt had been seated at a nearby table, separated by a narrow aisle. Mrs. Wesley testified that Mrs. Brown, who was her sister-in-law, came over and asked the witness to accompany her to the restroom. As they started in that direction and were passing the table where Mrs. Williams, Roosevelt and Washington were seated, Mrs. Williams asked Mrs. Wesley if she was going to leave with them. Mrs. Wesley replied that she wanted to, but didn't want to start anything and defendant thereupon jumped to his feet, said: 'She is not going anywhere!' and rushed over and stabbed Washington while he was seated.

Mrs. Wesley testified that this happened about ten or fifteen feet from where she was standing; and that she saw defendant strike Washington in the chest with an object he held in his right hand, but she couldn't see it well enough to tell what it was. She was positive that prior to the occurrence there had been no conversation between those seated at the two tables.

She further testified that Washington said nothing to defendant prior to the stabbing; that she saw nothing in Washington's hands at the time; that he was 'just sitting there;' and that when Washington was struck he fell over backward to the floor and his chair fell with him. After the assault, Mrs. Wesley stated that she saw several men 'rush' defendant out of the place after which she accompanied Mrs. Brown to the rest room and later left the building with her. An extensive cross-examination served only to emphasize that the witness was in a position to see and hear that which she had testified to in her direct examination.

The testimony of Mrs. Williams corroborated the statements of Mrs. Wesley relative to the occurrence and antecedent events. She testified additionally that Washington fell to the floor in a sitting position after he had been assaulted; that defendant was rushed out of the place by several men and she tried to follow but was shoved back into the restaurant; and that when she returned she found Washington crawling in the corridor, 'cut and bleeding.' She also stated that she called the police and an ambulance, but that an employee named Ashley took Washington to the hospital in his car; that she and several others went along; and that a doctor pronounced Washington dead on arrival and she later saw his body there.

Mrs. Williams also related that she had been in defendant's home in October of 1955; that defendant then showed her some sort of weapon with a long thin blade on a handle like a cane which turned. She further stated that a man known to her as Woodrow Peete showed her a pocket knife after the stabbing which he stated belonged to deceased; that she asked him whether Washington had the knife out and he told her he didn't; and that this knife was closed when she saw it. She saw no object in deceased's hands when he was struck by defendant and he did not strike back. On cross-examination she admitted that before the assault, and as defendant approached her table, she warned Washington that defendant might have a knife. She denied that Washington said: 'I have a knife too,' but admitted that she had seen Washington's knife prior to the night in question.

Mrs. Brown's version of the stabbing was essentially that related by Mrs. Williams and Mrs. Wesley. She testified additionally that she heard defendant say that Pauline 'wasn't going anywhere' as he started toward the other table; that she pulled Mrs. Wesley into the rest room after seeing the assault; that when they returned later they saw a pool of blood in the corridor in front of the check room; and that she took Mrs. Wesley home in a cab.

Several police officers testified for the People. William McArdle, attached to the Woodlawn station, testified that on August 11, 1956, at about 3:30 a. m. he received a call from the Woodlawn Hospital; and that he went there and ascertained that a man who had been brought in was pronounced dead on arrival. He also testified that a man known to him as Jake Fuller handed him a small pocket knife which he said had been given to him by the deceased. It was about three inches long and closed at the time.

Another officer, Matthew A. Ferguson, testified that on August 13, 1956, at about 2:30 p. m. he received a telephone call from a friend who operated a restaurant stating that defendant was there and wanted to give himself up and that he went to the restaurant and arrested defendant. He testified that defendant told him, among other things, that he had picked up a screwdriver which he found in the street before entering the C & C Lounge; that while there, he and his wife were seated at a table; that she had previously been at a nearby table with a mixed party; that a man at that table kept saying something about defendant and his wife and finally got up as though to come toward his table; and that it appeared to defendant that the man was reaching into his pocket to 'get something,' whereupon defendant struck him with the screwdriver. Ferguson further related that defendant also told him that he had thrown the screwdriver away in an alley. They searched the alley together but could not find it.

The defendant testified that he went to the C & C Lounge with a friend; that when he saw his wife there he told her she had no business being up so late in 'her condition;' that after they had some beer and Scotch he asked her about the people she was with and whether one of the men was 'her boy friend;' that she replied that 'when she had her fill' she would come home; and that during this conversation he heard someone say, 'I don't give a damn who he is.' Defendant related that he told his wife he...

To continue reading

Request your trial
76 cases
  • People v. Romero
    • United States
    • United States Appellate Court of Illinois
    • May 24, 2018
    ...impartial manner. People v. Smith , 299 Ill. App. 3d 1056, 1062, 234 Ill.Dec. 52, 702 N.E.2d 218 (1998) (quoting People v. Wesley , 18 Ill. 2d 138, 154–55, 163 N.E.2d 500 (1959) ). We also observe that a trial judge does not " ‘assume the role of prosecutor merely because [his] questions so......
  • People v. Butler
    • United States
    • United States Appellate Court of Illinois
    • October 18, 1985
    ...to question witnesses in order to elicit the truth or to bring enlightenment on material issues which seem obscure (People v. Wesley (1959), 18 Ill.2d 138, 163 N.E.2d 500; People v. Marino (1953), 414 Ill. 445, 111 N.E.2d 534), but that the right to do so is not unbridled. (People v. Santuc......
  • People v. Jackson
    • United States
    • United States Appellate Court of Illinois
    • May 3, 2011
    ...examination may be justified if the court has reason to believe that a witness is not telling the truth.” People v. Wesley, 18 Ill.2d 138, 155, 163 N.E.2d 500 (1959). Whether a trial court's questioning of a witness is appropriate depends on the facts and circumstances of each case, and res......
  • People v. Nevitt
    • United States
    • Illinois Supreme Court
    • March 29, 1990
    ...a trial judge has discretion to question witnesses in order to elicit truth or clarify issues which seem obscure. (People v. Wesley (1959), 18 Ill.2d 138, 155, 163 N.E.2d 500.) The propriety of each examination depends on the circumstances of the case (People v. Hopkins (1963), 29 Ill.2d 26......
  • 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