State v. Bradford

• Decision Date: 08 May 1900
• Citation: 156 Mo. 91,56 S.W. 898
• Parties: STATE v. BRADFORD.
• Court: Missouri Supreme Court

56 S.W. 898

156 Mo. 91

STATE v. BRADFORD.

Supreme Court of Missouri, Division No. 2.

May 8, 1900.

MURDER — HOMICIDAL ACT — FELONIOUS CHARACTER — INDICTMENT — SUFFICIENCY — CONFESSION — ADMISSIBILITY — DUPLICATE INSTRUCTIONS — REFUSAL NOT ERROR — INSANITY — EXPERT EVIDENCE — FINDING OF SANITY.

1. An indictment for murder, which charged that defendant, with a shotgun, powder, and leaden balls, "then and there, feloniously and on purpose," shot the deceased in his right side, giving him a mortal wound, of which he immediately died, sufficiently charges that the homicidal act was done with a felonious purpose.

2. Where the most said to defendant to induce a confession was a guard's remark that, if he had been dragged into the crime, it was likely to go lighter with him in court if he confessed, but that, if he had not committed the crime, not to confess, it is not error to admit his confession; the statement of the guard being but an expression of opinion, and not a promise.

3. Where, in a criminal trial, all the instructions asked by defendant have already been given by the court, it is not error to refuse to multiply instructions by giving those requested.

4. Where, in a murder trial, two physicians, who had made a few minutes' examination of defendant, testified that he was insane when examined, but on cross-examination it appeared that they were not alienists, and that, in their opinion, defendant's acts and conduct before and after the crime pointed strongly to sanity, such evidence is not sufficient to overthrow the jury's finding of sufficient sanity to know right from wrong, based on ample evidence.

Appeal from circuit court; Pemiscot county; Henry C. Riley, Judge.

Jack Bradford was convicted of murder in the first degree, and he appeals. Affirmed.

L. L. Collins and S. J. Corbett, for appellant. Edward C. Crow, Atty. Gen., and Sam B. Jeffries, Asst. Atty. Gen., for the State.

GANTT, P. J.

The defendant was jointly indicted with William Bradford and Mattie Holt for the murder of L. T. Holt in Pemiscot county on May 5, 1899. He was duly arraigned, and pleaded not guilty. A severance was granted, and he was tried alone, found guilty of murder in the first degree, and sentenced to be hung. He appeals to this court. The facts are few and simple. The defendant is a brother of Mattie Holt and his co-defendant William Bradford. For some cause, not disclosed, unless, as defendant stated in one of his many confessions, Holt, the deceased, was cruel to his wife, these three conspired to murder L. T. Holt. Mrs. Holt and William Bradford induced defendant to do the killing by the promise of a horse and $25. Defendant was working for a neighbor, but on Monday he claimed to be sick. On Friday, May 5th, his brother, William, came and took his place to work. Defendant armed himself with a single-barrel, breech-loading shotgun, and went to a spot on a private road leading from Virginia township to Braggadocia, in Pemiscot county. The road runs through the timber, and at the point of the homicide the timber was very heavy, and the ground low and marshy. Seating himself on a log near the road, the defendant awaited the coming of his victim on his return that evening. About 4 o'clock, deceased came riding along in a walk. Defendant says deceased saw him sitting there, but neither spoke. Just as deceased passed him, defendant raised his gun and shot deceased through the right side. The horse sprang forward in a run, and carried deceased about 150 yards, when the deceased fell off, and the horse ran home riderless. Seeing deceased fall, defendant reloaded his gun and followed rapidly until he reached the prostrate form of deceased, and, to make sure of his work, he placed the gun near the head of the dying man and blew out his brains. The defendant went home, took the mainspring out of his gunlock, and another fixture, and put them in a small box, and put the small box in an old rag box. Having dismantled his gun, he went to the field, and held a whispered conference with William Bradford. William then informed their employer that Holt's horse had come home with the saddle bloody, and they were afraid he had been killed. This neighbor and others went to the home of Bradford, the defendant, and found the gun still fresh from the recent shots, and, after a search, found the missing parts of the lock. The neighborhood was aroused, and they started to find Holt. It was a dark, stormy night, however, and the party got lost in the swamp, and went to a neighbor's, and waited till morning, when they soon found the dead body. Defendant and his brother were induced to go to the place where the body lay, and the inquest was held. Their conduct and manner excited suspicion, and a warrant was procured for them and their sister, Mrs. Holt. That night, after much questioning, defendant voluntarily confessed the killing, and stated that his brother and sister were his accomplices. He said he felt better as soon as he confessed; he had relieved his conscience. After that he had no hesitancy of telling any one that he killed deceased, and all the circumstances. His defense was insanity. The indictment is as...