State v. Bronstine
Decision Date | 07 February 1899 |
Citation | 147 Mo. 520,49 S.W. 512 |
Parties | STATE v. BRONSTINE. |
Court | Missouri Supreme Court |
Appeal from circuit court, Clark county; E. R. McKee, Judge.
Fred Bronstine was convicted of murder in the first degree, and he appeals. Affirmed.
Eli W. Gwynne, J. S. Tall, N. T. Gentry, and J. A. Whiteside, for appellant. Edward C. Crow, Atty. Gen., Sam. B. Jeffries, Asst. Atty. Gen., and W. W. Graves, for the State.
From a conviction of murder in the first degree, defendant appeals to this court. The homicide occurred in Clark county on the 12th day of March, 1898. The indictment was returned at the April term, 1898. Defendant was duly arraigned. Being without means, the court appointed two members of the bar to represent the defendant. The cause was set down for trial on June 25, 1898. At that time a trial was had, and defendant found guilty.
The facts are few and simple. The defendant was a married man. His wife had borne him six children, two of whom had died before the homicide occurred. He had become so cruel in his treatment of his wife and children at times that his wife left him, and took her children to her mother's home. On the 12th of March, 1898, he went to the home of her mother, and shot and killed his wife.
The facts are thus detailed by Mrs. Julia Rowe, the mother: "I am 78 years old. I was at home on the 12th of March. There was no one there but me and her and the two little children. The biggest child was up at Henry's. When I say `her,' I mean Mrs. Bronstine. She was my daughter. Her name was Amelia Jane, but she was generally called `Dud.' That was the nickname she always went by. I have seen Fred Bronstine. He came to my house on that day. He came there horseback. He came there, but no one knew it. I guess he must have slipped up, and then got on his horse. She went to the door. I did not go. I says, `What's out there?' I says, `Well,' she says, `It's Fred.' I did not say nothing more, you know. He said he came to see the children. She said to come in, and he came in, but he did not come into the house, — only came to the door. The children got there, and it appeared like they did not want to see him. When one got up and went towards him, that was not what he came for, — the child. No, sir; it was not. He says, `Are you going to come back and live with me?' Said this to Mrs. Bronstine. She said, `No; I won't go back.' He jerked a revolver out of his pocket, and pushed and jammed her against the door, and shot at her, and she knocked the revolver away, and he did not hit her. She ran into the room, and he followed her, and shot her there. She ran back, and he ran back to where she was a-standing, and caught her with his left hand, and jammed her against the facing of the door, and drawed up the gun, and shot her in the eye. I did not know which eye it was. And she slipped till she fell upon the ground. He saw she was going to die, and said to me, `Come, help me take her in the house;' and then he laid her on the floor. She was dead then. He walked around her, and said to me, `Do you think she is dead?' I said, `My God, anybody would be dead!' He walked around, and said: He always called her Jennie. I took the pocketbook, and laid it upon the safe. Then he says, `Now, I am going to kill myself.' I says, `Just step out of doors, if you are going to kill yourself.' I didn't want him in the house. He then would not kill himself. He walked around, and the little girl went up to Mr. Clark. He was fixing something with his back to me, and directly the revolver shot, and the little girl said the bullet just passed her head. He shot four times at her in the door; once in the house. That made five times. The sixth time he went after the little girl. When he had Mrs. Bronstine against the door, and shot her, was the time he killed her. She was against the facing of the door, and just slipped down. She never struggled. There was no signs of life after that. Two little ones and me was there when he shot down their mother. I was there when the doctor came. The doctor washed her face. Bronstine got on his horse, and said he was going to Monticello to give himself up. He came back and got his pocketbook. He had gone pretty nigh a hundred yards, and came back, and asked me for his pocketbook. Mr. Clark came as soon as Fred got out of sight a little bit, and stayed with me. Mrs. Bronstine and the children had been at my house nearly two months. Before that she had lived with him. Bronstine and his wife had lived at my house some years ago. They farmed my place. That has been several years ago. Sometimes he appeared to treat her well, and again he was awful cross to her. We buried Mrs. Bronstine on the next day (Sunday), at Providence Church. Cross-examination: They lived with me about three years ago. He tended two crops on my place. He was kind enough to his family while there, except at times. He was unkind to his children when he got mad at them." Here counsel for the defendant showed by the witness that defendant would at times get mad at his wife and children, apparently without cause, the witness calling these spells "mad or mean spells." Concerning the murder, the witness then said:
Birdie Lee Bronstine, a child of defendant 10 years old, testified: The cross-examination of this witness was along the line of showing that the husband would frequently take mad spells, without any apparent cause, evidently for the purpose of sustaining a plea of insanity. The witness states that when he was not mad he was good to her mother and the children.
Dr. Thomin testified that he was called on March 12th, and found Mrs. Bronstine dead at the home of her mother. He testified that the bullet entered at the inside angle of the eye, went in between the eyeball and the nose,...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
State v. Kenyon
...one mortal wound on two parts of the body. [State v. Edmundson, 64 Mo. 398; State v. Ramsey, 82 Mo. 133, 136-7; State v. Bronstine, 147 Mo. 520, 530, 49 S.W. 512, 515.] The first point, that the information fails to connect the appellant with the killing of the deceased, is mere cavil. True......
-
The State v. Davis
... ... peremptorily. The exception saved was taken to the question ... put by the prosecuting attorney. Counsel for appellant did ... not challenge the juror for cause as he should have done if ... he desired to save the point. [State v. Bronstine, 147 Mo ... 520, 531, 49 S.W. 512; R. S. 1909, sec. 5220.] Under these ... circumstances we rule the point against appellant ... III ... The action of the trial court in overruling objections to ... "Exhibit A," referred to in the motion for new ... trial, cannot be ... ...
-
State v. Davis
...did not challenge the juror for cause as he should have done if he desired to save the point. State v. Bronstine, 147 Mo., loc. cit. 531, 49 S. W. 512; section 5220, R. S. 1909. Under these circumstances we rule the point against 3. The action of the trial court in overruling objections to ......
-
Gary Realty Co. v. Kelly
... ... Keleher v. Johnson, 272 Mo. 699, loc. cit. 701, 199 S. W. 935; State ex rel. v. Ellison, 272 Mo. 571, loc. cit. 580, 199 S. W. 984; State ex rel. v. Reynolds, 245 Mo. 704, 151 S. W. 85; Wilson v. Drainage & Levee ... ...