State v. Hatfield

• Decision Date: 23 October 1888
• Citation: 75 Iowa 592,39 N.W. 910
• Parties: STATE v. HATFIELD.
• Court: Iowa Supreme Court

75 Iowa 592

39 N.W. 910

STATE

v.HATFIELD.

Supreme Court of Iowa.

October 23, 1888.

Appeal from district court, Polk county; JOSIAH GIVEN, Judge.

Jeff Hatfield was indicted, tried, and convicted of the crime of assault with intent to commit a rape upon the person of one Adelia M. Bale, and he appeals.McHenry, McHenry & McHenry, for appellant.

A. J. Baker, Atty. Gen., for the State.

ROTHROCK, J.

1. There is no question that an assault with intent to commit a rape was made upon Adelia M. Bale on a sidewalk in one of the streets of the city of Des Moines. The crime was committed late in the night. Mrs. Bale and another woman were returning to their homes from the house of a neighbor, where they had been practicing music for a wedding. The assailant of Mrs. Bale seized her, and threw her upon the sidewalk, pulled up her clothing, held his hand over her mouth, laid down upon her, and attempted to part her legs, and only desisted when surprised by some one coming towards the place where the parties were. We have stated enough of the particulars of the assault. The other details are not necessary to be stated, and, owing to their disgusting character, it is better that they should be omitted. The woman who was with Mrs. Bale escaped at the first onset, and raised an alarm. When the person who made the assault made his escape the complainant was found upon the sidewalk very much injured. She was severely bitten by her assailant in several places. The facts of the case, as detailed by the complaining witness, and as disclosed by the injuries upon her person, were such as to influence the minds of jurors, and incline any one having official connection with the prosecution to the belief that the perpetrator of the crime should be severely punished. We have for that reason carefully examined the transcript of the short-hand notes of the evidence, which appears to be a full report of the trial, including the examination of the witnesses by question and answer, the remarks of the trial judge in making rulingsupon the admission and rejection of evidence, and the colloquies between court and counsel during the trial. We have done this because the defendant stoutly claimed upon the trial, and based his defense upon the ground, that he was not the party who committed the crime. The assault was committed on Saturday night, and the defendant was arrested upon the charge the following Monday evening. He, with other men, was taken to the house of the complaining witness, and out of seven men she identified the defendant as her assailant. Her identification was positive, and without doubt or question, and she maintained on the final trial with absolute positiveness that the defendant was the guilty party. The woman who was in company with her also identified the defendant as the man who made the assault, but not with so much positiveness and certainty. It was moonlight, and there was snow upon the ground at the time of the assault. The defendant is an unmarried man, and at the time of the assault lived with his father and mother and two or three brothers. One of the brothers was married, and occupied part of the same house. Several members of the family, including the defendant's mother, testified, as witnesses, that the defendant was at home and in his bed before the crime was committed. There was other evidence tending to show that the defendant was seen by parties, who knew him, after the crime was committed, and a pipe was found at the place where the crime was committed which the evidence tended to show belonged to the defendant. This evidence, however, was not...