State v. Stokes
| Decision Date | 26 May 1921 |
| Docket Number | No. 22612.,22612. |
| Citation | 232 S.W. 106,288 Mo. 539 |
| Parties | STATE v. STOKES. |
| Court | Missouri Supreme Court |
Appeal from Circuit Court, Hickory County; C. H. Skinker, Judge.
Frank Stokes was convicted of seduction, and appeals. Affirmed.
On November 19, 1919, the grand jury of Hickory county, Mo., returned into the circuit court of said county an indictment, charging therein that Frank Stokes, on or about the 15th of November, 1918, under a promise of marriage, did feloniously seduce and debauch Chloe Durnell, an unmarried female of good repute and under 21 years of age, against the peace and dignity of the state. On April 20, 1920, defendant Stokes waived formal arraignment under the indictnent, pleaded not guilty, and entered upon a trial of said cause before a jury:
Evidence of the State.
The testimony of prosecutrix, Chloe Durnell, in substance, tends to show the following facts: That she was born in Hickory county, Mo., on August 9, 1899; that she had lived 4 miles north of Flemington, in said county, all her life; that she had known defendant, Frank Stokes, since she could first remember; that she commenced going with him in August, 1918; that defendant lived about 2Y2 miles away, and came to see her about two or three times a week; that she went to parties and to church with him; that while at her sister's, in November. 1918, she and defendant were engaged to be married; that afterwards she and defendant continued to attend church and parties; that about one week after they became engaged defendant had sexual intercourse with her, near the chapel in said county, after night; that defendant was the father of her child; that he had sexual intercourse with her a few times at other places; that he continued to visit her until February, 1919; that the wedding was first set for December 24, 1918; that she was getting her quilts and things ready, making her clothes, etc.; that she got caught before above date, and did not marry then; that by the 24th of December, 1918, she found out she was in a family way; that she did not marry in December, because she could not get ready; that on July 11, 1919, defendant gave her $15 and sent her to Kansas City, to try and get rid of the baby; that she wrote defendant a letter upon her return from Kansas City where she spent one night, and asked him to marry her, which he declined to do; that in the latter part of November, 1918, while close to the chapel defendant wanted to have intercourse with her, said he would be her husband and could not wait until they were married; that he had been hugging and kissing her before that time. Over the objection of defendant, she was permitted to testify that she would not have yielded to defendant's entreaties and had intercourse with him, had it not been for his promise to marry her.
On cross-examination, she testified in substance that she had never gone with Frank Stokes before August, 1918; that she had been keeping company with other boys, but Fred Wise was the only one, before she commenced going with defendant; that after August, 1918, Fred Wise was the only other boy she went with; that she went with Frank Stokes, the 1st of August, and then with Fred Wise; that the wedding was first set for December, but they became engaged November 25, 191.8; that defendant first had sexual intercourse with her about one week after November 25, 1918, and after they were engaged; that defendant asked her to marry him; that defendant bought her a dress in December, 1918; that they did not marry then, because she could not get ready; that she first found out she was in a. family way an January 20, 1919; that she told defendant about it; that the second date for their marriage was February 20, 1919; that defendant then quit her, about February 15, 1919; that he never went with her any more until May, 1919; that she had a talk with defendant near Marcus Miller's after she returned from Kansas City in July, 1919; that her baby was born October 25, 1919; that she had never had intercourse with any other boy.
Defendant's Exhibit 1, dated at Humansvine, Mo., August 8, 1917, addressed to Earl Stokes, purporting to be signed "From C. E. to E. S.," was presented to prosecutrix, and she was asked if she wrote the letter. She testified that she never wrote the letter, and it was not in her handwriting.
James Miller testified in substance that he was the brother-in-law of prosecutrix; that he knew defendant Stokes; that the latter came to see prosecutrix about once a week, and took her to church and parties; that he heard them talk about getting married and about what they would do after they were married; that defendant said they would live on the old place for a year and then they would move to his place; that he (witness) gave prosecutrix a hog, and told her she could let it run there until they married; that defendant was present and heard the talk about the hog; that she went to work getting her clothes together, quilting, etc.; that they first talked about getting married about Christmas, but she could not get ready by that time, and they put it off until February; that witness and defendant are own cousins.
On cross-examination, the testimony of Witness was practically the same as in chief. He denied making any arrangements with prosecutrix to remain at his home and not get married; denied that he agreed to give her a mare and some other property, if she would remain with witness and his wife.
On re-examination, witness testified that defendant told him he had given prosecutrix some money to go to Kansas City to see if she could get rid of the baby.
Mrs. Dona Miller testified to substantially the same facts as did her husband.
Fred Wise testified, in substance, that he had known prosecutrix about three years. He was asked if he was acquainted with the general reputation of prosecutrix in that community for virtue and chastity, as being virtuous and moral woman. Defendant's counsel objected to the question, on the ground that witness was only acquainted with a few people in the community and the objection was sustained.
Tim Stokes, a cousin of defendant, testified that he had known prosecutrix about all his life (he was 21 years old); that they went to school together; that she and defendant went to gatherings together. He heard defendant say he did not know whether the baby was his (defendant's) or not. Witness testified that, so far as he knew, prosecutrix's reputation for virtue and chastity in that community was good.
Tim Stokes was recalled for further cross-examination and denied that he told the defendant in August, 1918, he had had sexual intercourse with prosecutrix.
Chloe Burnell, prosecutrix, was recalled for further cross-examination, and denied that she told Oleeda Shockley, in the fall of 1918, If she ever got married she wouldn't have any children as she knew how to get rid of them.
The state introduced 10 witnesses, who testified as to the good reputation of prosecutrix for virtue, chastity, etc.
The foregoing covered substantially the state's case in chief.
Defendant's Evidence.
Fred McCracken testified that in the fall of 1918 he met Ray Bernard and prosecutrix in the road; that Bernard had his arm around her and was hugging her as they were walking down the road together. It was daylight at the time.
Henry McCracken testified in substance the same as the preceding witness, except that he fixed the date when Ray Bernard and prosecutrix were walking together as being in March, 1919.
Cuba Beem, 15 years of age, testified that she was defendant's niece; that she had known prosecutrix 2 or 3 years and had a conversation with her in the fall of 1918; that in this conversation prosecutrix told witness that Jim Miller had promised her, if she would never marry, stay there and work for himself and wife, that he would give her a team of colts and some other property, and that she had accepted his proposition; that this conversation occurred at Jim Miller's, in the cow lot, on November 12, 1918.
Oleeda Shockley testified that she was IS years of age, had known prosecutrix all her life, and in the fall of 1918 heard her say, if she ever got married, she wouldn't have any children; that she knew how to keep from having them, and had tried it, Earl Stokes, a cousin of defendant, testified that he went to school with prosecutrix and knew her handwriting; that he received a letter from her, described as Defendant's Exhibit 1; that he had quit school, and his sister Mamie gave it to him; that he talked with prosecutrix after receiving this letter, and she wanted to know why he didn't answer it, or come to the chapel, as she had told him. Witness further testified that prosecutrix, In August or September, 1818, told him she had had intercourse with Burr Ousley, Glenn Jones, Tim Stokes, and Fred Wise; that this occurred on the road from Flemington, while she was staying at Mr. Shreck's.
Defendant's Exhibit was read in evidence, as follows:
To continue reading
Request your trial