Reeves, Jr. v. Alabama Transcript of Record
Public Court Documents
October 4, 1954
Cite this item
-
Brief Collection, LDF Court Filings. Reeves, Jr. v. Alabama Transcript of Record, 1954. 29b0e3e2-c19a-ee11-be36-6045bdeb8873. LDF Archives, Thurgood Marshall Institute. https://ldfrecollection.org/archives/archives-search/archives-item/30e9becf-a708-43f3-a4e2-8c55ef7b4e57/reeves-jr-v-alabama-transcript-of-record. Accessed May 05, 2025.
Copied!
TRANSCRIPT OF RECORD
SUPREME COURT OE THE UNITED STATES
O ctobeb T e e m , 1954
No. 120
JEREM IAH REEVES, JR., PETITIONER,
vs,
STATE OF ALABAM A
O N W R IT OF CERTIORARI TO T H E SU P R E M E COURT OF T H E STATE
OF A L A B A M A
PETITION FOE CERTIORARI FILED MARCH 12, 1954
CERTIORARI GRANTED JUNE 7, 1954
SUPREME COURT OE THE UNITED STATES
O ctober T erm , 1954
No. 120
JEREMIAH REEVES, JR , PETITIONER,
vs.
STATE OF ALABAMA
ON W R IT OE CERTIORARI TO T H E SU P R E M E COURT OP T H E STATE
OP A LAB A M A
I N D E X
Original Print
Record from the Circuit Court of Montgomery County,
Alabama ................................................................................. 1
Caption .................................. (omitted in printing). . 1
Indictment ......................................................................... 1 j
Arraignment and plea of not guilty.............................. 2 1
Judgment on pleadings, Eugene W. Carter, J ............ 3 2
Appointment of James J. Carter as Special Judge, etc 5 5
Judgment on pleadings, James J. Carter, J ................ 6 6
Jury and verdict .............................................................. 7 7
Sentence ............................................................................. 8 7
Motion for new trial......................................................... 9 8
Continuances ..........................(omitted in printing). . 11
Refused charges requested by the defendant (omitted
in printing) .................................................................. 13
Transcript of proceedings before Judge Eugene W.
Carter ............................................................................. 14 )o
Appearances ............................................................. 14 10
Defendant’s Exhibit A—Motion to quash indict
ment .............. 22 16
Defendant’s Exhibit B— Affidavit of Jeremiah
Reeves, Jr................................................................ 23 17
Defendant’s Exhibit C— Motion to permit public
to remain ............................................................... 25 19
Defendant’s Exhibit C -l—Motion to permit rela
tives of defendant to remain.............................. 25 19
Defendant’s Exhibit D—Motion to exclude
public while prosecutrix testifies........................ 25 20
Defendant’s Exhibit E'—Motion to quash venire. . 26 20
11 INDEX
Record from the Circuit Court o f Montgomery County,
Alabama— Continued Original Print
Reporter’s and Judge’s certificates (omitted in
printing) ............................................... .................... 28
Transcript of proceedings before Judge James J.
Carter ............................................................................. 29 21
Appearances ............................................................. 29 21
Colloquy ..................................................................... 29 21 .
State’s Exhibit 1— Motion of State of Alabama
to strike the motion of defendant to quash the
indictment.................... (omitted in printing) . . 31
Defendant’s Exhibit 1— Motion to permit public
to remain (Copy) . . . . (omitted in printing) . 34
Defendant’s Exhibit 2— Motion to quash the
venire ..................................................................... 38 24
State’s Exhibit 2—Demurrer to motion to quash
the venire................................................................. 36 25
Hearing on defendant’s motion to quash venire. . . 38 26
Evidence on behalf of the defendant on motion
to quash the venire................................................ 40 27
Testimony of Eugene W. Carter.................... 40 28
John R. Matthews.................... 49 36
Defendant rests ......................................................... 51 37
State’s evidence on motion of defendant to quash
the indictment ...................................................... 51 37
Testimony of Walter B. Jones...................... 51 37
J. E. Pierce.............................. 53 40
D. Caffy .................................. 55 41
Testimony closed on defendant’s motion to quash
the venire................................................................. 57 43
Ruling on motion....................................................... 57 43
Colloquy ..................................................................... 59 44
Defendant’s request to propound questions to
prospective jurors..................................................... 61 46
Selection o f ju ry ............................................................. 62 47
Defendant’s Exhibit 1— Motion for continuance. . 67 50
Defendant’s Exhibit 2—Defendant’s motion to
quash venire (Copy) . . (omitted in printing) . . 69
Defendant’s Exhibit 3— Affidavit of Jeremiah
Reeves, Jr. ( Copy ) . . . . (omitted in printing).. 70
Defendant’s Exhibit 4— Motion for mistrial
(omitted in printing)............................................... 72
Defendant’s Exhibit 5— Motion to permit public
to remain (C op y )........(omitted in printing) . . 73
Defendant’s Exhibit 6— Motion to exclude public
while prosecutrix testifies (Copy) (omitted in
printing) ............................................................... 73
Defendant’s Exhibit 7—Motion to permit rela
tives of defendant to remain (Copy) (omitted
in printing) ............................................................... 73
Record from the Circuit Court of Montgomery County,
Alabama— Continued
Transcript of proceedings before Judge James J.
INDEX 111
Carter— Continued
Defendant’s Exhibit 8—Motion to set aside entire
Original
74
Print
51
Defendant’s Exhibit 9— Motion for continuance
(omitted in printing).......................................... 75
Defendant’s Exhibit 10— Motion for instanter
subpoena...................... (omitted in printing).. 75
Evidence on behalf of the State.............................. 76 52
Testimony of Mabel Ann Crowder.............. 76 52
Lois Struehko.......................... 96 68
W. R. Clark.............................. 99 7.1
George Harold K ojac............ 109 80
C. N. Johnson.......................... 114 84
Virgil R. Zarling.................... 115 85
C. J. Rehling............................ 119 89
Clyde Jones.............................. 126 95
William M. Stanley................ 128 97
S. E. Sellers............................ 131 99
State’s Exhibit 1— Photograph of defendant
(omitted in printing)..........................................
State’s Exhibit 2—Pocketbook and contents
(omitted in printing)............................................ 133
Evidence on behalf of defendant............................ 136 100
Testimony of George Harold Kojac (re
called) .................................. 136 1.00
Carnella Reeves ...................... 137 101
J. T. Thomas............................ 147 110
Jerry Reeves............................ 154 115
Mary Jordan............................ 156 117
Frances H all............................ 159 120
Elizabeth A lford ...................... 162 123
Fannie Mitchell...................... 164 125
J. D. Cook (omitted in print
ing) ...................................... 172
Elizabeth Alford (recalled) . . 174 132
Harvey Butts.......................... 175 133
Jeremiah Reeves, Jr................ 177 135
Charlie Williams.................... 196 151
John Harris (omitted in print
ing) ...................................... 199
James Dolman (omitted in
printing) ............................ 200
Earline Thomas (omitted in
printing) ............................ 201
Willie Thomas (omitted in
printing) ............................ 204
Sephia Lovelace (omitted in
printing) ............................ 204
IV INDEX
Record from the Circuit Court of Montgomery County,
Alabama— Continued
Transcript of proceedings before Judge James J.
Carter— Continued
Evidence on behalf of defendant— Continued
Testimony of— Continued Original
Berta Pollard ........................... 206
Rebecca Goins.......................... 209
Lou Ellen Thomas (omitted
in printing).......................... 210
J. Lewis Miller........................ 211
Earl D. James.......................... 213
State’s rebutting evidence........................................ 215
Testimony of Robert D. Murphy.................. 215
Philip S. Bazar........................ 217
Colloquy ..................................................................... 230
Charge of the co u r t ................................................... 233
Verdict ....................................................................... 244
Sentence............................ (omitted in printing). . 246
Judgment overruling motion for new trial
(omitted in printing).......... 248
Reporter’s and Judge’s certificates (omitted in
printing) ............................................................... 250
Appellant’s statement of indigence (omitted in
printing) ............................................................... 252
Order of court directing transcript of testimony
(omitted in printing)........................................... 252
Clerk’s certificate.................... (omitted in printing).. 254
Proceedings in the Supreme Court of the State of Alabama 255
Order passing cause to Call of 8th Division........................ 255
Argument and submission.............. (omitted in printing) . . 256
Opinion, Merrill, J .................................................................... 257
Judgment ................................................................................... 267
Motion for rehearing................................................................. 268
Certificate of recall (recalling certificate of affirmance and
copy of opinion pending consideration of motion for
rehearing) ............................................................................. 269
Order overruling appellant’s application for rehearing etc. 270
Petition for stay of execution pending petition for certi
orari ................................................................. .................. 271
Order granting petition for stay of execution etc................ 272
Clerk’s certificate............................. (omitted in printing).. 274
Order extending time to file petition for writ of certiorari 275
Designation of record.................... (omitted in printing) . . 277
Cross-designation o f record............(omitted in printing) . . 283
Order granting certiorari......................................................... 288
Print
154
154
155
157
158
158
160
172
174
183
185
185
185
194
195
196
196
197
198
199
200
JEREMIAH REEVES, JR., VS. STATE OF ALABAMA 1
1 [Caption omitted]
In the Circuit Court of Montgomery County, State of Alabama
No. 5121
T he State of Alabama, plaintiff
vs.
Jeremiah R eeves, Junior, defendant
I ndictment—Filed November 14,1952
T he State of Alabama,
Montgomery County:
Circuit Court of Montgomery County November Term A.D. 1952
The Grand Jury of said County charge, that before the finding
of this indictment,
Jeremiah R eeves, Junior, whose name is to the Grand Jury other
wise unknown, forcibly ravished Mrs. Ann Crowder, a woman,
against the peace and dignity of the State of Alabama.
W illiam F. T hetford,
Solicitor Fifteenth Judicial
Circuit of Alabama.
No Prosecutor—A T rue B ill— Homer Spiva,Foreman of Grand Jury
Presented in open Court by the Foreman of the Grand Jury in
the presence of 14 other members of the Grand Jury, this 14th
day of November A. D. 1952.
John R. M atthews,
Clerk of the Circuit Court of
Montgomery County.
[File endorsement omitted.]
2 In the Circuit Court of Montgomery County
Arraignment and Plea of N ot Guilty—November 15th, 1952
Present the H onorable Eugene W. Carter, Judge; Presiding
[Title omitted]
This day came the State by its Solicitor, and came also the de
fendant in his own proper person and by attorney; and the defend
ant’s motion to continue the arraignment until a later day being
argued by counsel and understood by the Court, and being consid-
2 Jeremiah reeves, jr ., vs. state of Alabama
ered by the Court, it is considered and ordered by the Court, and
it is the judgment of the Court, that the said motion to continue
the arraignment of the defendant be and the same is hereby denied.
Thereupon the said defendant being duly arraigned upon the
indictment pleaded thereto not guilty, and not guilty by reason of
insanity; and on motion of the Solicitor for the State, it is consid
ered and ordered by the Court that the 26th day of November, 1952,
be and the same is hereby appointed as the day for the trial of
this cause.
It is further ordered by the Court that the Sheriff of Montgomery
County summon eighty persons including those heretofore drawn
on the regular venire for the week in which this cause is set for
trial; the Court proceeds to draw from the jury box in open Court
and in the presence of the defendant the number of names, to-wit:
thirty persons with the regular jurors heretofore drawn for the week
in which this cause is set for trial, to-wit: fifty, making the eighty
jurors named in this order.
It is further considered by the Court that a list of the names of
all jurors drawn for the week in which this cause is set for trial
and those that are here specially drawn together with a copy of the
indictment be forthwith served upon the defendant by the Sheriff
of this County.
3 In the Circuit Court of Montgomery County
Judgment on Pleadings by Judge Eugene W. Carter, Presiding
November 26th, 1952
[Title omitted]
This day came the State by William F. Thetford, its Solicitor,
and came also the defendant in his own proper person and by
attorney; and before the defendant or State announced ready for
trial the Court of its own motion ruled that the public at large be
excluded from the Court room and from being present at the trial
of this cause, and that only members of the bar, witnesses, jurors
and Court officials would be allowed to remain in Court during
the trial of this cause.
Thereupon the defendant objected to said ruling and moved the
Court to let the public remain in the Court room, and upon consid
eration of said motion the Court is of opinion that said motion
should be overuled; it is, therefore, considered, ordered and adjudged
by the Court that the motion of the defendant to allow the public
to remain in the Court room during the trial of this cause be and
the same is hereby overruled, and the defendant duly excepted to
said ruling of the Court.
JEREMIAH REEVES, JR., VS. STATE OF ALABAMA
Thereupon, the defendant made a motion to allow newspaper
reporters to remain in the Court room during said trial, and upon
consideration of said motion it is considered and ordered by the
Court, and it is the judgment of the Court that the motion to allow
newspaper reporters to remain in the Court room during said
trial be and the same is hereby overruled and the defendant duly
excepted to this ruling of the Court.
Thereupon the defendant moves the Court to allow said defend
ant to have a special stenographer to take down for him the pro
ceedings of said cause, along with the official Court reporter, and
upon consideration of said motion the Court is of opinion that the
same should be denied. It is, therefore, considered, ordered and
adjudged by the Court that the said motion of the defendant to
allow a special stenographer to take down for the defendant the
proceedings of said cause be and the same is hereby denied, and
the defendant duly excepted to this ruling of the Court.
Thereupon the defendant moves the Court to set aside the entire
proceedings because neither side had announced ready for trial,
and upon consideration of said motion the Court is of opinion
4 that said motion should be denied. It is, therefore, considered,
ordered and adjudged by the Court that the motion to set
aside the entire proceedings because neither side had announced
ready for trial be and the same is hereby overruled, and the defend
ant excepts thereto.
Thereupon the defendant moves the Court to quash the indict
ment in said cause on the ground that there were no Negroes on the
Grand Jury that returned the indictment in this cause; and upon
consideration of said motion the Court is of opinion that the same
should be denied. It is, therefore, considered, ordered and adjudged
by the Court that the said motion to quash the indictment on the
ground that there were no Negroes on the Grand Jury that returned
said indictment be and the same is hereby over-ruled, and the
defendant excepts thereto.
Thereupon, the defendant made a motion to permit relatives of
the defendant to remain in the Court room throughout the trial, and
upon consideration of said motion the Court is of opinion that the
same should be granted, and it is ordered and adjudged by the
Court that the relatives of defendant were permitted to remain
in the Court room during the trial of said cause.
Thereupon, the defendant files a motion to exclude the public
from the Court room only when the prosecutrix testifies, and upon
consideration of said motion the Court is of opinion that the same
should be denied. It is, therefore, considered, ordered and adjudged
by the Court that said motion be and the same is hereby denied,
and the defendant excepts thereto.
Thereupon, the defendant files a motion to quash the jury panel
4 JEREM IAH BEEVES, JR ., VS. STATE OP ALABAMA
on the ground that Negroes have been systematically excluded from
the jury rolls of Montgomery County, and further that said motion
be heard in the absence of the jurors summoned for said trial; and
further, that all members of the Montgomery County Board of
Jury Supervisors, including the Presiding Judge, who is a member
of said Board, be summoned as witnesses to testify in support of
said motion; and upon consideration of said motion, the Court is
of opinion that said motion, and such evidence as may be presented
in support thereof, be heard out of the presence of the jurors.
Thereupon the trial Judge announced that he would recuse himself
on the ground that he has become a witness in said cause.
The defendant’s attorney and the Solicitor were called to the bar
in the presence of the defendant, and they stated that the State of
Alabama and the defendant had agreed that the Honorable James
J. Carter be appointed as Special Judge in the trial of said cause,
in accordance with Section 124, Title 13, of the 1940 Code of
5 Alabama. The said James J. Carter was called to the bench
and was informed of the agreement that he serve as Special
Judge in the case, and asked if he would serve. He stated in addi
tion to agreement of counsel he would prefer to have an appointment
by the Governor of Alabama to make it doubly sure that no ob
jection be made to his appointment as Special Judge. The defend
ant’s attorney, in the presence of the defendant, stated that at no
time would he make any objection to the appointment of James J.
Carter as Special Judge.
Honorable Eugene W. Carter, presiding, thereupon recused himself
from sitting at said trial; and the case was then continued for trial
until November 28th, 1952.
In the Circuit Court of Montgomery County
Appointment of James J. Carter A s Special Judge
By Governor of the State of A labama— November 26, 1952
In the Name and By the A uthority of
T he State of A labama
( Alabama )
( Great Seal )
I, Gordon P ersons
G overnor of the Said State
To: James J. Carter
Send Greetings:
Reposing full trust in your Prudence, Integrity and Ability, by
virtue of the Power and Authority in me vested as Governor of
the State of Alabama hereby commission you a
Special Judge— 15th Judicial Circuit of Alabama, to Hear the
Jeremiah Reeves Case Beginning Friday, November 28, 1952
in the Absence of Honorable Eugene W. Carter W ho Recused
Himself on Account of Disqualification By Law.
To have and to hold the said office, together with all the Rights,
Powers and Emoluments to the same belonging or in anywise law
fully appertaining, during the term prescribed by the Constitution
and Laws of the State of Alabama, if you shall so long demean
yourself well.
In T estimony W hereof, I have hereunto set my hand and caused
the Great Seal of State to be affixed at the Capitol, in the City of
Montgomery, this 26th day of November in the year of our Lord
One Thousand Nine Hundred and Fifty-two.
Gordon Persons,
Governor.
( Alabama )
( Great Seal)
By the Governor:
M rs. Agnes Baggett,
Secretary of State.
JEBEMIAH REEVES, JR., VS. STATE OF ALABAMA 5
6 In the Circuit Court of Montgomery County
Judgment on Pleadings by Special Judge James J. Carter,
Presiding— November 28t,h, 1952
[Title omitted]
This day came the State by William F. Thetford, its Solicitor, and
came also the defendant in his own proper person and by attorney;
and the defendant’s motion to grant a continuance of this cause
because of change of Judges after another Judge had ruled on
numerous motions being duly considered by the Court, it is con
sidered and ordered by the Court that the motion be and the same
is hereby denied, and the defendant excepted to this ruling of the
Court.
And the defendant files his motion to exclude the public from the
Court room only while the prosecutrix testifies, and said motion
being considered by the Court, the Court is of opinion that the
same should be denied; it is, therefore, considered and adjudged by
the Court that the said motion to exclude the public only while the
prosecutrix testifies be and the same is hereby denied, and the
defendant excepted to this ruling of the Court.
And the defendant files his motion to quash the venire on the
ground that Negroes have been systematically excluded from the
Jury Rolls of Montgomery County, and the State files its demurrer
to said motion to quash the venire; and said motion being argued
by counsel and understood by the Court, and being considered by
the Court, it is considered and ordered by the Court, and it is the
judgment of the Court that said demurrer to the motion to quash
the venire be and the same is hereby over-ruled; and issue being
joined between the State and the defendant on said motion to quash
the venire on the alleged ground that Negroes had been syste
matically excluded from the jury roll of Montgomery County; and
the Court, after hearing all the evidence introduced on said motion,
finds from the undisputed testimony that said motion is not sus
tained and finds affirmatively that no Negroes qualified for jury
duty were excluded from the jury roll of Montgomery County
solely because of their race or color, and it is, therefore, considered
and ordered by the Court, and it is the judgment of the Court that
said motion to quash the venire be and the same is hereby denied,
and the defendant excepts thereto.
7 Thereupon, the defendant moves the Court to allow the
public to remain in the Court room during the trial of said
cause, and upon consideration of said motion the Court is of opinion
that relatives of the accused, members of the Press and news service,
and a stenographer to assist said defendant, if he so desires, be
permitted to remain in the Court room during the trial of said cause,
and that all others except members of the bar, witnesses, jurors and
6 JEREMIAH REEVES, JR., VS. STATE OF ALABAMA
JEREMIAH REEVES, JR., VS. STATE OF ALABAMA 7
Court officials be and they are hereby excluded from the Court room
from the time of the beginning of the taking of testimony.
In the Circuit Court of Montgomery County
Jury and V erdict— November 29th, 1952
[Title omitted]
The the 29th day of November, 1952, came William F. Thetford,
Solicitor who prosecutes for the State of Alabama, and came also
the defendant in his own proper, person and by attorney; and it
appears to the Court that on a former day of this Court the said
defendant was duly arraigned and charged upon the indictment and
for his plea thereto said he was not guilty, and not guilty by reason
of insanity; and it further appearing to the Court that the said
defendant has been duly served with a copy of the indictment to
gether with a list of the names of all of the jurors with x regular
and special in strict accordance with the former order of this Court
heretofore made and entered in this cause; and the trial of this cause
having been set for November 26th, 1952, and continued until No
vember 28th, 1952, the said defendant in open Court on November
28th, 1952 announcing himself ready for trial on his said plea of
not guilty and not guilty by reason of insanity and the trial of this
cause having begun on said November 28th, 1952, and continuing
until this day; thereupon came a jury of good and lawful men,
to-wit: Carroll J. Griggs and eleven others, who having been duly
drawn, selected, empaneled and sworn according to law upon their
oaths do say: “We the jury find the defendant guilty as charged
and fix his punishment at death.”
It is, therefore, considered and adjudged by the Court that the
said defendant is guilty as charged in the indictment, and the said
defendant was remanded to jail to await the sentence of the law.
8 In Circuit Court of Montgomery County
Sentence of the Court-—-December 3rd, 1952
[Title omitted]
And now upon this the 3rd day of December, 1952, the defendant
being now in open Court, and it appearing to the Court that the
said defendant was duly convicted of said offense on a former day
of this term; and the said defendant being asked by the Court if
he had anything to say why the sentence of the law should not now
be pronounced upon him, says nothing.
It is, therefore, considered and ordered by the Court, and it is
8 JEREMIAH REEVES, JR., VS. STATE OF ALABAMA
the judgment and sentence of the Court that the Sheriff of Mont
gomery County, Alabama, shall remove the said defendant Jeremiah
R eeves, Junior, forthwith to Kilby, at Montgomery, Alabama, where
he, the said Jeremiah R eeves, Junior, shall remain in custody
until the 23rd day of January, 1953, and on said day in strict
accordance with the law, the Warden of Kilby Prison at Mont
gomery, Alabama, shall put the said Jeremiah R eeves, Junior, to
death by causing to pass through the body of said Jeremiah R eeves,
Junior, a current of electricity of sufficient intensity to cause the
death of said Jeremiah R eeves, Junior, and that the application
and continuance of such current of electricity to pass through the
body of said Jeremiah R eeves, Junior, until he, the said Jeremiah
R eeves, Junior, is dead.
And it is further ordered by the Court that the Clerk of this
Court shall issue the necessary warrant for the execution of the said
Jeremiah R eeves, Junior, as required by law.
And questions of law arising in this case for the decision of the
Supreme Court of Alabama, and now on motion of the defendant,
it is considered, ordered and adjudged by the Court that the sentence
in this cause lie and the same is hereby suspended, pending the
defendant’s appeal to the said Supreme Court of Alabama.
9 In Circuit Court of Montgomery County
M otion for N ew T rial— Filed December 20, 1952
[Title omitted]
Comes the defendant in the above styled cause and moves the
Court to set aside the verdict of the jury and the sentence of the
Court and to grant unto said defendant a new trial in said cause
upon the following separate and several grounds, to-wit:
1. The Court erred in the ruling it made on various motions made
by the defendant to which rulings the defendant duly excepted.
2. The Court erred in over ruling various objections made by
defendant to the evidence to which rulings the defendant excepted.
3. The Court erred in excluding the public from the trial.
4. The Court erred in excluding the public from the Court room
before the trial started.
5. The Court erred in not permitting the defendant’s counsel to
have the use of a private stenographer to assist him in the trial.
6. The Court erred in making the defendant’s counsel’s private
stenographer leave the Court room.
7. The Court erred in over ruling the defendant’s motion to
permit counsel’s private stenographer to stay in the Court room
to which ruling the defendant duly excepted.
8. The Verdict of the jury is contrary to the law and the evidence
in the case.
JEREMIAH REEVES, JR., VS. STATE OF ALABAMA 9
9. The verdict of the jury is contrary to the law in the case.
10. The verdict of the jury is contrary to the evidence in the case.
11. The verdict of the jury is contrary to the great weight of the
evidence.
12. The verdict of the jury is not supported by the great weight of
the evidence.
13. The verdict of the jury is contrary to the preponderance of
the evidence.
14. The verdict of the jury is not supported by the preponderance
of the evidence.
15. The verdict of the jury is not supported by the great pre
ponderance of the evidence.
16. The verdict of the jury is contrary to the great preponderance
of the evidence.
10 17. The Court erred in stepping down in the trial and
permitting the Honorable James Carter to serve as judge.
18. The Court erred in excluding the press from the Court room
at the preliminary proceedings.
19. The Court erred in permitting introduction of certain photo
graphs over the objection and exception of the defendant.
20. The Court erred in refusing to grant the defendant’s motion
for a continuance upon the ground that material witnesses had been
subpoenaed, served and were not present, to which ruling the de
fendant duly excepted.
21. The Court erred in permitting Dr. Rheling to testify about
certain scars and scratches on the defendant’s arm over the objection
and exception of the defendant.
22. The Court erred in not permitting the defendant’s counsel to
examine the contents of the jury box.
23. The Court erred on charges it made to the jury.
24. The Court erred in commenting to the jury that the alleged
confession made by the defendant was a voluntary one as a matter
of law, to which ruling the defendant duly excepted.
25. The Court erred in refusing the grant the defendant’s motion
for a mis-trial because of the presence of the policeman, Jack Page,
on the jury to which ruling the defendant duly excepted.
26. The Court erred in refusing to permit the defendant to prove
the grounds defendant gave in requesting a motion for a new trial,
upon discovering on the jury a policeman wrho had an independent
knowledge of the facts in the case.
27. The Court erred in permitting the State to ask many questions
over the proper objections and exception of the defendant.
28. The Court erred in failing to grant various motions made by
the defendant to exclude various answers to illegal questions made
by the State to which ruling the defendant duly excepted.
29. The Court erred in permitting the prosecutrix to testify about
a conversation had by her with the defendant while being held by
the police incommunicado to which ruling the defendant duly
excepted.
30. The Court erred in refusing to permit the defendant to show
the entire treatment he received from the police and the hostile and
threatening surroundings he was in at the time of the allged conver
sation between the defendant and the prosecutrix.
11-13 31. The Court erred in refusing to grant a continuance of
the arraignment.
John N. M cGee, Jr.,
Attorney for Defendant.
[File endorsement omitted.]
14 In the Circuit Court of M ontgomery County, Alabama
[Title omitted]
Before: Hon. Eugene W. Carter, Circuit Judge
Transcript of Proceedings— November 26, 1952
9:08 a, m., the defendant entered the Court Room.
9:30 o ’clock A. M.
Present:
The Court.
W illiam F. T hetford, Esq., Circuit Solicitor, and R obert B.
Stewart, Esq., Assistant Circuit Solicitor, for the State of Alabama.
John M. M cGee, Esq., for defendant.
Jeremiah R eeves, Junior, defendant.
The Court: If you are not a witness in the Jeremiah Reeves case,
and not an official of the Court, we are about to start the case, and
I am going to clear the Court Room. You are going to have to go
out.
Mr. M cGee: May I make a motion, please?
The Court: I want the Court Room cleared.
Mr. M cGee: I want to make a motion that the public remain in
Court. And I have certain other preliminary motions to make.
I woud like to move the Court to permit the public to remain until
I make all the preliminary motions, which are based on the following
grounds:
That the failure to do so violates the constitutional rights of the
defendant as guaranteed by the Fourteenth Amendment to the Con
stitution of the United States.
That is my motion.
15 The Court: Overrule the motion.
Mr. M cGee: I except to the Court’s ruling. And another
exception to the Court overruling my motion before it was made.
10 JEREMIAH REEVES, JR., VS. STATE OP ALABAMA
JEKEMIAH BEEVES, JR., VS. STATE OF ALABAMA 11
The Court: That applies to the newspaper reporters too, to have
the Court Room cleared, except for Jurors and Officials of the
Court.
Mr. M cGee: I would like to move the Court to permit the press
to remain during the trial on the following grounds:
1. Any exclusion of the press from the defendant’s trial is in
violation of the defendant’s constitutional rights as guaranteed under
the Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States
of America.
2. That the exclusion of the press from tfte defendant’s trial by
the Court is a denial of the defendant’s rights under the Constitu
tion of the State of Alabama.
The Court: Motion overruled.
Mr. M cGee: I would like to have an exception entered on the
record.
The Court: All right.
(Exception noted for the defendant by direction of the Court.)
Mr. M cGee: I have a special court reporter, Mr. Ira Fred Watson,
who was to be here today, to assist me in this trial. He is not here.
The Court: What says the solicitor?
The Solicitor: He is not one of the regular court reporters, who
are sworn officials of this Court.
Mr. M cGee: Mr. Watson has appeared in this Court, and other
Courts, as assistant to the official court reporters.
The Court: He has no connection with our court reporters.
Mr. M cGee: I am asking that he come in as assistant to me.
The Court: We don’t recognize anybody but jurors, lawyers and
court officials.
Mr. M cGee: I move that the Court permit the counsel for defend
ant to have as his assistant a regular stenographic reporter, one who
has acted, and now acts on occasions, as the official reporter,
16 as the assistant to defense counsel in the trial of this cause,
upon the following grounds:
1. The denial of this right of assistance deprives the defendant,
violates the defendant’s constitutional rights as guaranteed under
the Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States.
The Court: On objection of the Solicitor, the Court having de
clared, this being a trial for rape, the Court Room would be cleared.
The Solicitor objected, and the Court sustains the objection.
Mr. M cGee: I would like tô have an exception entered on the
record.
The Court: All right.
(Exception noted for the defendant by direction of the Court.)
12 JEREMIAH REEVES, JR., VS. STATE OF ALABAMA
Mr. M cGee: I would like to move that the entire procedure that
has already gone on in this case be set aside upon the following
grounds:
1. The entire action by the Court in this case was the start of
the case before either side, and especially the defendant, had an
nounced ready.
The Court: Overruled.
Mr. M cGee: I would like an exception entered to Your Honor’s
ruling.
The Court: Y ou may have an exception.
(Exception noted for the defendant by direction of the Court.)
The Solicitor: Will you call the State’s witnesses?
(The list of State’s witnesses was called by the Clerk.)
The Solicitor: The State announces ready.
The Court: Call the defendant’s witnesses.
(The list of Defendant’s witnesses was called by the Clerk.)
Mr. M cGee: The defendant isn’t ready. There are some missing
witnesses.
The Solicitor: Are they marked executed?
The Clerk: Yes, sir. John Galston not here. Arnos Harvey not
here. J. D. Cooks not here.
17 (Side bar conference between the Court and counsel, not
reported by the stenographer.)
The Court: Do you announce ready in the Crowder case, No.
5121?
Mr. M cGee: There is a motion to quash the indictment on the
grounds set forth in the motion.
The Solicitor: Would you like to hear the State on that, or hear
him first?
The Court: Yes. Have you any other motions? Which one of
these is filed first? You have two motions here, first stating to
quash it because of the defendant’s custody, and so forth.
Mr. M cGee: I have four grounds.
The Court: I thought you had four motions. I have four affi
davits.
Mr. M cGee: Yes, sir. This is the affidavit.
The Assistant Solicitor: On the motion filed by the defendant,
the State demurs as to that motion, and further moves to strike the
motion, and requests permission to file the demurrer to strike in
writing. The authorities are uniform in this State that any motion
to quash the indictment comes too late after the defendant has
entered a plea of not guilty. And there is a leading case on that,
Whitehead vs. The State. All of these motions and the grounds
therefor, come too late, since this defendant has been arraigned
and entered a plea of not guilty.
The Court: I would like to hear from you, Mr. McGhee.
Mr. M cGhee: The defendant objects to that motion made to
strike the motion. There is no such thing as a demurrer to a mo
tion, or motion to strike a motion. If he can rely on a motion, I
can make a motion to strike, and we might go on for the next ten
years. There is no such thing as a demurrer to a motion. If I have
proved it at this time it would constitute a question of law' by which
Your Honor would grant the motion.
The Court : The Court will rule it is the law' when it comes after
the plea is made it comes too late. The motion to quash, I am. going
to overrule it unless you show' me some cases that I am not familiar
with. Any motion to quash an indictment after a plea is entered,
as there was in this case, a plea of not guilty, not guilty by reason
of insanity, comes too late.
Mr. M cGee: At the time of arraignment the defendant
18 made written motion to, one, to continue the arraignment to
permit him to have time to file protest to the indictment or,
two, to permit him to file written pleas after the indictment, which
motions was, of course, overruled and the question presented by
the first motion was whether or not the State could force the defend
ant to go ahead and plead and say, “ how do you plead right now7?’ ,
and plead in writing, when the defendant hadn’t been served and so
certified.
The Court: Y ou pleaded orally. W7e don’t require a written plea
in this Court.
Mr. M cGee: Other than written pleas, the defendant should have
known what he was going to be charged with in order to prepare
and investigate the case so he could attack it even though it was
orally.
Whereupon, the Solicitor called George Mosely, Jr., who, upon
having been duly sworn, was examined and testified as follows:
By The Solicitor:
Q. What is your name and occupation?
A. George Mosely, Jr., Chief Deputy Sheriff for Montgomery
County, Alabama.
Q. Did you serve the defendant, Jeremiah Reeves, Junior, with a
copy of the Indictment and Venire List in Case No. 5121?
A. I did. I personally served him on November 17th with a
copy of the Indictment and Venire List in Case No. 5121. I was
accompanied by Deputy Shivers when I served him.
JEREMIAH REEVES, JR., VS. STATE OP ALABAMA 13
The Court: The Court holds the defendant had been given a
copy of the indictment after arraignment, and given a copy of the
jury venire to be tried by.
The Court holds the motion to quash the indictment comes too
late, after the plea of not guilty, and not guilty by reason of insanity.
Mr. M cGee: If I can prove these things as alleged to the satis
faction of the Court and law, then the entire proceedings against
this defendant are null and void, and it is never too late to attack
such a proceeding.
The Court: You and the Supreme Court differ. The Supreme
Court has held right straight out differently.
Mr. M cGee: I would like to file the motion and affidavit in sup
port of it.
19 (Defendant’s motion to quash the indictment marked “ De
fendant’s Exhibit A, 11/26/1952, WHL.” )
( Affidavit of defendant market “ Defendant’s Exhibit B,
11/26/1952, WHL.” )
Mr. M cGee : The motion has been filed, and I would like the
Court to permit the defendant to try to prove the motion, and
grant the defendant a hearing on it.
The Court: The Court has to overrule your motion because the
Supreme Court has held if it comes at this stage it comes too late.
Mr. M cGee: I would like to have an exception entered on the
record.
(Exception noted for the defendant by direction of the Court.)
Mr. M cGee: At this time I have a motion here to request the
Court to permit the public to remain during the trial of this case
upon the following grounds:
“ 1. Exclusion of the public is a violation of the defendant’s con
stitutional rights as guaranteed by the Fourteenth Amendment
under the United States Constitution.”
The Court: It doesn’t apply to rape cases or kindred offenses,
the purpose being not to embarrass the females who are in the
case. Overrule the motion. Under the Constitution of Alabama
and our laws, the Court would be as qualified as any to judge it,
of course, and he has a legal right so to do.
Mr. M cGee : I understand the ruling is based on the State law
and is not based on the constitutional provision?
The Court: Yes.
Mr. M cGee : I want to file this motion: “ Comes the defendant in
the above styled cause and moves the Court to permit the relatives
of the defendant to remain in the Court Room throughout his trial
upon the following grounds:
1. Failure to permit this violates the defendant’s constitutional
14 JEREMIAH REEVES, JR., VS. STATE OF ALABAMA
JEREMIAH REEVES, JR., VS. STATE OF ALABAMA 15
rights as guaranteed by the Constitution of the State of Alabama
and violates the defendant’s constitutional rights as guaranteed by
the Fourteenth Amendment of the Constitution of the United
States.”
The Court: I think the relatives of the defendant should stay in
there whether they are witnesses for the defendant, or not.
20 The Solicitor: We agree with that.
Mr. M cGee: Your Honor realizes the State really is the
public.
The Court: It is left in the discretion of the judge.
(Motion of defendant to permit the public to remain during the
trial marked “ Defendant’s Exhibit C, 11/26/1952, WHL.” )
(Defendant’s motion to permit relatives of the defendant to re
main in the Court Room marked “ Defendant’s Exhibit C-l,
11/26/1952, WHL.” )
Mr. M cGee: The defendant moves the Court to exclude the pub
lic and so inform the public that they are excluded only while the
prosecutrix testifies. We say we should have a public trial, almost
throughout the trial of the case, except when the prosecutrix is tes
tifying, so the prosecutrix would not be embarrassed, and this is
the motion I have here I want to file.
The Court: I cannot grant the motion. I have already ordered
the clearing of the Court Room. I would have to deny a public
trial.
Mr. M cGee: I wmuld like to have an exception on the record.
(Exception noted for the defendant by direction of the Court.)
(Motion to exclude public only while prosecutrix testifies,
marked “ Defendant’s Exhibit D, 11/26/1952, WHL.” )
Mr. M cGee: I think this is my last one. This is a motion to
quash the venire in the case this is rather prejudicial argument. I
would like to have this heard in the absence of the panel.
The Court: Let me see the motion first.
Mr. M cGee: I am going to add a ground to that here.
The Court: If this motion is granted the Court, the presiding
judge, would have to disqualify himself and have to continue this
case until Friday, and have a Special Judge appointed to try the
case, because I am a member of the Jury Commission. And this
motion the Court would have to grant because it is too late to attack
the venire. And being a member of the Jury Commission, the Jury
Commission being attacked, and being a witness, it would be neces
sary for me to excuse myself and have to have a Special Judge
21 appointed, and the case would have to be continued until
Friday morning at 9:30.
Mr. M cGee: I would like to have some little time relative to the
motion.
16 JEREMIAH REEVES, JR., VS. STATE OF ALABAMA
The Court: The Court has granted your motion to continue the
case until Friday at nine o’clock in the morning, and have to have a
Special Judge to try the case. I will have to excuse myself as being
a member of the Jury Commission. The Jury Commission is being
attacked, and I couldn’t be a witness and take any part in the trial.
The case is set for 9:30 o ’clock Friday morning, and we will have
another judge to try it.
22 (Defendant’s motion to quash the venire marked “ Defend
ant’s Exhibit E, 11/26/1952, WHL.” )
D efendant’s Exhibit A
In the Circuit Court of Montgomery County Criminal Term
Case No. 5121
T he State
Jeremiah R eeves, Jr.
Comes the Defendant in the above styled cause and moves the
court to quash the indictment upon the following grounds:
1. The Defendant, after nearly three (3) days of continual ques
tioning and being subject to mental torture by State officers, con
fessed to said charges. During this time the Defendant was held
incommunicado and said confession was obtained by violation of the
Defendant’s constitutional rights as guaranteed by the 14th amend
ment to the United States Constitution and said confession was used
before the Grand Jury in securing this indictment.
2. Negroes are systematically excluded from the Grand Jury of
Montgomery County and were excluded from the Grand Jury ren
dering this indictment in violation of the Defendant’s said rights
under said 14th amendment.
3. There were no negroes serving on said Grand Jury that rendered
this indictment and this was a violation of the Defendant’s con
stitutional rights under said amendment of the United States
Constitution.
4. Said Grand Jury was called back specially to hear only cases
against Defendant and that discrimination violated Defendant’s
said rights under said 14th amendment.
(S.) John N. M cGee, Jr.,
Attorney for Defendant.
As part of said motion Defendant requests that subpoenas be
issued to Circuit Judge Walter B. Jones, Sheriff G. A. Mosley, Circuit
Clerk John Mathews, Probate Judge W. W. Hill, and Circuit Judge
JEREMIAH REEVES, JR., VS. STATE OF ALABAMA 17
Eugene Carter, all as jury commissioners to produce the jury
23 box of Montgomery County or in the alternative to request
the appearance before the court at the hearing of this motion
of all Montgomery County citizens in the jury box so their race
and color might be proportionately determined.
(S.) John N. M cGee, Jr.,
Attorney for Defendant.
D efendant’s Exhibit B
In the Circuit Court of Montgomery County Criminal Term
State of Alabama,
Montgomery County:
Case No. —
Affidavit
My name is Jeremiah Reeves, Jr. I am seventeen (17) years old.
I quit school in the 8th grade. I am a member of the negro race.
About 2:10 in the afternoon on November 10th, 1952 I was arrested
by Mr. H. P. Armstrong and Mr. Talley, Deputy Sheriffs of Mont
gomery County. They carried me to the county jail in Montgomery
county. They accused me of raping and attempting to rape several
white women and they told me I was going to the electric chair
for it. They kept me in the county jail for about five minutes and
then carried me to the Kilby State Penitentiary a few miles from
Montgomery. I told them I wanted to either telephone my Mamma
or see her. They did not let me do this. When I got to Kilby I was
questioned by so many people I don’t remember all of them. Some of
them cursed me and threatened me. Different police officers and one
reporter named Joe Azbell, who I never will forget, questioned me
at different time until Monday night they finally let me sleep. About
the time I went to sleep Mr. 0. R. Deeds, Depute Warden of Kilby
Penitentiary, woke me up and took me to the room with the elec
tric chair in it and questioned me some more. I finally told him
that I had tried to rob Mrs. Frances Prescott. I only did this after
Mr. Deeds kept on telling me to go ahead and say you did it. That’s
the only thing that will keep you out of that chair. Go on and
plead guilty to it and you won’t go to the chair. That Monday I
was questioned constantly from 2:10 P. M. to 7:30 P. M. Early
Tuesday morning the officers started questioning me again.
24 They forced me to strip naked and some man named Dr.
Rheling, State Toxicologist, came out and took several pic
tures of me while I was that way. I was then questioned all day
Tuesday until first dark. Warden Deeds and all the other officers
kept telling me to plead guilty to all those rapes. They kept saying
that was the only way I would keep out of the chair. The Warden
18 JEREMIAH REEVES, JR., VS. STATE OP ALABAMA
and some others said they would help me if I said I did these things.
They told me it would save me from the chair if I pleaded guilty.
Wednesday morning they showed me some papers and said the best
thing for me to do was to go on and say I did them. The Solicitor
came out and listened to some of the questions. After about two
hours more of questioning on Wednesday morning I finally said I
did these things. I did not do these things. I only said I did them
because the police told me it would save me from the chair if I
admitted doing these things and pleaded guilty. While I was out
at Kilby the prison doctor took some fluid out of my spine and also
some blood out of my left arm over my protest. They would not let
me contact anyone or see anybody until my Mamma was finally let
in to see me about five o’clock in the afternoon on Wednesday. On
Thursday I was taken down to the Montgomery police headquarters
where the police ordered me to strip naked again and they took
eight or nine pictures of me. I was carried back to Kilby then.
On Saturday I was taken to the Montgomery County Court and at
9:00 A. M. I was ordered to plead to three (3) indictments, two (2)
for rape and one (1) for robbery. After court they left me in the
county jail. These indictments were not given to me or served on
me until Monday, November 17th, 1952. I have signed some kind
of paper I think but I do not know what was in it.
Signed the 26 day of November, 1952.
(S.) Jeremiah R eeves, Jr.
State of Alabama,
Montgomery County:
Before me, L. H. Walden, Notary Public in and for said State
and County, personally appeared Jeremiah Reeves, Jr. who upon
being identified by me upon oath doth depose and say and swear
that the above statement is true and correct and was voluntarily
given by him and signed by him on the day this bears date.
(S.) L. H. W alden,
Notary Public in and for Said County and State.
JEREMIAH REEVES, JR., VS. STATE OP ALABAMA 19
25 D efendant’s Exhibit C
In the Circuit Court of Montgomery County Criminal Term
Case No. —
T he State
vs.
Jeremiah R eeves, Jr.
Comes the Defendant in the above styled cause and moves the
court to permit the public to remain during the trial of his case
upon the following grounds:
1. Exclusion of the public is a violation of the Defendant’s con
stitutional rights as guaranteed by the 14th amendment under the
United States Constitution.
(S.) John N. M cGee, Jr.,
Attorney for Defendant.
D efendant’s Exhibit C -l
In the Circuit Court of Montgomery County Criminal Term
Case No. —
T he State
vs.
Jeremiah R eeves, Jr.
Comes the Defendant in the above styled cause and moves the
court to permit the relatives of the Defendant to remain in the court
room through out his trial upon the following grounds:
1. Failure to permit this violates the Defendant’s constitutional
rights as guaranteed by the Constitution of the State of Alabama
and violates the Defendant’s constitutional rights as guaranteed by
the 14th amendment of the Constitution of the United States.
(S.) John N. M cGee, Jr.,
Attorney for Defendant.
D efendant’s Exhibit D
In the Circuit Court of Montgomery County Criminal Term
Case No. —
T he State
20 JEHEMIAH REEVES, JR., VS. STATE OF ALABAMA
vs.
Jeremiah Reeves, Jr.
26 Comes the Defendant in the above styled cause and moves
the court to exclude the public and so inform the public that
they are excluded only while the prosecutrixs testifies upon the
following grounds:
1. Permanent exclusion of the public from all phases of the
Defendant’s trial is a violation of the Defendant’s constitutional
rights as guaranteed by the 14th amendment to the Constitution
of the United States.
(S.) John N. M cGee, Jr.,
Attorney for Defendant.
D efendant’s Exhibit E
In the Circuit Court of Montgomery County Criminal Term
Case No. —
T he State
vs.
Jeremiah R eeves, Jr.
Comes the Defendant in the above styled cause and moves the
court to quash the venire in said case upon the following grounds:
1. The Defendant’s constitutional rights as guaranteed by the
14th amendment to the Constitution of the United States has been
violated in that there are no members of the negro race on said
venire and said Defendant is a member of the negro race.
2. Negroes, because of their race and/or color, have been sys
tematically excluded from the jury in violation of the 14th amend
ment under the Constitution of the United States.
3. Negroes, because of their race, are systematically excluded from
Montgomery County juries in violation of the 14th amendment to
the Constitution of the United States.
(S.) John N. M cGee, Jr.,
Attorney for Defendant.
JEREMIAH REEVES, JR., VS. STATE OF ALABAMA 21
27 10:10 o’clock A. M.
Adjourned until Friday, November 28th, 1952, at 9.30
O’clock A. M.
28 Reporter’s and Judge’s Certificates to foregoing transcript
omitted in printing.
29 In the Circuit Court of Montgomery County, Alabama
[Title omitted]
Before Hon. James J. Carter, Specially Presiding
T ranscript of Proceedings—November 28, 1952
9:12 O’clock A. M., the Defendant Entered the Court Room
9:30 o’clock A. M.
Present :
The Court.
W illiam F. T hetford, E sq., Circuit Solicitor, and P̂ obert B.
Stewart, E sq., Assistant Circuit Solicitor, for the State of Alabama.
John N. M cGee, E sq., for defendant.
Jeremiah R eeves, Junior, defendant.
Colloquy
The Court: I want the record to show in this case in order to
get the preliminary matters before the trial of this case, that Judge
Eugene W. Carter recused himself from the bench; that I am sit
ting as presiding judge of this trial by appointment of the Governor
of the State of Alabama, and by virtue of the Commission issued
pursuant to that appointment.
And that further, I am sitting with the express agreement and
consent of the Solicitor representing the State of Alabama and the
attorney representing the defendant in this cause. Is there any
objection to that appearing of record ?
The Solicitor : No.
Mr. M cGee: No.
The Court : The record will so state.
The Solicitor: We would also like, if it is agreeable, to present
this agreement. We would like to have it in the
30-31 record.
The Court: If it is agreeable, all right.
Mr. M cGee: As far as agreement is concerned, as far as having
you as special judge, according to that I have no objection, but as
to having a change of judges after this case was commenced, I do
have an objection. That is something which I couldn’t agree.
The Solicitor: You had no objeetion.
Mr. M cGee: If the Court is going to excuse and recuse itself and
having a special judge called in I think that such action will be
over my protest. But having done that, I am willing to continue
with Judge James J. Carter only.
The Court: Under those circumstances the case will proceed.
32 Mr. M cGee: I have a motion here that the public be per
mitted to remain during the trial of this cause.
The Court: That motion will be acted upon in due course when
the trial of this cause begins and after the Jury is empanelled and
sworn. You may resubmit that motion at that time if you care to
do so. I might state at this time the public will be excluded from
this trial under the provision of the discretion vested in me by the
Constitution of the State of Alabama and the Statute. The only
exception to that, representatives of the press will be allowed to be
present during the trial of this case, and also that the family and
relatives of the accused will be allowed to be present during the
trial of this case, as are the officers and officials of this Court, and
the members of the Bar.
Mr. M cGee: I have here another motion I would like to file at
this time. This is a motion to grant a new trial on the ground they
cannot change judges after the other judge has passed on numerous
motions.
The Court: Let the record show upon Judge Eugene W. Carter
announcing he had recused himself the Solicitor and attorney for
the defendant suggested that I serve as special judge to try this
case, and that pursuant to that agreement I agreed to serve in the
trial of this case if acceptable, and by appointment of the Governor
of the State of Alabama. And this is the appointment, and I present
to you the Commission issued for that appointment. The motion
is overruled.
Mr. M cGee: I would like an exception on the record.
(Exception noted for the defendant by direction of the
33 Court.)
Mr. M cGee: May the record show the defendant was not
consulted and no agreement reached with him personally?
The Court: Let the record show what Mr. McGee said.
Mr. M cGee: This is a motion for a continuance. My ground for
the motion for a continuance is for the reason:
1. He has not received a copy of the venire with the indictment
in the case to be tried. He had received three copies of the indict
ment, and the venire list was attached to that, which said robbery.
We contend such action is under the law—the law should be strictly
22 JEREMIAH REEVES, JR., VS. STATE OF ALABAMA
complied with, and the law means in each case a copy of the venire
in each case should be served on him. It should be served on
him at least one day prior. I think in striking the jury that is
misleading, because the defendant don’t know which case he was
going to be tried on. And he received one copy of the venire, and
that was marked robbery.
The Solicitor: He has been served with a copy of the venire, and
I think that, is all the statute contemplates and requires.
The Court: I agree with that. The motion is overruled.
Mr. M cGee: Will you grant me an exception?
(Exception noted for the defendant by direction of the Court.)
The Court: Any other motions?
Mr. M cGee: Not at this time, Your Honor.
The Solicitor: We also have proof that he was served with three
copies of the venire. We are willing to put evidence on to that effect.
The Court: If you want to do so, the Court will hear evidence
on it.
Mr. M cGee: That motion was overruled without any evidence
from the defendant. The defendant made the motion and he is
entitled to present all his evidence. Without hearing any evidence
Your Honor overruled the motion and gave your ruling on the
motion.
The Court: Let the ruling of the Court stand, and show that the
attorney for the defendant objects to the introduction by the State
of evidence showing three copies of the venire was served on the
defendant. Let us proceed.
34-35 Mr. M cGee: I would like to have the record show there
is a statement by the solicitor he can show that.
The Solicitor: An offer by the State.
The Court: Let it so show. Any further motions to be heard
by the Court at this time? If not, we are ready to proceed with the
qualifying of the jury.
Mr. M cGee: Except for the motion set for hearing this morning.
The Court: I asked you if you have any motions to present.
Have you agreed to present that motion at this time? It has not
been presented to me.
Mr. M cGee: It was presented to Judge Carter, and he recessed
the hearing.
The Court: All right, let us have the hearing. Let the record
show the motion is filed in open Court.
(Marked “ Defendant’s Exhibit 2, 11/28/1952, WHL.” )
The Court: I am ready to hear you on the motion.
The Solicitor: The State would like to file this demurrer to the
motion to quash the venire.
JEREMIAH REEVES, JR., VS. STATE OF ALABAMA 23
(Marked “ State’s Exhibit 2, 11/28/1952, WHL.” )
Mr. M cGee: I would like to have the hearing in the absence of
the panel.
The Court: As to the demurrer too?
Mr. M cGee: Yes, sir.
The Court: All right. The hearing on the motion and demurrer
will be held in Chambers. We will go back to Judge Jones’ Cham
bers and hear this motion.
D efendant’s E xhibit 1—Omitted. Printed side page 25 ante
36 D efendant’s Exhibit 2.
In the Circuit Court of Montgomery County Criminal Term
Case No.—
T he State
vs.
Jeremiah R eeves, Jr.
Comes the Defendant in the above styled cause and moves the
court to quash the venire in said case upon the following grounds:
1. The Defendant’s constitutional rights as guaranteed by the
14th amendment to the Constitution of the United States has been
violated in that there are no members of the negro race on said
venire and said Defendant is a member of the negro race.
2. Negroes, because of their race and/or color, have been system
atically excluded from the jury in violation of the 14th amendment
under the Constitution of the United States.
3. Negroes, because of their race, are systematically excluded
from Montgomery County juries in violation of the 14th amendment
to the Constitution of the United States.
(S.) John N. M cGee, Jr.,
Attorney for Defendant.
2 4 JEBEMIAH BEEVES, JR., VS. STATE OF ALABAMA
JEREMIAH REEVES, JR,, VS. STATE OF ALABAMA 25
State’s Exhibit 2.
In the Circuit Court of Montgomery County Criminal Term,
November, 1952
Case No.—
T he State
vs.
Jeremiah R eeves, Jr.
Now comes the State of Alabama by and through William F.
Thetford, Circuit Solicitor of the 15th Judicial Circuit of Alabama,
and demurs to the motion to quash the venire heretofore filed in
this cause by the Defendant, and, as grounds for said demurrer,
separately and severally assigns the following:
1. The Defendant does not allege that there has been any
37 systematic exclusion of members of the Negro race from
the jury panels of Montgomery County by reason of their
race, creed or color in violation of the Constitution of the United
States.
2. The defendant is not entitled to trial by jury composed in whole
or in part by members of his race.
3. It does not affirmatively appear that the Jury Commission
of Montgomery County has violated the defendant’s constitutional
rights because there are no members of the Negro race on the venire
to try this cause.
4. The allegation that Negroes are systematically excluded from
juries in Montgomery County does not amount to a violation of
Defendant’s constititutional rights.
5. It is not alleged that the systematic exclusion of Negroes from
the juries of Montgomery County has been by the Jury Commis
sion of said county.
6. For ought that appears any exclusion of Negroes from juries
results from striking of said juries by counsel rather than by action
of the Jiuy Commission.
7. The allegation that there are no members of the Negro race
on the venire in said cause is a mere conclusion of the pleader.
8. The allegation that Negroes are systematically excluded from
juries in violation of the 14th Amendment of the Constitution of
the United States is a mere conclusion of the pleader.
9. The systematic exclusion of “Negroes” from the juries of
Montgomery County would not amount to a violation of any con
stitutional right of the Defendant,
38 10. The systematic exclusion of Negroes because of their
race and/or color from the jury is not a violation of the
Defendant’s rights under the Constitution of the United States.
(S.) W illiam F. T hetford,
Circuit Solicitor.
H earing on D efendant’s M otion to Quash V enire
9:50 o’clock A. M.
Chambers of Judge Walter B. Jones.
Present:
The Court.
The Solicitor and Assistant Solicitor.
The Defendant and his Counsel.
The A ssistant Solicitor: You have a copy of the motion before
you. The gist of the demurrer is this. While he has alleged that
negroes have been excluded, he has failed to allege the essential
element that the jury commission of Montgomery County has sys
tematically excluded negroes because of their race, creed or color
from the jury box or the jury roles. The first paragraph of his
motion there is that this defendant’s constitutional rights have been
violated because there are no members of the negro race on said
venire, the defendant being a negro. That particular paragraph
does not allege any systematic exclusion, does not allege any action
of the Board of Jury Commission systematically excluded negroes
and is, therefore, faulty.
The second paragraph states negroes are systematically excluded
from the jury in violation of their constitutional rights. It fails to
state that the Jury Commission of Montgomery County has system
atically excluded them. It doesn’t allege that they have been ex
cluded from the jury panel. It just says the jury. Any number of
them have been struck from the juries in this County.
As to the third paragraph. First he is going to have to correct
the spelling of negroes. I have never seen the name spelled like
that. He alleges—he says: “ negores, because of their race, are sys
tematically excluded from Montgomery County juries in
39 violation of the 14th amendment to the Constitution of the
United States.” What I have said about the other para
graphs applies to this. He has not alleged the Jury Commission
of Montgomery County has systematically excluded. He fails to
allege in the three paragraphs anything that violates the laws of
the State of Alabama.
The Court: I am going to hold in a case of this kind the first
paragraph states nothing at all on which this Court would be re
quired to pass. I am holding that paragraphs two and three do state
26 JEREMIAH REEVES, JR., VS. STATE OP ALABAMA
a question which the Court has arranged to hear and pass on. I,
therefore, overrule the demurrers to the motion.
Mr. M cGee: I would like to amend paragraphs two and three
by inserting the word “ box” after “ jury” .
I would like to amend grounds two and three to read like this:
“ Negroes, because of their race and their color, have been system
atically excluded by the Montgomery County Jury Commission
from the Montgomery County jury box as a whole, in violation of
the 14th amendment to the Constitution fo the United States” .
The Court: All right. The amendment is allowed. Are we ready
to proceed?
Mr. M cGee: Yes, sir, Your Honor.
The Assistant Solicitor: I s that the only amendment you make?
Mr. M cGee: Yes, sir.
The A ssistant Solicitor: The State refiles its demurrers.
The Court: Let us proceed.
Mr. M cGee: I have requested subpoenas for the different members
of the Jury Commission to appear before the Court with the jury
box for the purpose of determining the number of negroes in the
jury box, and the number of white people, and check them off the
gross total to see whether they are white and colored, and for that
purpose I ask that the jury box be opened in court. I think the
only way that question can be proved is by going into the jury
box and determining the number of white and colored jurors in it.
The Court: The Court is going to rule you are not going to be
allowed to go into the jury box for the purpose of determining the
number, or color, or creed, or religion, or race of the jurors
40 in the box.
Mr. M cGee: I would like to have an exception.
The Court: Y ou may have an exception to that.
(Exception noted for the defendant by direction of the Court.)
The Assistant Solicitor : Let the record show the members of the
Jury Commission are present. Let the record show that.
The Court: Judge Hill has a doctor’s certificate. Judge Hill is
feeble and infirm.
Mr. M cGee: I won’t make any point of that. I didn’t realize he
was in bad health or I wouldn’t have brought it up.
I would like to make a motion I be permitted to go into the jury
box on the ground that by going into it it can be determined whether
or not they are systematically excluded. I want to go into it for
the purpose of determining whether they have proportional repre
sentation.
The Court: The Court rules you will not be allowed to go into
the jury box. You may establish that with any testimony you would
JEREMIAH REEVES, JR., VS. STATE OF ALABAMA 27
28 JEREMIAH REEVES, JR., VS. STATE OF ALABAMA
like to present along that line. Tf it becomes an issue for decision
in the case we will meet it when we get to it.
Mr. M cGee: I would like to have an exception.
(Exception noted for the defendant by direction of the Court.)
Evidence on Behalf of the D efendant on M otion to
Quash the V enire
Eugene W. Carter, having been duly sworn, was examined and
testified as follows:
D irect examination.
By Mr. M cGee:
Q. You are a member of the jury commission of Montgomery
County?
A. I am.
Q. Do you know the approximate number of names in the jury
box?
A. We have quite a good many. I haven’t the slightest idea. I
couldn’t give within five hundred how many there were in there.
Q. Do you recall when Judge Jones was running for re-election?
A. Yes," sir; I remember when Judge Jones was running for re-
election.
41 Q. Did you ever hear him make any reference to the
number of names in the box?
A. No; I never did.
The Assistant Solicitor: We object to this line of questioning.
The W itness: I haven’t the slightest idea how many are in there.
Any time I meet a member on the jury I have discussed with him
about putting names in, and if he knows any good, substantial men
in the community to send in their names.
By Mr. M cGee:
Q. Does every member of the Commission contribute names to
the box?
A. They do.
Q. Is it your custom to take names from different clubs like the
Elks, and so forth?
A. We have done that. And I have asked negroes. My first
recollection of putting them in there, I once went to the clubs, lists
were made up of those who were willing to serve, and secured the
first ones I put in there. Every time we got the names of a few
negroes they were put in, of course. I remember one in particular—
JEREMIAH REEVES, JR., VS. STATE OP ALABAMA 29
his name is Smith; I don’t recall his first name—in the insurance
business. I called him in the office after he served on the jury and
asked him would he be kind enough to get me a list of negroes,
intelligent, honest, trustworthy type of negro, who were the type of
negroes, as far as possible, the same type of white people we had on
the jury. He submitted the names of at least twelve I know of
which I presented to the Jury Commission myself. I just remem
ber, Morris Smith is his name. That was two or three years ago
and from time to time we have asked people to send in names. It is
particularly hard for us to put in negroes without knowing them.
We have never put in anybody at all unless we have a list from
somebody. I know the other members of the Jury Commission
have done the same thing. As far as I remember, when I have
attended a meeting of the Jury Commission, I have never attended
a meeting where a negro was turned down because oi the fact he
was a negro. As a matter of fact, I don t believe I have attended a
meeting where a negro was turned down, where somebody has sub
mitted us the name of any negro.
Mr. M cGee : I move to strike the answer on the ground it is
not responsive to the question.
42 The Court: Objection overruled.
Mr. M cGee: I would like to have an exception.
(Exception noted for the defendant by direction of the Court.)
By the Court:
Q. Do you apply the same qualifications for negroes and white
people?
A. Absolutely. We follow the same qualifications for everybody
in putting them in the jury box. There is a lot of regulations we have
to follow, various means we have to follow getting people who are
intelligent, names of people to go in the jury box, both white and
black.
Mr. M cGee: I move to strike all that because it is not responsive.
The W itness: I am answering the Judge, not you.
The Court: The motion is overruled.
Mr. M cGee : I would like to have an exception.
(Exception noted for the defendant by direction of the Court.)
By Mr. M cGee:
Q. Have you an idea how many negroes you have?
A. No; I have not. I know there are a good many in there. I
wouldn’t know, anymore than I could tell you how many negroes
vote. I don’t know. I know there is a number of them. I do know
this; I have tried to get them. I mean high-class negroes.
Q. How long have you been a Circuit Judge here?
A. Eighteen years in January.
Q. You were a Circuit Judge at the time this jury law was passed,
were you not?
A. I believe it was the law before I went on it. My recollection
is it was the law and they repassed it shortly after that. I may be
wrong. That is my recollection.
Q. You have been on the Jury Commission ever since you have
been Judge?
A. I believe it was the first year I was elected that we filled the
jury box. They already had the box and everything else. And in
1939— I believe I am right—there was a local Act passed with a
number of supplementary Acts, if I am right. I could be wrong
because I haven’t given it any thought. When I was first
43 elected judge my recollection is the local statute was the
thing we went by.
Q. I believe the normal practice is there are four criminal terms
during the year and approximately three civil terms?
A. That is right, unless we have an extra session of court, as we
have this term. The jurors are taken out of the box, except in war
times. That is the only time we didn’t do that. The name is put
back in the jury box about every eighteen months.
I might say—what we want to get is the truth— since I have been
judge we have had as many as three negroes called for one term.
We never turned any back, if he was a negro, for a white man. It
is possible a negro’s name would not be drawn, but it never was
thrown back. And I have never seen the jury box anywhere near
empty. The most I have seen was three at one time.
Q. How many do you draw out for a regular term of court?
A. You draw about fifty, but you never get fifty here. Usually
out of fifty you get thirty-five if you are doing good.
Q. If you don’t have enough you draw an additional supply?
A. That is right. The same thing comes up each time we draw.
Lots of them move away from here. We draw a lot of them who
have died, and their names are not removed from the jury roles. We
don’t know about that until the names are drawn. Some men are
out of the State, and others sick. The only way to get them out of
the jury box is to have somebody notify us they are dead, or have
left here, unless it is somebody we know, somebody very well known,
some prominent person we know.
Q. Do you know the approximate number of colored registered
voters in this County?
A. I don’t know.
Q. That list is available, is it not?
A. Naturally, they have a list of them. Whether they carry them
3 0 JEREMIAH REEVES, JR., VS. STATE OF ALABAMA
JEREMIAH REEVES, JR., VS. STATE OP ALABAMA 31
black and white, or not, I don’t know. They did at one time.
Whether they are listed as one group, I don’t know.
Q. Do you ignore the voter list?
The Court: I don’t know what the voters’ list has to do with
the jury.
Mr. M cGee: I want to get the number of qualified colored voters.
The W itness: What has that to do with the jury commission?
There are so many people who cannot serve on the jury. Y ou
44 have teachers who are engaged in teaching, they cannot
serve; no doctor can serve; no dentist can serve. We have
made it a rule not to call a preacher for jury duty. The jury
commissioners feel it would be embarrassing for him when some
member of his congregation was up for trial. For that reason wre
haven’t done that in the past. They are not excused under the law.
There are a lot of others disqualified, that the law disqualifies. We
do not.
By the Court :
Q. The statute exempts persons engaged as railroad engineers?
A. That is right. We have never put in anybody of that grade.
By Mr. M cGee:
Q. Aren’t there around approximately twenty-eight hundred to
three thousand colored voters in the County?
A. I couldn’t tell you.
Mr. M cGee: Could I have the voter record brought here?
The Court: I don’t see what the voting list has to do with this
phase.
Mr. M cGee: For the purpose of picking men of good character.
The Court: T o pick a man of good character they have several
tests. I see no value of the voting list, because many people on
there mostly appear to be good jurors in your opinion. I think it
is irrelevant to this particular hearing. If you care to show what
the number is, I will let it in for what it is worth.
Mr. M cGee: I want to show approximately the number of quali
fied colored voters in the County.
The W itness: In all fairness to both sides, this ought to be read
into the record. Title 30, Chapter 1, Section 3: “ Persons exempt
from jury duty.—The following persons are exempt from jury duty,
unless by their own consent: Judges of the several courts; attorneys
at law during the time they practice their profession; officers of
the United States; officers of the executive department of the state
government; sheriffs and their deputies; clerks of the courts and
county commissioners; regularly licensed and practicing physicians;
dentists; pharmacists; optometrists; teachers while actually engaged
32 JEREMIAH REEVES, JR., VS. STATE OF ALABAMA
in teaching; actuaries while actually engaged in their profession;
officers and regularly licensed engineers of any boat plying the
waters of this state; passenger bus driver-operators; and
45 driver-operators of motor-vehicles hauling freight for hire
under the supervision of the Alabama public service com
mission ; railroad engineers, locomotive firemen, conductors, train
dispatchers, bus dispatchers, railroad station agents, and telegraph
operators when actually in sole charge of an office; newspaper
reporters while engaged in the discharge of their duties as such,
regularly licensed embalmers while actually engaged in their pro
fession; radio broadcasting engineers and announcers when engaged
in the regular performance of their duties; the superintendents,
physicians, and all regular employees of the Bryce hospital in
Tuscaloosa county and the Searcy hospital in Mobile county;
officers and enlisted men of the national guard and naval militia of
Alabama, during their terms of service; and convict and prison
guards while engaged in the discharge of their duties as such.”
“ Section 20. Jury roll and cards.—The jury commission shall
meet in the court house at the county seat of the several counties
annually, between the first day of August and the twentieth day
of December, and shall make in a well bound book a roll containing
the name of every male citizen living in the county who possessed the
qualifications herein prescribed and who is not exempted by law
from serving on juries. The roll shall be arranged alphabetically
and by precincts in their numerical order and the jury commission
shall cause to be written on the roll opposite every name placed
thereon the occupation, residence and place of business of every
person selected, and if the residence has a street number it must be
given. Upon the completion of the roll the jury commission shall
cause to be prepared plain white cards all of the same size and
texture and shall have written or printed on the cards the name,
occupation, place of residence and place of business of the person
whose name has been placed on the jury roll; writing or printing
but one person’s name, occupation, place of residence and of business
on each card. These cards shall be placed in a substantial metal
box provided with a lock and two keys, which box shall be kept in
a safe or vault in the office of the probate judge, and if there be none
in that office, the jury commission shall deposit it in any safe or
vault in the court house to be designated on the minutes of the
commission; and one of said keys thereof shall be kept by the
president of the jury commission. The other of said keys
46 shall be kept by a judge of a court of record having juries,
other than the probate or circuit court, and in counties having
no such court then by the judge of the circuit court, for the sole use
of the judges of the courts of said county needing jurors. The jury
roll shall be kept securely and for the use of the jury commission
exclusively. It shall not be inspected by any one except the members
of the commission or by the clerk of the commission upon the au
thority of the commission, unless under an order of the judge of the
circuit court or other court of record having jurisdiction.”
“ Section 21. Qualifications of persons on jury roll.—The jury
commission shall place on the jury roll and in the jury box the names
of all male citizens of the county who are generally reputed to be
honest and intelligent men and are esteemed in the community for
their integrity, good character and sound judgment; but no person
must be selected who is under twenty-one or who is an habitual
drunkard, or who, being afflicted with a permanent disease or physi
cal weakness is unfit to discharge the duties of a juror; or cannot
read English or who has ever been convicted of any offense involving
moral turpitude. If a person cannot read English and has all the
other qualifications prescribed herein and is a freeholder or house
holder his name may be placed on the jury roll and in the jury box.
No person over the age of sixty-five years shall be required to
serve on a jury or to remain on the panel of jurors unless he is
willing to do so.”
This is the amended provision I have read. That is part of our
duty as the jury commission. There are five members of the jury
commission, and it takes three of them to constitute a quorum. We
have meetings, sometimes twice a year, sometimes more. During
the summer we have a meeting at somebody’s house for breakfast,
and then go out all through the County canvassing names.
By Mr. M cGee:
Q. When you select jurors from these clubs, do you check up the
list of membership?
A. They do that in the club among themselves, find out how many
can serve. We know where they live, the names of the members,
and we check to find out how long he has been living around here,
find out everything we can about him.
Q. You do have some on the club list you don’t know?
47 A. Oh, yes. We find out all about him if we don’t know
the member, and if he qualifies, we take him.
Q. From how many clubs approximately have you got a list of
club members?
A. I couldn’t answer that. Most all of them here.
Q. Do you request lists from colored clubs?
A. Not that I know of. I never go to the negro clubs. The ones
I have asked to help me have been somebody I know, negroes I
know.
Q. I am talking about club lists.
A. I don’t know because I don’t go in their clubs.
Q. You don’t go in their clubs?
A. I don’t go in them. I do know—this is way, way back—I do
JEREMIAH REEVES, JR., VS. STATE OP ALABAMA 33
know one club. We had several members out of that club. In
fact, we had at least twenty out of the club. That is when that
meets in an insurance office. They call it the Montgomery Improve
ment Association or Society. It might be the Atlanta Insurance
Company. Pearce, I remember, and Morris Smith, I remember.
Out of that group we had at least half the membership anyway.
Mr. M cGee: I would like to strike the answer as not responsive.
The Court: Overrule the motion.
Mr. M cGee: I would like to have an exception.
(Exception noted for the defendant by direction of the Court.)
Mr. M cGee: In regard to a certain number of jurors, approxi
mately twenty, named by the witness as having been secured from
an unascertained club, I move you permit me to go into the jury
box to determine the number.
The Court: Overrule your motion.
Mr. M cGee: I would like to have an exception.
(Exception noted for the defendant by direction of the Court.)
Cross-examination.
By the Solicitor:
Q. Who is on the Jury Commission of Montgomery County?
A. The Jury Commission is composed of two circuit judges, the
Judge of Probate, the Circuit Clerk and the Sheriff, Judge Jones
being the Chairman, or President, and John Matthews being the
Clerk.
48 Q. Section 21 of Title 30, which is qualifications of persons
on the jury roll, reads: “ That the names of all male citizens
of the County who are generally reputed to be honest and intelligent
men and are esteemed in the community for their integrity, good
character and sound judgment.” Do you place every person, re
gardless of color, who fits those qualifications just the same as any
other person?
A. We have tried to to the best of our knowledge, information
and belief.
Q. And I will ask you this. Have you ever excluded any person
who would otherwise have qualified because of color?
A. No, sir. Color has never been discussed, except somebody has
said he is a negro, and he is a white man. I could make this state
ment in all honesty. I never remember one being turned down. I
wasn’t present at all the meetings. Any meeting I attended nobody
ever turned down one somebody recommended as being qualified
for jury service, somebody we could rely on.
Q. There is a negro on this present jury panel?
34 JEREMIAH REEVES, JR., VS. STATE OF ALABAMA
A. Yes. He was on the panel before this case ever came up, on
the regular panel. I don’t know his name. He is there. He was
on the regular jury panel before any special jury was drawn.
Q. Isn’t it a matter of fact we have had negroes who have been
drawn on the panels of both grand juries and petty juries fairly
regularly?
A. During the years. I can mention Page. I don’t know their
names. And this comical negro on Monroe Street who has lot of
freckles on his face. He has been on quite regularly. Those are
the ones I remember well. Those have been on the jury time and
time again. One of the first ones I knew was connected with the
Atlanta Life Insurance Company, but I cannot remember his name.
He was head of the Atlanta Life. He was on the jury about every
eighteen months for a long time before any of this came up. I knew
that firm. Mr. Tilley represented the company when I was prac
ticing law. That is before I was judge. I might say these negroes,
some of them and I were raised up together. Theodore Michaels
lived near me as a boy, and Aaron Harris runs a club in Newtown.
I remember those particularly because they were negroes raised
with me and we played together as boys.
49 R edirect examination .
By Mr. M cGee:
Q. A lot of times, particularly grand juries and other juries, wrhen
no colored jurors are on them?
A. Yes, sometimes there are no negroes’ names drawn, and other
times we have three or four at one time.
Mr. M cGee: I move to strike the answer as not responsive to the
question.
The Court: Objection overruled.
Mr. M cGee: I would like to have an exception.
(Exception noted for the defendant by direction of the court.)
By the Court:
Q. Has the Jury Commission, or has it at any time during the
time you have been a member, systematically and intentionally
excluded any person or persons by reason of their color, their race
or their creed?
Mr. McGee: I object to the question on the ground the witness
is not qualified to answer it.
The W itness: As far as I know, there never has been. I never
have objected to any.
Mr. M cGee: May I have a ruling?
JEREMIAH REEVES, JR., VS. STATE OP ALABAMA 35
The Court: I will sustain the objection to exclude the testimony.
Mr. M cGee: My contention is he can only state what he did
himself when he was present.
The Court: I qualify the question as to the time he was present
as a member.
Mr. M cGee: He can only speak for himself when present; he
cannot read the minds of the other people there.
The Court: I take for granted he knew when he testified that
he knew the rules. He says he did.
Any other question?
Mr. M cGee: No.
John R. M atthews, having been duly sworn, was examined and
testified as follows:
D irect examination.
50 By Mr. M cGee:
Q. Do you also choose names from club lists?
A. We get them from club lists, church rolls, and labor organiza
tions, just anywhere where we can find a group of people who would
qualify to go into the jury box.
Q. Do you ever secure club lists, lists from colored clubs?
A. No; I have not, because I don’t know any colored clubs. I
have asked different members of the negro race about names for
the jury box. Peirce, in particular, about six months ago. He is a
professor at the State Normal School. I asked him wouldn’t he
submit a list of names of good colored men to the Jury Commission
for the purpose of placing those names in the jury box. I never did
get a list.
Q. Have you had any response from them?
A. I asked D. Cathy for a list of colored people to put in the
jury box.
Q. Do you know this man Cathy served time in the penitentiary?
A. Yes, sir, following which he has turned out to be a pretty
responsible citizen of Montgomery.
Q. Has he ever been pardoned?
A. I don’t know about that.
Cross-examination .
By the Solicitor:
Q. Have you talked to any other negroes about getting names for
juries?
A. Yes, sir. I talked to a negro by the name of M. G. Bowen,
who was an old postman—I think carried mail here in Montgomery
36 JEREMIAH REEVES, JR., VS. STATE OF ALABAMA
JEREMIAH REEVES, JR., VS. STATE OF ALABAMA 37
for forty years—I asked him wouldn’t he submit a list of colored
people for the purpose of putting names in the jury box. I never
heard from that.
Q. In other words, rather than excluding negroes systematically
from the jury, your testimony is you made every effort you could
to get names of qualified negroes?
A. That is right. I want to go a step further and say that I know
there are a lot of good white people and good negroes whose names
are not in the jury box. It is not because we have tried to leave
them out, it is because we just don’t know everybody. We have
done the best we could to get them.
Q. Have you ever excluded any person from the jury simply
51 because of their color?
A. I never have. Never decided or discussed before the
Jury Commission about them being discriminated against,
Q. In other words, your testimony is, if they are qualified for
jury duty, their names are placed in the box regardless of color?
A. That is right.
Q. The color of a person has no influence on the minds of the
Jury Commissioners?
A. Regardless of race and color. If they meet the qualifications
of Title 30, Section 21, Code of 1940. We try to set that pattern.
R edirect examination .
By Mr. M cGee:
Q. You have no figures as to the number of colored and whites
in Montgomery County?
A. No. My acquaintance with colored people isn’t as wide as
it is with whites.
D efendant R ests
State’s Evidence on M otion of D efendant to Quash the
I ndictment
W alter B. Jones, having been duly sworn, -was examined and
testified as follows:
D irect examination.
By the Solicitor:
Q. You are presiding Circuit Judge of this Judicial Circuit?
A. I am.
Q. How long have you been Circuit Judge here?
A. I have been Circuit Judge for thirty-two years, and President
of the Montgomery County Jury Commission since 1923, since it
was organized.
38 JEREMIAH BEEVES, JR., VS. STATE OF ALABAMA
Q. To your knowledge has there ever been any discrimination in
securing names for the jury list as far as negroes are concerned?
A. None whatever in any meeting I attended, and I have attended
most of the meetings.
Q. I will ask you whether there was any discussion generally
whether a man is negro or white, or just confined to his name?
52 A. To be perfectly frank, I never heard that discussed
whatever. All I go by the man’s name. Unless I see the
street and know it is a negro section, I don’t know whether he is
white or black, and never made any inquiry.
Q. Have you as a member of the Jury Commission made any
effort to secure names of negroes in the past?
A. I have made countless efforts. Recently I made a speech
to veterans taking G. I. training at the Washington Carver School
on the duties of citizenship. At that time I went over the require
ments for service on juries, and we would be glad to get the names
of veterans or any other qualified persons that they could give to us.
We did get two or three names. When the start of world war II
cut down on the available men for jury duty, we had a public meet
ing in the court house attended by thirty or forty high-class negroes
as sort of observers. I stated the purpose of the meeting, and also
told all present the Jury Commission would like to have the names
of qualified colored folks sent to them.
Q. You have exercised as much diligence to secure the names of
qualified negro jurors as you have to secure the names of qualified
white jurors?
A. I would say probably we have exercised more. The Board of
Jury Commissioners of Montgomery County makes trips every
year out in the County, and quite often we make trips around the
city.
Cross-examination .
By Mr. M cGee-:
Q. How many names are in the jury box?
A. I don’t know positively. I would have to make a guess. I
never have checked the jury roll.
Q. Didn’t you make a statement when you were running for
election the approximate number?
A. I don’t recall if I did.
Q. Didn’t you state in your opinion that the total would be in the
neighborhood of five or six thousand?
A. I would say possibly five thousand. It would be near that.
Q. It is true at this time there are not as many colored jurors as
there are white jurors in the box?
JEREMIAH REEVES, JR., VS. STATE OF ALABAMA 39
A. We called upon and made requests of the colored people. I
have made every effort to get the names of colored people. I made
that over a good many years as a member of the Commission.
53 Q. Have you any idea how many colored voters are in the
box?
A. I have no idea.
Q. Have you any idea how many colored voters there are in the
County?
A. I don’t know. I never have checked the lists.
Q. Do the names put in the Jury Box have any designation
whether colored or white?
A. No, sir. The only way to know that is to know the streets
these colored people live on. If a man lives on Perry Street, I as
sume he is a white man. If he lives in Peacock Alley, or Dunbar,
I would figure he is a colored man.
R edirect examination.
By the Solicitor:
Q. You testified that the names which are drawn, those are names
in the jury box?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. There is a card prepared after the name is placed on the jury
list which shows the man’s name and his occupation?
A. Business address and residence.
Q. Is anything on that card which would show his race?
A. No.
Q. Does the actual jury list itself indicate the color or anything
A. Doesn’t even show white, black, Caucasian, Japanese, or race,
creed, or anything mentioned on the jury roll about creed.
Q. When the Judge draws names out, unless he knows the man
and knows the address, he wouldn’t know whether he is drawing
a colored man or a white man?
A. No way of knowing.
Q. Have you anything else to say?
A. When I went on the Bench in 1920 they had a Board of Jury
Commissioners appointed by the Governor. 1923 introduced a new
bill, and when Mr. Stakely was Senator in 1939 that bill became a
local bill, and there has been no change except to change the Clerk’s
salary $100 to $1200. I have been continuously Chairman of the
Board since that time.
40 JEREMIAH REEVES, JR., VS. STATE OF ALABAMA
J. E. Pierce, having been duly sworn, was examined and testified
as follows:
54 D irect ex am in atio n .
By the Solicitor:
Q. Your name is?
A. James E. Pierce.
Q. You are a member of the negro race?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. What is your occupation?
A. Schoolteacher.
Q. Where?
A. State College.
Q. In Montgomery?
A. Alabama State College, Political Science Teacher.
Q. Have you ever served on juries in Montgomery County?
A. I have.
Q. Do you know Mr. John Matthews, Clerk of the Circuit Court?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Has he ever discussed with you or requested you to submit
names of negroes for jury duty?
A. Yes, sir, he did.
Q. Could you tell us when that conversation took place?
A. The best of my knowledge it was June or July.
Q. And he asked you to submit, I believe, a list of names?
Mr. M cGee: I object to the question on the ground it calls for
hearsay.
The Court: Overruled.
Mr. M cGee: I ask for an exception.
(Exception noted for the defendant by direction of the Court.)
By the Solicitor:
Q. Did he, or did he not, ask you to submit a list of names for
jury duty?
A. Yes, sir.
Mr. M cGee: I move to exclude the answer on the ground of hear
say.
The Court: Overrule the objection.
Mr. M cGee: I would like to have an exception.
(Exception noted for the defendant by direction of the
Court.)
55 Cross-examination .
By Mr. M cGee:
Q. At the time you served were there other colored people picked
on the jury?
A. The last time there were three.
Q. How many times did you serve?
A. I have been called to jury service to my knowledge at least six
times.
Q. In how many years?
A. Over a period of about eight or ten years.
Q. Have you been on the regular panel each time you served?
The Assistant Solicitor: We object to that. By regular panel
do you mean the petty jury?
Mr. M cGee: Any panel.
The W it n e ss : I have knowledge of being here maybe once for
Grand Jury service, two of us. We were not used at that time.
By Mr. M cGee:
Q. Were there other colored on each occasion?
A. On one occasion I remember three.
Q. And one occasion two?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. On other occasions was anybody on the panel with you?
A. I don’t remember the other times.
D. Caffy, having been duly sworn, was examined and testified as
follows:
D irect examination .
By the Solicitor:
Q. What is your name?
A. D. Caffy.
Q. What is your occupation?
A. I am in the real estate business.
Q. Where?
A. 110' North Court.
Q. That is in the City of Montgomery?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. How long have you lived in Montgomery ?
A. All my life.
Q. You are a member of the negro race?
56 A. Yes, sir.
Q. Have you ever served on the jury in Montgomery
JEREMIAH REEVES, JR., VS. STATE OF ALABAMA 41
County?
42 JEREMIAH REEVES, JR., VS. STATE OF ALABAMA
A. I don’t know when, but I served.
Q. You don’t know when?
A. No, sir. I have been called.
Q. Do you know Mr. John R. Matthews, Clerk of the Circuit
Court?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Has he ever talked to you in connection with securing, names
of qualified negroes for jury duty?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Could you tell me on how many occasions Mr. Matthews has
discussed that with you?
A. Twice.
Q. When?
A. I think about a month prior to the election when we discussed
this the first time.
Q. Did he ever request you to submit names for jury service?
Mr. M cGee: I object on the ground that it calls for a hearsay
answer.
The Court: Objection overruled.
Mr. M cGee: I would like an exception.
(Exception noted for the defendant by direction of the Court.)
By the Solicitor:
Q. Did he ever request you to submit names?
A. Yes, sir.
Mr. M cGee: I object to the question and move to exclude the
answer on the ground of hearsay.
The Court: Objection overruled.
Mr. M cGee: I would like to note an exception.
(Exception noted for the defendant by direction of the Court.)
By the Solicitor :
Q. Has he ever asked you to give him names of members of the
negro race who might qualify for service on the jury?
Mr. M cGee: That is objected to on the ground of hearsay.
The Court: Objection overruled.
Mr. M cGee: I would like to have an exception noted.
(Exception noted for the defendant by direction of the
Court.)
57 The W itness: Yes, sir, he did.
Mr. M cGee: I move to exclude the answer on the ground
of hearsay.
JEREMIAH REEVES, JR., VS. STATE OF ALABAMA 43
The Court: Objection overruled.
Mr. M cGee: I would like an exception.
(Exception noted for the defendant by direction of the Court.)
Cross-examination.
By Mr. M cGee:
Q. Weren’t you convicted of receiving stolen property and sen
tenced to Kilby Penitentiary one time?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Have you been pardoned?
A. Yes, sir.
Testimony closed on Defendant’s motion to quash the venire.
R uling on M otion
The Court: The Court is prepared to rule. The Court finds
there is no evidence to sustain the allegations of the motion that
negroes have been systematically excluded from the jury rolls, and
the jury box or venires in this County. It is, therefore, considered,
ordered and adjudged by the Court that the motion be, and the same
is hereby overruled.
Mr. M cGee: I except.
(Exception noted for the defendant by direction of the Court.)
Mr. M cGee: There is another motion I want to file, and before I
do that I would like to refile all the motions I filed with Judge
Eugene Carter, and move to file them now, and in the order they
were filed.
The Court: All motions refiled with the exception of the motion
concerning the exclusion of the press. The motions are overruled,
and an exception granted the defendant.
(Exception noted for the defendant by direction of the Court.)
58 10:40 o ’clock A. M.
W est Court R oom
Parties present as before noted
The Court: Let the record show the defendant’s motion not to
exclude the press is withdrawn.
Mr. M cGee: I have a motion to set aside the entire jury box on
the ground the Jury Commission is composed under an Act which is
unconstitutional and in violation of Section 105 of the State Con
44 JEREMIAH REEVES, JR., VS. STATE OF ALABAMA
stitution. Section 105 of the State Constitution provides a general
act in all cases, and the legislature isn’t permitted to pass a local
act providing for the same subject. It is my contention that this
local act by which the Jury Commission was set up in 1939, at the
time there was in effect a general act providing for that, therefore,
the local act controverted the act of the legislature, and so forth.
The Court: Motion overruled. Exception granted for the de
fendant.
(Exception noted for the defendant by direction of the Court.)
The Court: Any further motions?
Mr. M cGee: Not at this time.
The Solicitor: I would like to have the State’s witnesses called.
(State’s witnesses called by the Clerk.)
The Solicitor: The State announces ready.
Mr. M cGee: Call the Defendant’s witnesses.
(Defendant’s witnesses called by the Clerk.)
Mr. M cGee: There are material witnesses for the defendant in
this case missing who are vital to the defense of this defendant.
Mrs. Katherine Trawick and Mrs. Pearl Barron are missing.
The Court: What do you propose to prove by them? We will
adjourn to the Jury Room.
Left Jury Room
Parties present as before noted
59 Colloquy
The Court: I expect to have the hearing at this time. Mrs. Tra
wick and Miss Barron are not present. They are under subpoena to
be here.
Mr. M cGee: These two witnesses are probably the most material
of all. It is my understanding from information received and set
out in the affidavit this defendant has been indicted six different
times; also that the defendant confessed to each of six different
crimes. The newspapers, of course, were on the street saying he
confessed to all six of them. He has been indicted on six, and
three cases were set for trial on the capital list, and came here
to be tried on any of those indictments. And a confession where
he says he did do these six different crimes. Your Honor knows
if he confessed falsely or wrongly because of some duress, and
if that confession isn’t true, and if he confessed falsely under duress,
I want the opportunity to disprove that confession. I have some
pretty strong testimony out of these six women, four of them failed
to identify the defendant. As a matter of fact, the defendant was
picked up last summer, held three days and subjected to the line-up,
and during which time he wasn’t identified by them.
The Court: Have you talked to them?
Mr. M cGee: No ; I have not. I just discovered it late and re
quested subpoenas for them.
The Court: It will be up to you, Mr. Sheriff, to get them here.
Mr. M cGee: Actually the ones, I think, who didn’t identify him
are Mrs. Trawick and Miss Barron, and probably Mrs. Burson.
The Court: Y ou can make a showing of what they would testify to
if you deem it necessary.
Mr. M cGee: Perhaps I better indicate to Your Honor as to why
their presence is absolutely necessary, for this reason. The defend
ant was picked up this summer. Out of six indictments, five of
them occurred before he was picked up. And while he was held
five of these alleged crimes already had been committed, and he
was subjected to the line-up and released by the police.
The Court: tie is on trial for only one offense.
Mr. M cGee: On the trial if they offer an alleged confession in
which he says he committed six different offenses, I have been
wondering whether the confession is going to be allowed to be intro
duced.
The Solicitor: Any confession that the State seeks to in-
60 troduce in this case will be limited to the offense in the
Crowder case, and will not introduce anything other than
the Crowder case. We do not intend to present any evidence what
soever as to any attack, or any crime, or anything else, except in
the case at issue. It is my opinion, legally speaking, we can only
present a single case. We do not expect to bring in all of these
cases, or offer any part of the confession not applying to the case
on trial.
Mr. M cGee: Everybody in this County knows this defendant
has been charged with six separate offenses, and the newspapers
printed this story, but he had confessed to all six.
The Court: I am going to overrule the motion for a continuance.
Mr. M cGee: Although the State may not introduce the written
confession covering all of these cases. I think Mr. Thetford will
agree I have a right to develop all the details that had to do with
this confession, and detail all the conversations with the officers
out in Kilby Prison. He certainly is going to have to bring out the
entire conversations, everything that took place. He cannot restrict
the -witnesses. There is no way it can be kept out without going
into full detail at the time the confession was obtained.
The Court: Were the witnesses present at the time the confession
was secured?
The Solicitor: No.
The Court : I will overrule your motion and give you an exception.
JEREMIAH REEVES, JR., VS. STATE OF ALABAMA 45
(Exception noted for the defendant by direction of the Court.)
Mr. M cGee: As to these other witnesses—Fannie Mitchell—she
is missing.
The Court: What do you expect to show by her?
Mr. M cGee: Well, she was going to be a witness to the fact, I
have information she has known the boy for quite a number of
years, that he is insane and not of sound mind. And John Galston
would be called for the same purpose. And Amos Harvey would
be called for the same purpose. And Reverend J. T. Thomas would
be called for the same purpose, and also as to character.
The Court: Does the State have any objection to a showing of
that kind?
61 The A ssistant Solicitor: Have you talked to these people?
Mr. M cGee: I have talked to them, and the parents have
talked to them for me.
The Solicitor: I don’t know that I am going to make a showing
for any of these witnesses without the right to cross examine. Don’t
you have other witnesses who are going to testify to the same
things?
Mr. M cGee: Not the same facts. I think they will testify to
other facts too.
The Solicitor: I don’t know why the State should make a show
ing without the right to have cross examination.
Mr. M cGee: I am making a motion to continue the case until
tomorrow or Monday to get the witnesses down here.
The Court: I deny the motion, and give you an attachment for
those witnesses.
Mr. M cGee: I move the Court be continued to allow me to obtain
some witnesses who could not be here.
The Court: You can make a showing for them if you have talked
to them. The State refuses to agree to a continuance, attachments
will issue for the witnesses, and I overrule the motion.
The case will proceed to trial.
West Court R oom
10:56 o’clock A. M.
Present: Parties as before noted
The Court: Any further motions?
Mr. M cGee: I would like to have certain questions propounded
to the prospective jurors.
The following questions were submitted to the Court in writing
by the defendant:
“ 1. Have any of the jurors ever had a close relative or friend
raped by a member of the negro race?”
4 6 JEREMIAH REEVES, JR., VS. STATE OF ALABAMA
JEREMIAH REEVES, JR., VS. STATE OF ALABAMA 47
“ 2. Have you ever had any close friend or relative raped by
anyone?”
62 11:01 o’clock A. M.
All jurors sworn generally by the Clerk
The Court: Have any jurors in the court room any valid excuse
they want to submit at this time why they should not serve? This
is an important case so please don’t ask to be excused unless you
have a valid excuse.
The following jurors were excused by the Court:
No. 33 Cline B. Pruitt
No. 56 William E. Chalkley
No. 5 Cecil C. Boyd,
The Court: We are about to try the case of The State of Alabama
vs. Jeremiah Reeves, Junior, charged with the capital offense of
rape, and if you don’t have a valid excuse, the Court will require
that you remain.
The following jurors were excused, with consent of the defend
ant:
No. 33 Cline B. Pruitt
No. 56 William E. Chalkley
No. 5 Cecil C. Royd.
The Court: We are about to try the case of The State of Alabama
vs. Jeremiah Reeves, Junior, charged with the capital offense of rape.
Are each of you citizens of Alabama, and been citizens for the past
year?
Are each of you resident householders or freeholders of this
County ?
Have each of you any fixed opinion as to the guilt or innocence of
the defendant that would bias your verdict?
Have you any fixed opinion against capital punishment or peni
tentiary punishment?
Culver R. Broach: I don’t think I would make a good juror.
I am personally acquainted with one of the victims, and I am hardly
the right person to serve.
The Court: Have you a fixed opinion as to the guilt or innocence
of this defendant?
Culver R. Broach: What the papers comment—I have.
63 The Court: Any objection to discharging this juror?
The Solicitor: N o.
Mr. M cGee : No.
The C ourt: The juror is excused with the consent of the defendant.
Are you willing to convict on circumstantial evidence if that
evidence convinces you beyond a reasonable doubt?
These two requests are made by the defendant’s counsel:
Have you ever had a close relative or friend raped by a member
of the negro race?
Have you ever had any close friend or relative raped by anyone?
(The foregoing questions were propounded by the Court to each
of the regular and special jurors present.)
The following jurors were excused for cause with consent of coun
sel for defendant:
No. 49 Alex D. Tram
No. 59 Lewis P. Goodwin
No. 66 Joseph D. Jolley
No. 72 A1 Myers.
The selection of the Jury was made in the left jury room, there
being present:
The Court.
The Solicitor and Assistant Solicitor.
The Clerk.
The defendant and his counsel.
W est Court R oom.
12:04 o’clock P. M.
48 JEREMIAH REEVES, JR., VS. STATE OF ALABAMA
Present:
Parties as before noted.
Jury sworn.
12:06 o’clock P. M.
Witnesses for the State and defendant sworn.
Counsel for defendant requested the rale. State’s witnesses
placed in right jury room; defendant’s witnesses in left jury
64 room.
The Court: The Court makes the following order:
By virtue of the provisions of the Constitution of Alabama and
laws of Alabama, and discretion vested in me as to the exclusion
of persons from the hearing of this case, it is the order of this
Court that all parties are excluded from the court room during
the trial of this case, except the jurors trying the case, the officials
of the Court, including the law enforcement officers, members of the
Bar, and members of the press, and the relatives of the accused.
All other persons must leave the court room, and no other person
will be allowed to enter at any time during the trial of this case.
JEREMIAH REEVES, JR., VS. STATE OF ALABAMA 49
Motion of the defendant to allow the public to remain overruled,
and an exception granted the defendant.
(Exception noted for the defendant by direction of the Court.)
Motion presented by defendant to exclude the public only while
the prosecutrix testifies is overruled, and an exception granted the
defendant.
(Exception noted for the defendant by direction of the Court.)
Mr. M cGee: I move that all persons be excluded except the jury,
the defendant’s counsel and officials of the Court, otherwise it
would not be within the discretion of the Court for part of the
public to remain and others not.
The Court: The Court is still of the opinion the Court can remove
those indicated and so rules. Let the record show Mr. McGee is
now taking a different position in that matter.
Mr. M cGee: I ask for an exception.
The Court: Exception granted.
(Exception noted for the defendant by direction of the
65 Court.)
The Court: What about your motion to have a stenog
rapher assist you? You may have one if you like.
Mr. M cGee: I will not press that. I cannot locate him now.
66 (Defendant’s Motion for a Continuance marked “ Defend
ant’s Exhibit 1, 11/28/1952, WHL.” )
(Defendant’s Motion to Quash the Venire marked “ Defendant’s
Exhibit 2, 11/28/1952, WHL.” )
(Affidavit of defendant marked “ Defendant’s Exhibit 3, 11/28/-
1952, WHL.” )
(Defendant’s Motion for a Mistrial marked “ Defendant’s Ex
hibit 4, 11/28/1952, WHL.” )
(Defendant’s Motion to permit the public to remain during the
trial marked “ Defendant’s Exhibit 5, 11/28/1952, WHL.” )
(Defendant’s Motion to exclude the public from the trial while
the prosecutrix testifies marked “ Defendant’s Exhibit 6, 11/28/-
1952, WHL.” )
(Defendant’s Motion to permit relatives of defendant to remain
during the trial marked “ Defendant’s Exhibit 7, 11/28/1952,
WHL.” )
(Defendant’s motion to set aside the entire jury box marked
“ Defendant’s Exhibit 8, 11/28/1952, WHL.” )
(Defendant’s Motion for a continuance because of absence of
material witnesses marked “ Defendant’s Exhibit 9, 11/28/1952,
W H L ” )
67-68 (Defendant’s motion for instanter subpoenas marked “ De
fendant’s Exhibit 10, 11/28/1952, W HL.” )
D ependant’s E xhibit 1
In the Circuit Court of Montgomery County Criminal Term
Case No. —
T he State
vs.
Jebemiah R eeves, Jr.
Comes the Defendant in the above styled cause and moves the
court to continue the trial of this cause upon the following grounds.
1. Defendant was indicted on six (6) separate cases by the Grand
Jury of Montgomery County and three (3) of these cases, capital
cases, were set for today, November 26th, 1952. Said three (3)
capital indictments were rendered on November 14th, 1952. Defend
ant was arraigned on November 14th and forced to plead to said
three (3) capital indictments and said indictments were not served
on the Defendant until November 17th, 1952. Furthermore Defend
ant was not informed as to which of the three capital cases would be
tried on the 26th and thus neither he nor his counsel has had time
to prepare the Defendant’s defense in three (3) different capital
cases.
2. Defendant or counsel, due to the enormity of the three (3)
capital charges, have had insufficient time in which to prepare
an adequate defense.
3. Going to trial under conditions set out in grounds one and
two will be a violation of the Defendant’s constitutional rights as
guaranteed by the 14th amendment under the Constitution of the
United States.
4. Defendant was indicted on three different capital charges,
all three of which were set for the same day, and the defendant was
served a copy of the venire in only one case and that was a charge
of robbery, a copy of which venire list is attached to this motion.
He was not informed until the day of the trial that he would be
tried on a rape charge and he has as yet not received a list of the
venire or had served on him a list of the venire in the case which
is not being tried.
(S.) John N. M cGee, Jr.,
Attorney for Defendant.
5 0 JEREMIAH BEEVES, JR., VS. STATE OP ALABAMA
51
69 D efendant’s Exhibit 2— Omitted. Printed Side page 36 Ante
70-72 D ependant’s Exhibit 3—Omitted. Printed Side Page 23
Ante
73 D efendant’s Exhibit 5— Omitted. Printed Side Page 25
Ante
D efendant’s Exhibit 6— Omitted. Printed Side Page 25 Ante
D efendant’s Exhibit 7—Omitted. Printed Side Page 25 Ante
74-75 D efendant’s Exhibit 8
In the Circuit Court of Montgomery County, Alabama, Criminal
Term
Case No. —
State of Alabama
vs.
Jeremiah R eeves, Junior
Comes the defendant in the above cause and moves the court to
set aside the entire Jury box on the following grounds:
1. The Jury Commission as presently composed is unconstitutional
and illegal, and as set violates the constitution of the State of Ala
bama and that of the United States.
2. The method used by the Jury Commission in selecting jurors
violates the fourteenth amendment to the Constitution of the
United States and violates the Constitution of Alabama.
3. The jury box was illegally filled by a group of men set up as
jury commissioners under an act of the legislature that is in viola
tion of Section 105 of the Constitution of the State of Alabama which
prohibits the passage of a local act in any case which is provided
for by a general law.
4. The jury box is illegally filled by a group of men acting without
legal and constitutional authority.
5. The jury commission of Montgomery as set up under a local
act is illegal as said local act is unconstitutional and in violation of
section 105 of the Constitution of the Sovereign State of Alabama.
JEREMIAH REEVES, JR., VS. STATE OF ALABAMA
Attorney for Defendant.
52 JEREMIAH REEVES, JR., VS. STATE OF ALABAMA
76-77 12:27 O’clock P. M.
Adjourned Until 2 O’clock P. M.
2 O’clock P. M.
West Court Room
Present:
The C ourt.
The Jury .
The Solicitor, and A ssistant Solicitor.
The defendant and his counsel.
E vidence on B ehalf of th e State
M abel A nn Crowder, having been duly sworn, was examined and
testified as follow s:
D irect ex am in atio n .
By the Solicitor:
Q. Will you state your name to the jury, please?
A. My name is Mabel Ann Crowder.
Q. Where do you live?
A. At the present time I live at 124 North Capitol Parkway.
Q. Where were you living on July 28th of this year?
A. I was living at that time at 3852 Cleveland Avenue.
78 Q. You say he had a hat. What kind of hat was it?
A. A straw hat.
Q. Do you remember how he was dressed?
A. He had on light blue trousers, a dark shirt with yellow designs
on it—either blue or black; I think blue—maybe it was a blue shirt
— with yellow-gold designs.
Q. After this rape where did you go?
A. I went to my next door neighbor’s house, Mrs. Struchko.
79 Q. What did she do for you?
A. I told her—
Mr. M cGee: I object.
By the Solicitor:
Q. Don’t tell what you told her. Just what did she do?
A. She notified the police and my husband. She washed the
bruises on my head and gave me codeine tablets, I believe one
quarter grain codeine, and ammonia and water, spirits of ammonia
and water.
JEREMIAH REEVES, JR,, VS. STATE OF ALABAMA 53
Q. Where did you go after that, or where were you taken after
that?
A. After the policemen and detectives and all came to talk with
me I was taken to Maxwell Air Force base hospital.
Q. How long vrere you out there?
A. Four days.
Q. Who treated you out there, what doctors saw' you there?
A. Colonel Kojak and Major Zarling.
Q. Are you still under treatment out there?
A. Yes; I am,
Q. For what?
A. Head injury.
Q. Do you remember how many times he hit your head on the
floor?
A. I remember thirteen times my head hit the floor. After that 1
don’t know whether it hit more times, or not.
Q. That is when he had you by the hair?
A. Yes, sir. He had me by the hair and was beating my head
against the floor.
Q. Do you remember any conversation, anything that he said
there at the time of the rape or immediately afterwards?
A. He said once—
Mr. M cGee: I object. It is irrelevant to the facts in issue.
The Court: I think the witness has a right to testify to any
statement the accused made in her presence, if he made any.
Mr. M cGee: I would like an exception.
The Court: Exception for the defendant.
(Exception noted for the defendant by direction of the Court.)
By the Court:
Q. You may go ahead and answer the question.
A. Once he said, “ I ought to kill you.” And that is all I remem
ber him saying, other than what I said.
80 By the Solicitor:
Q. Other than what you have already said?
A. Yes.
Q. I believe you testified this happened on July 28th?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Of 1952?
A. Yes.
q ’ The place that this happened is in Montgomery County?
A. Yes.
Q. The City and County of Montgomery?
A. Yes.
54 JEREMIAH REEVES, JR., VS. STATE OF ALABAMA
Q. When was the next time you saw this defendant?
A. It was just a few days ago when I was taken down to Police
Headquarters to identify him.
Q. You hadn’t seen him at any time after that except when you
saw him at Police Headquarters?
A. No.
Mr. M cGee: I object to that as a self-serving answer. I object
to it on the ground it calls for a self-serving, answer.
The Court: Overrule the objection.
Mr. M cGee: I would like an exception.
The Court: Exception granted.
(Exception noted for the defendant by direction of the Court.)
Mr. M cGee: I would like to move to have the answer excluded on
the ground it was given before my objection.
The Court: The motion is overruled.
Mr. M cGee: Grant me an exception.
The Court: Exception granted.
- (Exception noted for the defendant by direction of the Court. )
By the Solicitor:
Q. Where was he at Police Headquarters when you saw him?
A. He was in a room on the right side of the building down where
the detectives’ offices are, and I saw him. through the glass.
Q. Did you, or did you not, then make a positive identification
at that time?
81 Mr. M cGee: I object to anything not in the presence of
the defendant, and on the ground it is hearsay.
The Court: She has a right to say whether she recognized him or
not. Overrule the objection.
Mr. M cGee: I would like to have an exception.
The Court: Exception given the defendant.
(Exception noted for the defendant by direction of the Court.)
By the Solicitor:
Q. Will you answer the question.
A. I did.
Mr. M cGee: I move to exclude the answer on the ground of
hearsay.
The Court: Objection overruled.
Mr. M cGee: I would like an exception.
The Court: Exception granted the defendant.
(Exception noted for the defendant by direction of the Court.)
JEREMIAH REEVES, JR., VS. STATE OF ALABAMA 55
By the Solicitor:
Q. Subsequently did you talk to this defendant?
A. I don’t understand the question. What do you mean by sub
sequently?
Q. Right afterwards.
A. Yes; I did.
Q. Where did you talk to him?
A. In one of the rooms there at Police Headquarters, the detec
tives’ office.
Q. Do you know who else was present at that time?
A. I can name a few of the men who were present. And the la
dies with me, I didn’t know everyone.
Q. Will you name those you know who were there?
A. Miss Pearl Barron, and Miss Sullivan and I were the only
ladies present in the room. Lt. Miller was in there. I don’t know
the names of the policemen there. There were other men present.
Q. Did you coerce or threaten this defendant, or offer him any
promise or hope of reward?
A. No; I did not.
Q. Did anyone in your presence and hearing threaten this de
fendant, or coerce him, or offer him anything, or any promise of
reward?
82 A. No, sir.
Q. Will you tell the Jury—
Mr. M cGee: I object.
The C ourt: I haven’t heard the question yet.
By the Solicitor:
Q. Will you tell the jury what conversation, if any, you had with
this defendant at that time?
A. Yes, sir.
Mr. M cGee: At this time I would like to interpose an objection
if this testimony about to be given is something in the nature of a
confession. I would like to file a motion to exclude it until we know
the nature of it in the absence of the Jury as to whether or not such
a confession would be admissible.
The Court : Y ou have a m otion?
Mr. M cGee: Yes, sir.
The C ourt: The Court will allow you to state your motion ver
bally to save time.
Mr. M cGee: I have one in writing. If the Court please, I will
go ahead and dictate it into the record.
The defendant moves the Court to grant him a hearing in the
absence of the Jury as to whether or not the confession, or any
alleged confession, made by him is admissible upon the following
grounds:
1. Certain statements and admissions were extracted from the
defendant by the officers of the State of Alabama while the de
fendant was being held incommunicado at Kilby Penitentiary and
said statements "were extracted only after continual questioning for
periods of hours, and after threats and abuse.
2. Upon the further ground that part of the time while the de
fendant was being questioned, he was questioned in the room with
the electric chair, and was offered the hope and promise by such
officers that if he would confess he would thus save his life and
keep out of the chair.
The Court: I understand this particular conversation the State
is asking about is a conversation that took place at City Hall?
The Solicitor: That is correct.
The Court: Is it in the nature of a confession?
The Solicitor: It is in the nature of a confession, and
83 also is in the nature of an admission against interest—both.
The Court: All right. The Court will conduct a prelim
inary investigation limited to anything that may have happened
preliminarily to this conversation.
We ask that the Jury be taken out. You are not to talk about
this case, or even discuss it among yourselves. The matter raised is
a matter of law that I shall hear first as a preliminary matter to
determine whether you should hear the evidence at all.
(The Jury retired to the Jury Room in charge of the bailiff.)
The Court: Let the record show a preliminary hearing as to the
admissibility of the statement made is had before the Court out of
the presence of the Jury, at the request of the defendant.
I will let the defendant cross-examine the prosecutrix all that
happened in the presence of the defendant, anything that took place
in her presence. You may examine her now as to what happened.
That will not interfere with your right to cross-examine her later
on any evidence she has already given.
By Mr. M cGee:
Q. Do you remember what date you went down to Police Head
quarters?
A. Which time?
Q. The time we are talking about you talked to the defendant.
A. It was on Monday—Wednesday—the 10th, I believe.
The Solicitor: Wednesday would be the 12th.
56 JEREMIAH REEVES, JR., VS. STATE OF ALABAMA
By the C ourt :
Q. The day after Armistice Day?
A. Yes. I don’t know. I know it was Wednesday. I am pretty
sure it was the 12th.
By Mr. M cGee:
Q. What time Wednesday, do you remember?
A. I think I went down in the morning, at 11 o ’clock, I believe.
Q. And, of course, he was in custody at the time you talked to
him? There were police officers present, I mean.
A. Yes.
Q. You didn’t know what had taken place before you got there?
A. No; I didn’t.
Q. Did the police say anything to him while you were there
before you started talking to him?
84 A. I believe Miller asked him when we first walked in the
room, Miller asked him did he recognize any of us, and that
is all that was said. Someone said when he hesitated to answer the
question, he said, “ that is all right, go on and talk.”
Q. Did you start the conversation with him?
A. After he answered Captain Miller,— let me think just a mo
ment—no; I wasn’t the first of the women to speak to him,
Q. When that conversation between you and him took place,
were you the first to speak, or did he speak first?
A. I spoke first.
Q. What did you say?
A. I went in for one purpose, to ask him why he done it, and I
asked him that question.
The Solicitor: I don’t believe it is proper to go into what she
said.
The C ourt: N o. The statement was limited to whether any
statement he made was made voluntarily.
By the C ourt:
Q. Did anybody at that time threaten him or offer him anything
if he was to testify?
A. No, sir.
By Mr. M cGee:
Q. You don’t recall all who were present there?
A. No; I don’t know all the gentlemen present.
Q. You don’t know whether they made any threats shortly before
you came in there?
A. I know nothing that went on before I went into the room.
JEREMIAH REEVES, JR., VS. STATE OF ALABAMA 57
58 JEREMIAH REEVES, JR., VS. STATE OF ALABAMA
Q. As far as that goes, you don’t know what went on then from
the time he was picked up, do you?
A. No, sir; I don’t.
Q. Did the police tell you he had confessed?
A. No. The Solicitor came into the room and didn’t tell me
anything, but handed me a typewritten confession.
Q. He handed you a typewritten confession when you first got
to Headquarters?
A. Yes, sir. But the confession wasn’t signed.
Q. It had his name on it?
A. Yes, sir.
85 Q. Did they tell you at the time you were taken in this
room------
A. Which time in which room?
Q. The room thay had taken you to.
A. They had told me that previously when they called me to
come down there.
By the C ourt :
Q. At the time you were there, did you see any evidence of him
being put in fear, or anybody threaten him, or anything of that kind?
A. Absolutely not.
The C ourt : The Court rules this statement voluntary, she is
qualified to testify to any conversation that took place at that time.
The Court rules preliminarily any statement made was voluntarily
given, and the credibility of it will be given to the Jury.
Mr. M cGee: May I introduce evidence in rebuttal? I now call
the defendant to show the reasons why he made a statement to her.
I am going to show the real reasons as I develop these facts.
The Court : If you have evidence as to this particular statement,
I will let it go in. The Court rules as a matter of law on this evi
dence, unless you have anything to rebut it, the State made a show
ing that this statement was voluntarily given.
Mr. M cGee: I have evidence at the time he was arrested he was
held incommunicado and wasn’t able to see anybody until Wednes
day afternoon.
The C ourt : The only issue I have before me at this time is
whether this statement was voluntarily given.
Mr. M cGee: I would like to make an offer to show at the time
of this conversation the defendant had been held since the 10th,
about two o’clock on the afternoon of the 10th, up until this conver
sation, incommunicado, and was denied permission to talk or to
phone to anyone, to any of his relatives and friends, friends and rel
atives hadn’t been allowed to see him or to hold a conversation,
and up to the time he was carried down to Police Headquarters the
defendant was held in the State Penitentiary at Kilby.
JEREMIAH REEVES, JR., VS. STATE OF ALABAMA 59
And further, the defendant is a seventeen year old negro boy,
seventeen in August of 1952, and that he quit school while in the
8th grade. That is the offer I would like to make. May I show
that?
86 The C ourt : Having stated for the record what you intend
to show, and nothing being applicable to this particular occa
sion, the offer is denied and the statement will be admitted.
Mr. M cGee: I would like to have an exception.
The C ourt: Y ou m ay have an exception.
(Exception noted for the defendant by direction of the Court.)
(At 2:30 o ’clock P. M. the Jury returned to the Courtroom.)
The C ourt: The State may proceed with the examination of this
witness.
By the Solicitor:
Q. I am going to ask you the question over again. The question
I asked was this. Did he make any statement to you down at
Police Headquarters on the 12th, Wednesday, the 12th of November?
Did you have a conversation with him?
A. Yes, sir; I did.
Q. I would like you to tell the Jury what conversation you had
with him, who asked the first question, what the reply was, as best
you remember.
A. I asked the first question.
Q. What was the question, what did you ask him?
A. “Why did you do it?” And to that he just shook his head, and
later he said, “ I don’t know.”
Q. Did he deny he raped you?
A. No, he did not.
Q. Did he recognize you?
A. Yes.
Mr. M cGee: I object.
By the Solicitor:
Q. Let me put it this way. Did he say anything that would show
he recognized you?
A. Yes, he did.
Q. What did he say?
A. He was asked -which house was I in— “yhere do you remember
her from?” And he told them, “ Cleveland Avenue, the first one.”
Q. “ Cleveland Avenue, the first one” ?
A. Yes.
Q. He said that to you at that time?
87 A. He was speaking to someone else, but I was in the room.
Q. Did you have any other conversation with him your
self?
A. Yes. I asked him by which door he entered the house, and he
said he entered by the back door.
Q. I want you to look at this defendant. Now, do you positively
identify him as the man who raped you?
A. Yes.
Q. I will ask you this. Have you any mental reservation whatso
ever?
A. No.
Mr. M cGee: I object, and move to exclude the answer on the
ground it is self-serving and prejudicial.
The C ourt : Sustain the objection to the last question and allow
it to be stricken.
By the Solicitor:
Q. I would like for you to go back to the actual rape itself. When
he came to the door of the room you testified you were sitting down.
Did you get up?
A. Yes, sir.
Mr. M cGee: I object to the question on the ground it is predi
cated on a question assuming a fact in issue.
The C ourt: Assuming what fact in issue?
Mr. M cGee: Assuming the fact he raped her.
The C ourt: She has already testified he did. Objection overruled.
You would have the right to cross-examine her. Previously she
testified he did without any objection.
Mr. M cGee: I would like to have an exception.
The Court : You may have an exception.
(Exception noted for the defendant by direction of the Court.)
By the Solicitor:
Q. Did you get up?
A. Yes; I got up. I was sitting in the room in a rocking-chair,
and when I looked in the mirror and saw him I got up and turned
around, and that is when I said, “ get out of here.”
Mr. M cGee: I move to exclude the answer on the ground it is not
responsive to the question and has nothing to do with what he asked
her.
The Court : Overrule the objection.
88 Mr. M cGee: I would like an exception.
The Court : You may have an exception.
(Exception noted for the defendant by direction of the Court.)
60 JEREMIAH REEVES, JR., VS. STATE OF ALABAMA
By the Solicitor:
Q. When did he first put his hands on you?
A. When he first came across the room after I had told him to get
out. Then he put his hands on my throat.
Q. On your throat?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. With both hands on your throat?
A. Yes. And he took both hands this way, and then he moved
and had one hand down here this way, and was holding my arms
because I was struggling.
Q. He did hold your arms?
A. Yes.
Q. When did he force you back on the bed?
A. After he had made me take my panties off, then he forced me
across the side of the bed. It wasn’t the center of the bed, more
or less across the foot of the bed.
Q. At that time was he still holding your hands?
A. He had one hand on my throat, and was holding my right arm,
holding me by the arm.
Q. On which hand did you have the broken fingernails?
A. On my right hand.
Q. Did you at any time ever hit at him?
A. Yes. If I struck him, I wasn’t conscious of actually striking
him.
Q. Did he hold your hands during the whole time as long as he
was on the bed?
A. He tore loose of me with one arm and took his pants, un
zipped his pants, or unbuttoned them, whatever it was—I don’t
know which it was—then he grabbed my hand again because I was
trying to fight him off, but I couldn’t.
Q. How much do you weigh?
A. I weigh between 96 and 100 pounds.
Q. When you talked to the police did you give them a description
of the defendant?
A. Yes.
89 Q. Did you tell them how he was dressed?
A. Yes.
Q. Had you ever seen this defendant before?
A. Not to my knowledge.
Q. Not to your knowledge before July 28th?
A. No, sir.
JEREMIAH REEVES, JR., VS. STATE OF ALABAMA 61
62 JEREMIAH REEVES, JR., VS. STATE OF ALABAMA
C ross-exam ination .
By Mr. M cGee:
Q. Do you remember what kind of a day that was, whether it was
clear, bright, cloudy or what?
A. Well, it wasn’t raining. I would say it was clear, bright day.
Q. The sun was shining.
A. The sun was shining later when I went to the hospital. I
don’t know whether it was shining at the particular moment he was
at the house, or not.
Q. You say you had a number of head injuries from, the scuffle
and are still under treatment for head injuries at Maxwell Field?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. You mentioned a Colonel and Major in the Medical Base.
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Approximately how many times was your head struck?
A. Thirteen times to my knowledge my head hit the floor.
Q. Were you knocked unconscious?
A. I passed out.
Q. How long altogether was this man who was in your room, was
he in there?
A. I don’t know how long he stayed after I passed out.
Q. Approximately what time was it when you went over to the
neighbor’s?
A. She called the police about a minute after I got there, I
suppose.
Q. What time was it?
A. 12:40 when she called.
Q. It was about 12:15 when you first saw this man; is that right?
A. Yes.
Q. Is that correct?
A. Approximately 12:15.
Q. Did he have on a coat?
A. No.
90 Q. About how tall was he?
A. I don’t know exactly. I judge he was only about 5.9
and one-half or 10.
Q. How much did he weigh?
A. I was no judge of that.
Q. No judge of it?
A. No. I said between one hundred and thirty and one hundred
and fifty.
Q. He didn’t have any coat or anything, just a shirt.
A. Just a shirt.
Q. When did the police first come to you after the 10th? Did
you read about this boy being picked up on the 10th?
A. I heard in the newspaper a woman had been attacked.
Q. Did the police come to see you as soon as they picked him up?
A. No.
Q. When did the police contact you after he was picked up?
A. They contacted me that evening, they called me and told me
I might have to go out to Kilby to look at him. And then they
called me later and said they would be around for the next after
noon out at Kilby.
Q. So they called you up the same night and told you?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. To be the next afternoon at Kilby?
A. Yes.
Q. Did you go to Kilby the next afternoon?
A. No. They changed their plans.
Q. Did they talk to you again after that?
A. Yes.
Q. When did they next call you? Did they come out to see you
on Tuesday?
A. They didn’t come out to see me. I cannot remember whether
they called me, or not, I had so many telephone calls during those
few days.
Q. They did contact you again after Monday night?
A. Yes.
Q. When was that?
A. I just answered that question. I said I didn’t know.
Q. Was it on Friday?
A. It couldn’t have been on Friday because I identified the boy
on Wednesday.
91 Q. I want to get the date to the best of your recollection.
A. They probably called me on Tuesday to let me know
I were to go downtown Wednesday.
Q. What time of day did they call you, morning or afternoon?
A. I don’t remember.
Q. Did anyone come out there to see you?
A. No, not until the policemen came to take me down.
Q. When did the policemen came out there?
A. Wednesday before 11 o’clock.
Q. Wednesday morning?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Do you know what policeman it was?
A. I believe he was a detective. I think he was new on the
force.
Q. You don’t remember his name?
A. No.
Q. Was he by himself?
A. He was by himself. Horton, or Hogan, something like that.
I don’t know the name.
JEREMIAH REEVES, JR., VS. STATE OB' ALABAMA 63
Q. Did he have any conversation with you when he saw you
out there?
A. Just the usual “ how are you, nice day, isn’t it?”
Q. Did he get out of the car and come in the house?
A. He got out of the car and came up to the door, and I asked
him to wait a minute until I wrote my husband a note.
Q. Did he tell you what he wanted with you?
A. They called me from Police Headquarters that morning and
told me they would send out and pick me up.
Q. He told you he was ordered to pick you up, I suppose.
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Told, you you were going down to look at this man?
A. He didn’t mention why. He said they told him to come out
and pick me up.
Q. Did they tell you that morning they wanted you to come down
and look at this negro?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Had you heard about a confession before that?
A. No; I hadn’t.
Q. When did the confession come up? You say after you got
to Headquarters the Solicitor said that he had confessed.
A. The Solicitor said he had confessed when I walked in
there.
92 Q. That is before you saw the boy; is that correct?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Do you know how many pictures they made altogether of
this boy?
A. Made of him?
Q. Yes.
A. I don’t know anything about that. I never saw a picture of
him.
Q. Did you read the paper on Tuesday?
A. I probably did. I don’t know which article you are refer
ring to.
Q. The article in the paper they wrote about him and carried
his picture.
A. That wasn’t until after I had identified him, was it?
Q. Do you remember the article which you read and had his
picture in the newspaper?
A. I remember the article, but I don’t remember which paper it
was printed in.
Q. You saw his picture in the paper?
A. I saw the picture, yes.
Q. The police officers, didn’t they tell you they had the nigger
that raped you?
A. No, they didn’t. They said they had a negro for me to
look at.
64 JEREMIAH REEVES, JR., VS. STATE OF ALABAMA
JEREMIAH REEVES, JR., VS. STATE OE ALABAMA 65
Q. The solicitor showed you a typed confession with this negro’s
name on it before you ever looked at this colored boy?
A. I looked at him through the window.
Q. Before you ever looked at the negro boy?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. They told you to look through the glass window?
A. That is correct.
Q. He was the only negro in there, was he not?
A. That is correct.
Q. In your original complaint how old did you tell the police
that man was you saw?
A. I said seventeen to twenty-five.
Q. Did you say he was about six feet tall?
A. I said he was taller than my husband. I didn’t know.
Q. You said he was taller than your husband. How tall is your
husband?
A. Five feet nine.
Q. Did you tell them he was a pretty heavy set man?
A. No; I did not.
93 Q. Did you tell them he had a mustache?
A. He didn’t have a mustache.
Q. Did you tell the police he has a mustache?
A, No; I did not.
Q. Did the police show you the pictures they took of him?
A. I never saw a picture of him until the one in the paper.
Q. Did the police show you any pictures of him at all?
A, Not of this particular boy, no.
Q. Were you pretty excited that morning when you went to see
that man? I imagine you were, weren’t you?
A. Yes, sir; I was.
Q. You were pretty frightened or scared?
A. Which morning do you mean, back in July?
Q. The morning you were raped by this man in your room.
A. Yes, sir, I was scared.
Q. About how long did you look at this boy before he jumped
on you, just a second?
A. Oh, possibly five or six seconds.
Q. You turned around and saw him, and screamed, and said,
“ get out,” and he jumped you; is that correct?
A. Yes.
Q. He held your throat with one hand and the right arm with
the other hand?
A. Yes.
Q. You told us before, you said he had intercourse with you.
Before he had intercourse with you, you struck at him one time,
but didn’t hit him?
A. I cannot say how many times I struck at him.
66 JEKEMIAH BEEVES, JB., VS. STATE OP ALABAMA
Q. On direct examination here you say you hit at him once and
missed him; is that right?
A. I said I know of once I hit at him and missed him. I know
I hit at him more than once.
Q. Which hand did you have the broken fingernails on?
A. The broken fingernails were on my right hand.
Q. He was holding your right hand?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. And held your neck all the time?
A. Yes.
Q. With his right hand?
94 A. No. He was holding my neck most of the time.
Q. Did you scratch at him with your left hand?
A. Yes.
Q. Did you scratch him?
A. I hit at him. I wasn’t conscious of ever striking him.
Q. He wasn’t doing any talking at this time, was he?
A. No.
Q. The only conversation he had with you was after it was over;
is that correct?
A. That’s correct.
Q. After it was over was when this man said he would kill you
if you reported it?
A. That is right.
Q. Before this happened he didn’t make any threats to kill or
say a word; is that correct?
A. That is correct.
Q. You say he was holding you by the neck with his right hand
and was holding your right arm, and he made you take your
pants off?
A. Yes.
Q. You took them off yourself; is that correct?
A. Yes.
Q. And all this time never said a word to you?
A. I didn’t say that.
Q. Until after the intercourse, I believe you said.
A. He had told me to quit screaming.
Q. And that is all he said, “ quit screaming?”
A. And “ shut up,” yes.
Q. I believe this was July 28th, and the next time you ever looked
at a nigger you thought might have attacked you was on Novem
ber the 12th, is that correct?
A. No. I had looked at two.
Q. You had looked at two negroes before that?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. On no other niggers had the Solicitor given you a typed con
fession?
JEREMIAH REEVES, JR., VS. STATE OP ALABAMA 67
A. No.
Q, Before you looked at them?
A. No. I was shown pictures of them.
Q. They was in a line-up of niggers is that right?
95 A. Yes, sir.
Q. Had some other niggers in the line; is that correct?
A. Yes.
Q. How many different line-ups did you look at?
A. I have no idea. Quite a few.
Q. Are you acquainted with Mrs. Burson now?
A. No.
Q. Was there any other women in there with you at the time
you talked to him?
A. Yes.
Q. Did they say anything to him?
A. Yes.
Q. Do you know Mrs. Kathrine Trawick?
A. I think I met her.
Q. Was she down there?
A. I don’t know where she was. There was quite a few women
down there I never met before.
Q. About how long did you stay with him at that time, on
Wednesday?
A. Several minutes.
R e-birect exam ination .
By the Solicitor:
Q. You said you did scream?
Mr. M cGee: Object to the question as leading.
The C ourt: I will sustain the objection on that ground.
By the Solicitor:
Q. Did you, or did you not, scream at that time?
A. I did.
Q. Do you remember how many times you screamed?
Mr. M cGee: I object. This is not re-direct.
The C ourt : Y ou didn’t object before. You m ay ask it one time.
By the Solicitor:
Q. Do you remember how many times you screamed?
A. No.
Q. In your best judgment, was it more than once?
Mr. M cGee: I object to the question because the witness has
shown herself disqualified to answer it by the previous an
swer.
96 The Court: She testified she doesn’t remember how many
times, so I will sustain this objection.
Lois Struchko , having been duly sworn, was examined and tes
tified as follow s:
D irect exam ination .
By the Solicitor:
Q. Will you tell us your name, please.
A. Lois Struchko.
Q. Where were you living on August 28th of this year?
A. At 3846 Cleveland.
Q. Do you know Mrs. Ann Crowder?
A. Yes, sir; I do.
Q. Where was your house in relation to her house?
A. Right next door.
Q. Did you see her on that day?
A. Not before she came to my front door.
Q. She came to your front door?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Approximately what time was this?
A. It was 12:40.
Q. Will you describe her condition to the Jury at the time she
came to your door?
A. Well, she was in a terrific state of shock, hysteria, crying, and
she was badly bruised and bleeding, and she was so nervous that
she just couldn’t hardly talk until I brought her in the house and
made her sit down, and I found out what was wrong with her and
I called the police.
Q. Did she complain to you she had been raped?
A. This is the way she told me— she had been beaten and raped
by a nigger.
Q. Did you give her anything?
A. Yes, sir; I did.
Q. Tell the Jury what you gave her.
A. I gave her a few drops of spirits of ammonia and water to
calm her nerves down. And she complained of her head hurting.
She had lacerations on her head, and then I gave her a codeine tab
let, and then put cold compresses on her head. That is all.
97 Q. Did you say she was bleeding?
A. Yes, sir, she was. Her head was bleeding on the right
side.
Q. How was she dressed when she came over there?
68 JEREMIAH REEVES, JR., VS. STATE OP ALABAMA
JEREMIAH REEVES, JR., VS. STATE OF ALABAMA 69
A. She had on brown loafers, a white housecoat with flowers in
it, her bras, her panties and garter belt.
Q. Do you know where she went from your house?
A. I took her to the hospital.
Q. What hospital did you take her to?
A. Maxwell Air Force Base.
C ross-exam ination .
By Mr. McGee:
Q. You say this is on August the 28th?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. August 28th of 1952, this year?
A. That is correct.
Q. What day was it?
A. On a Monday.
Q. About what time was it she knocked at your door?
A. I would say approximately 12:40.
Q. Was your door opened at that time?
A. No, sir. It was not. My door is always closed and locked.
Q. Did she in her conversation with you give you any descrip
tion?
A. Yes, sir, she did.
Q. How tall did she tell you that nigger was, six feet?
A. No, sir. She said he was medium height, she judged around
5.10.
Q. Do you know how tall her husband is?
A. Off hand, I cannot say.
Q. Did she tell you he was taller than her husband?
A. No, she did not.
Q. Did she tell you he was around twenty-five?
A. No, sir.
Q. Did she describe his color, or whether he had a mustache, or
anything?
A. She did.
Q. Did she say he had a mustache?
A. No, she did not.
Q. Did she say he didn’t have one?
A. She didn’t say mustache. She didn’t mention anything about
mustache.
98 Q. You don’t know whether she said he had a mustache,
or not?
A. No mustache mentioned whatever.
Q. Did she mention anything about how he was dressed?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Do you remember what she mentioned?
70 JEREMIAH REEVES, JR., VS. STATE OF ALABAMA
A. Blue trousers.
Q. Do you remember?
A. Yes, sir, I do.
Q. Did you hear any scream?
A. No, sir.
Q. Didn’t hear any scream that day?
A. No, sir.
Q. She lived next door to your property?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. That was summertime?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. A warm day?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Sun shining?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Were the windows up?
A. No. They were all locked.
Q. You had all your windows closed?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. On a hot August day?
A. I had a window fan in my dining room so I had the house
closed except one window.
Q. How close is her house to your house?
A. Do you want it in feet or yards?
Q. I would appreciate it by yards.
A. I would judge roughly about six or eight yards.
Q. You were side by side?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Do you remember if her house at that time had a window
fan, or anything?
A. It did not.
Q. Were the windows up?
A. Her bedroom windows were not up.
Q. You remember her bedroom windows were not up?
99 A. Yes, sir.
Q. Does she have a big fan or anything?
A. No, sir.
Q. The windows were down?
A. Yes, sir, they were.
Q. You remember that?
A. Yes, sir, I do.
Q. Did you go and check up later? You say you remember the
bedroom windows were down. Didn’t you take her straight to the
hospital from your house?
A. No, sir, not until after the detectives and police came out
and gave me permission to take her to the hospital.
Q. Did you go to her house before you went to the hospital?
A. I went out in my front yard and looked.
Q. Haven’t the police talked to you about this case?
A. No, sir.
Q. Haven’t they talked to you about it?
A. No.
Q. Have you ever talked to the police about the case?
A. No; I have not.
W. R. C lark , having been duly sworn, was examined and testi
fied as follow s:
D irect exam ination .
By the Solicitor:
Q. Will you state your name to the Jury, please.
A. Wilmer Rucker Clark, Jr.
Q. What is your occupation?
A. Salesman.
Q. Where were you at approximately one o ’clock on the 28th of
July of this year?
A. At approximately one o’clock I was proximately at the corner
of Fairview Avenue and Cleveland.
Q. Now, around that time did you see this defendant here?
A. Previous to that time.
Mr. M cGe e : I object to the question as leading.
By the Solicitor:
Q. What time did you see him?
100 The C ourt: He can answer the question yes or no. Over
rule the objection.
Mr. M cGe e : I would like an exception.
The C ourt : You m ay have an exception.
(Exception noted for the defendant by direction of the Court.)
By the Solicitor:
Q. What time did you see this defendant?
A. It was some short time before one.
Q. Where did you see him?
A. At the corner of National and Cleveland.
Q. Where were you going at that time?
Mr. M cG e e : I object to the question as immaterial and a hear
say answer, an irrelevant and prejudicial answer.
JEREMIAH REEVES, JR., VS. STATE OF ALABAMA 71
72 JEREMIAH REEVES, JR., VS. STATE OF ALABAMA
The Court : On the question of relevancy, I will sustain the ob
jection to where he was going.
The Solicitor: I believe I can connect it up and show where
it is relevant.
By the Solicitor:
Q. Did you have a conversation with this defendant?
A. Yes.
Q. Which direction were you going when you first saw him?
A. I was at a dead stop at the corner of Cleveland and National.
I had stopped because there is a stop sign there, and that is the
first time I had seen this person.
Q. What was he doing when you first saw him?
A. He was running up the street toward Fairview Avenue.
Q. Did you have a conversation with him at that time?
A. I had a very limited one.
Q. What did he say to you and what did you say to him?
A. He inquired of me a ride. I asked him where he was going,
and he said to town, so I offered him a ride.
Q. Where did he ride in your car?
A. He rode in the back seat.
Q. Where did you let him out?
A. At the corner of Fairview and Cleveland.
Q. That is where he got out of the car?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. He got in where?
101 A. At the comer of National and Cleveland.
Q. Approximately how many blocks did you carry him?
A. I say approximately five or six, whatever it is from there to
Fairview Avenue.
Q. Did he ask to be put out?
A. Yes.
Q. Did you notice anything unusual about the defendant?
A. Yes, sir; I did.
Q. What was it?
A. First of all, it is customary for anyone asking a ride of any
one else, with anyone else, to be courteous.
Mr. M cGee: I move to strike the answer on the ground it is
prejudicial and not responsive to the question.
The Court: The objection is sustained as to any discourtesy, or
anything of that kind.
By the Solicitor:
Q. Did you notice anything unusual about this defendant from
a physical standpoint?
Mr. M cGee: That is objected to, unless he makes it more clear
what is meant by unusual, unless it can be connected up with this
case.
The Solicitor: I would like to finish the question.
The C ourt: Go ahead.
By the Solicitor:
Q. Did you notice anything unusual about him in a physical
manner?
Mr. M cGee: I object.
The Court : Overrule the objection.
Mr. M cGee: I would like an exception.
The Court : Exception for the defendant.
(Exception noted for the defendant by direction of the Court.)
By the Solicitor:
Q. You may answer the question.
A. That individual was dressed very neatly, but was sweating
profusely and smelled very loudly.
Q. Can you tell us how he was dressed?
A. Only approximately. I have an impression, a loud shirt,
straw hat, neatly pressed pants.
Q. Do you remember the color of the pants?
102 A. My impression is the pants were blue.
Q. Have you seen this defendant from that time to this
day, have you seen him since then?
A. Yes.
Q. Where did you see him?
A. In the jail.
Q. In the Montgomery County Jail?
A. Across the street, whatever that is, the jail across the street
from the courthouse.
Q. Who was with you when you saw him?
A. There was one officer, one detective, present.
Q. Do you know who he was?
A. I don’t recall his name. I was introduced, but I don’t recall
his name.
Q. Did you have a conversation with this defendant?
A. Yes, sir: I did.
Q. Who was present besides yourself?
A. One officer.
Q. Whose name you don’t know.
A. Right.
Q. Did you threaten this defendant, did you offer him anything,
did you coerce him?
JEREMIAH REEVES, JR., VS. STATE OE ALABAMA 73
74 JEREMIAH REEVES, JR., VS. STATE OF ALABAMA
A. Definitely not.
Q. Did anyone offer him anything, promise him anything, give
him any hope or promise of reward in your presence or hearing?
A. No.
Q. Will you tell the Jury the conversation you had with this
defendant?
Air. M cGee: I would like to have the witness questioned if this
is going to be in the nature of a confession.
The Court: Have you any testimony as to this particular occa
sion contrary to what has been testified to?
Mr. M cGee: I might have. To save the time of the Court to
prepare a statement, I can tell you what I have in mind.
The Court : You may state right here what you have in mind.
Mr. M cGee: The evidence I have is that he was picked up by
two deputies, and, according to what the Sheriff, the Chief Deputy
told me, he was only there for about two minutes and carried
103 on out to Kilby. That is what the Sheriff and Chief Deputy
told me. The defendant tells me at the time he was picked up
by two deputies, on his way down to the County Jail he was threat
ened and worried by the two deputies carrying him. I think such
evidence as that would be admissible, if he was only there two
minutes, have some effect on anything he said.
The C ourt: I will overrule the objection to it.
Mr. M cGee: I move the Court to grant a hearing on the admis
sibility of this alleged confession on the ground that certain state
ments were extracted by officers of the State of Alabama from this
seventeen year old colored defendant while he was being held in
communicado in the State Penitentiary at Kilby in Montgomery
County, Alabama, and that said statements were extracted from the
defendant after he had been continuously questioned, questioning
in a series for a long period of time, for a period of hours, which
questioning took part of at least two days, and part of the
questioning was done in the room with the electric chair. And also
during such questioning certain officers told the defendant if he
confessed that would keep him out of the electric chair, and other
wise he was going to fry. And such conduct violated the defend
ant’s rights under the Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution
of the United States.
By the Court:
Q. Did you have conversation with this Defendant in Kilby
Prison?
A. No, sir.
The Court : The motion is overruled.
Mr. M cGee: I would like to have an exception.
JEREMIAH BEEVES, JR,, VS. STATE OF ALABAMA 75
The Court: Y ou may have an exception.
(Exception noted for the defendant by direction of the Court.)
By the Solicitor:
Q. You can refresh your recollection on the calendar back here,
and I will ask you if you recall what date you saw the defendant
in the County Jail.
A. I couldn’t say.
Q. Look at the calendar over there to refresh your recollection.
A. I think it was the 17th.
Q. Did the defendant recognize you?
A. He stated that he did.
Q. Will you tell us what other conversation you had with
104 him?
A. Well, I asked him if I was the person that picked him
up and he said, “ yes, sir, you are.”
Q. Did he say where you had picked him up?
A. I included that in my question. He said the corner of National
and Cleveland.
Q. And he said that you were the one that picked him up?
A. He said, “yes, sir; I am the one you picked up.”
Q. Do you know where Airs. Crowder was living at that time?
A. I do approximately. She lived at that time about—
Mr. M cGee: I object.
The C ourt : If this is a guess, I sustain the objection.
C ross-exam ination .
By Mr. M cGee:
Q. You said there was something unusual about the nigger’s
physical appearance when you saw him?
A. I didn’t use the word “ nigger.”
Q. You said there was something unusual about his appearance?
Just answer the question.
A. Yes, sir.
Q. You said the unusual thing to you ŵ as he was sweating
profusely and smelled bad; is that correct?
A. I used the word “ loudly.”
Q. When you first saw him he was running? You testify under
oath when you first saw that nigger he was running; is that correct?
A. That is right.
Q. This was in August or July?
A. July.
Q. Was it July?
A. Right.
Q. In the summertime, wasn’t it?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. You consider it unusual for a nigger running in the summer
time in Montgomery to be sweating and smelling loudly; would you
consider it unusual for a nigger running?
A. I would consider it unusual for a person dressed so carefully
to allow himself to become that way.
Q. Is there anything unusual to ride around down there
105 and see a nigger boy running by and ask you to give him a
lift?
A. I didn’t know the nigger boy, as you say, when I asked him
to get in.
Q. Were you South or North of Fairview?
A. I was at the corner of National and Cleveland. I don’t know.
That is where I was.
Q. You know where Ridgecrest is, don’t you?
A. That is to the left of where I was.
Q. Do you know where Ridgecrest is?
A. Yes.
Q. You know where Fairview is?
A. Right.
Q. Ridgecrest runs South of Fairview, does it not?
A. I was at the comer of National and Cleveland.
Q. Answer my question.
A. I am not sure. I don’t know the points of the compass that
well. I know where I was.
Q. Do you know how many blocks South of Fairview you were
at the time you saw this nigger?
A. Not precisely.
Q. Approximately how many?
A. Approximately six or seven blocks.
Q. The first time you said you didn’t know whether South or
North. Why did you first tell the Jury you didn’t know whether
you were North or South of Fairview? You now say South of
Fairview six or seven blocks.
A. Naturally, you are well schooled in the art of confusion.
Q. How many blocks did you carry him in the car before he
got out?
A. I don’t know. I previously stated I didn’t know how many
blocks it was from the point I picked him up until the point I
let him out.
Q. Six or seven?
A. I said approximately.
Q. Approximately six or seven?
A. That could be correct. I am not sure.
Q. What did he say to you?
76 JEKEMIAH BEEVES, JE., VS. STATE OF ALABAMA
A. At first he asked me for a ride.
Q. While he was running.
A. Yes. And then he got in the car, and I asked him to sit in the
back seat, and he sat quiet until I spoke first, and I had been
106 talking with my wife only about thirty minutes previously
about some old clothes we had. I asked him if he went to
Church and if he had a pastor who might dispose of those clothes.
Q. Where are you a salesman?
A. I travel South Alabama.
Q. For whom?
A. Bauer and Black.
Q. What kind of outfit is that?
A. Surgical dressings, one of the two largest in the world.
Q. Have you discussed this case with the Solicitor?
A. I don’t exactly know what you mean by discussing the case.
Q. Exactly what I said.
A. I have mentioned my part in it to him, yes.
Q. Both to Mr. Thetford and Mr. Stewart?
A. No comprehensive discussion of the case at all.
Q. Are you related to any of the parties involved in the case?
A. No.
Q. Any of them friends of yours?
A. No.
Q. Did you ever know the defendant?
A. No.
Q. At the time you talked to this boy in the County Jail tell the
Jury exactly what you said to him.
A. As I previously stated, I only have an impression of what I
said to him; I cannot give a verbatum report of the conversation
because I don’t recall it in detail.
Q. This is just a few days ago.
A. I think it was on the 17th of this month.
Q. On Monday?
A. That would be Monday, if I recall it correctly. I could be
mistaken.
Q. In other words, you cannot tell exactly what you said a couple
of weeks ago, but way back last summer you can recall in detail the
conversation without any great trouble now; is that correct?
A. I know he very definitely stated he remembered me, but I
don’t remember the conversation verbatum.
Q. What is your interest in this case?
A. I am interested as a citizen of the State of Alabama to see
that justice is done.
107 Q. Did you go down and tell the police right after you
picked this nigger up and had given him a ride?
A. Repeat that question.
JEREMIAH REEVES, JR., VS. STATE OF ALABAMA 77
Q. When did you approach the officers of the City or State in
this case?
A. The next morning I picked up the newspaper and read where
an offense was committed against one of my neighbors.
Q. Offense committed against one of your neighbors?
A. I consider anyone living in the same general area a neighbor.
Q. When you—
A. I didn’t finish my answer.
Q. Go ahead and finish your answer.
A. I have a wife and children, and travel, and am away most
of the week and, naturally, I have to consider the safety of my
own home.
Mr. M cG e e : I object to that.
The W itn ess : That is my interest in the case.
By Mr. M cGee:
Q. When did you first approach the officers after you saw the
newspaper?
A. That is why I went, because I was worried about my home.
The C ourt : That testimony may be excluded. You asked him
when it was, and the answer was not responsive.
By the C ourt:
Q. You may testify when you first approached a police officer.
Just confine your answer to the question.
A. The next day.
By Mr. M cGee:
Q. What time?
A. Approximately 9 o’clock in the morning.
Q. After you read the paper.
A. Yes.
Q. Did you carry a description of him to the police?
A. I don’t recall.
Q. Didn’t describe how he was dressed?
A. I don’t remember. I cannot state that. I am not sure.
Q. What officer did you talk to first?
A. I don’t know that.
Q. Who did you talk to next?
A. I don’t recall.
108 Q. When did you next talk to them?
A. I was on the road, and when I returned home, as I recall.
Q. When did you next talk to him?
A. I don’t remember exactly. Some police officer left a message
at my home to call him, which I did when I returned home.
78 JEREMIAH REEVES, JR., VS. STATE OF ALABAMA
JEREMIAH REEVES, JR., VS. STATE OF ALABAMA 79
Q. When was it, July, August, September, October, November?
A. I would say it was in July.
Q. In July?
A. No. It could have been the early part of August.
Q. Did you go down and talk to the police officer?
A. No. They came to my home.
Q. Who came out there?
A. I don’t recall the officers’ name.
Q. You don’t recall the officers’ name who came there then?
A. No.
Q. Did you talk to him anymore before the trial of this case?
A. Oh, yes, sir.
Q. When did you next talk to him?
A. They came out to my home once again after that.
Q. Do you remember when?
A. No.
Q. Do you remember who?
A. No.
Q. You don’t remember the name of the deputy at the County
Jail with you, do you?
A. One of the officers called me that morning by the name
of Goines.
Q. Did he come to the house to get you?
A. No; I came in my own car.
Q. You came down voluntarily in your own car?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Didn’t this boy just remain silent when you were over
there talking to him in the County Jail?
A. No. He answered my question.
Q. Don’t you recall the very first thing you said, “ we don’t like
white women being raped by niggers here?”
A. That wasn’t the first thing I said to him.
Q. What was the first thing said to him?
A. I am not sure.
109 R e-direct Exam ination .
By the Solicitor :
Q. Did you know Mrs. Crowder prior to this?
A. No, sir.
(5 minute recess. The Jury retired to the Jury Room in charge
of the bailiff.)
3:34 o ’clock P.M.
The Court reconvened.
Parties present as before noted.
80 JEREMIAH REEVES, JR., VS. STATE OF ALABAMA
G eorge H arold K ojac, having been duly sworn, was examined
and tesified as follows:
D irect E xam ination .
By the Solicitor:
Q. Will you state your name to the Jury, please.
A. George Harold Kojac.
Q. You are an officer in the United States Air Force?
A. That is right, sir.
Q. What is your occupation?
A. Lieutenant Colonel.
Q. You are a medical doctor?
A. That is right, sir.
Q. What institutions of higher learning have you attended and
what degrees have you obtained?
A. Went to Rutgers University and obtained a B.S. degree; then
went to Columbia University, College of Physicians and Surgeons,
and obtained a Doctor’s Degree, M.D.
Q. In what hospital did you intern?
A. The Morris Ania City Hospital in New York City. And just
recently completed a three year residence in obstetrics and gyne
cology at County Hospital in St. Antonio, Texas.
Q. How long have you been practicing your profession?
A. Since 1938.
Q. Where are you presently stationed?
A. At Maxwell Air Force Base.
110 Q. Do you know Mrs. Ann Crowder?
A. Mabel Crowder, not Ann Crowder.
Q. That is the same lady who was on the witness stand?
A. That is right.
Q. Out in the witness room now?
A. That is right.
Q. Have you ever examined her?
A. Yes; I have.
Q. On what date did you examine her?
A. On the 28th of July, 1952.
Q. Where did you examine her?
A. In the Obstetrical Clinic at Maxwell Air Force Base.
Q. Approximately what time did you examine her?
A. Five minutes of three.
Q. Will you tell the Jury what her condition was at that time.
A. At that time she was referred to me by the Attending Surgeon
for a pelvic examination, and she had numerous bruises, contusions
and abrasions of the head and face which had been previously taken
care of by the Attending Surgeon. And had abrasions over the left
iliac crest.
Q. Where is that?
A. Over the hip bone. That is the anterior aspect of the left
side. I did the pelvic examination, and that, with the exception of
the fact that there was some grayish oozing discharge of the vagina,
there was no other injuries revealed to the female genitalia.
Q. Could you describe the extent of the bruises, contusions and
lacerations you have stated, where were they?
A. I would be describing someone else’s findings in that respect.
She was examined more closely by the Attending Surgeon and by
the neurologist. In view of that fact I asked for a neurological
examination, asked for a neurologist to come in to see the patient
in question.
Q. Who is that?
A. Dr. Zarling.
Q. Did you take a smear from her vagina?
A. Three smears. One from the vulva, the lips of the vagina, and
one from within the uterus, and the other from the viscera promi
nence, which is the tip of the vagina.
I l l Q. What test was performed?
A. I forwarded the three specimens to the laboratory tech
nician to examine the spermatozoa.
Q. Could you tell what the result of the test was?
Mr. M cGee: That is objected to unless he made it.
The C ourt : If it is a test in the regular course and under his con
trol and he knows the result of the test, he can testify.
By the Court:
Q. Do you know?
A. Yes, sir; I do. Positive spermatozoa. Spermatozoa were
found in the specimen.
By the Solicitor:
Q. Am I right in saying you are talking about male spermatozoa?
A. I am. That is right, sir.
Q. Do you know whether they were living?
A. No motility was noted. Generally they were not living.
C ross-examination .
By Mr. M cGee:
Q. You said you took what you call a smear. Just what is
that?
A. A smear of the female genitalia extending backward from
JEREMIAH REEVES, JR., VS. STATE OP ALABAMA 81
the lips of the vagina, and by laboratory examination to determine
any abnormalities which might be found within the vulva, and
which includes the uterus and womb, an examination of her repro
ductive organs, also includes direct physical examination of the
surface for any indication of injury, or infection and spermatozoa.
Q. You said no other injuries; some grayish discharge of the
vagina, and no other injuries.
A. That is right.
Q. Was that discharge from an injury?
A. No, sir.
Q. Any injury to the upper boundary?
A. No'.
Q. How about the lower boundary?
A. No evidence of any contusion.
Q. You testified about this spermatozoa. Do you mean you
were there at the time the test was run?
A. I didn’t say I knew it was spermatozoa.
Q. I believe when I made an objection to the Court you
112 said you did know.
The C ourt : He testified that he knew the result of the
tests which were made under his direction and under his instruc
tions. He testified the tests showed it was positive spermatozoa.
By Mr. M cGee:
Q. Was that test run under your direction?
A. That is right.
Q. Were you there when the test was run?
A. No.
Q. You sent it over to the laboratory to have it run?
A. In our own laboratory. It was taken to the laboratory and
given to the laboratory technician.
Q. Did you take it there?
A. I took the three test tubes.
Q. Did you remain when he ran the test.
A. No, sir.
Q. You didn’t run the test on it?
A. No, sir. Excuse me one moment. You asked me did I make
the test?
Q. Yes.
A. I directed the test in writing. In other words, I made out a
routine slip.
Q. You never remained to see if your directions were carried out?
A. No, sir.
Q. You didn’t stay there?
A. Not while the test was being run.
Q. Were you sent a clinical report?
82 JEREMIAH REEVES, JR., VS. STATE OF ALABAMA
JEREMIAH REEVES, JR., VS. STATE OF ALABAMA 83
A. I was.
Q. A chemical analysis?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. The testimony you have given is a result of that chemical
analysis?
A. Yes, sir.
Air. M cGee: I object to this testimony and make a motion that
it be excluded from the record.
The C ourt: Objection overruled.
Air. M cGee: I would like an exception.
The C ourt : Y ou may have an exception.
(Exception noted for the defendant by direction of the
113 Court.)
By Mr. M cGee:
Q. When you made the statement it was spermotozoa in that
smear you took, you are basing your statement on the result of the
test sent to you from the lab?
A. That is right.
Q. Who made that test?
A. Mr. Johnson.
Q. Is he a doctor?
A. No, sir.
Q. Has he had any qualified medical training that you know of?
A. I don’t know.
Q. You don’t know of any medical training that he has had
that you know of?
A. I don’t know.
Q. You were not there when he made the test?
A. That is right.
Q. The only thing you are testifying to is the result of the test
he had made?
A. That is right.
Q. You say there was no motility in that spermatozoa, they were
not alive?
A. That is right.
Q. You concluded they were dead?
A. That is right.
Q. The fact that there was no motility, is that based on the
result of the test of the smear?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. How long does it take spermatozoa to die?
A. It varies in individuals. It depends upon the individual person,
and depends upon the individual who generates the spermatozoa.
Q. What is the average time the spermatozoa will continue to live?
A. It would vary.
Q. In the vagina, I mean.
A. It may vary from less than one hour to twenty-four hours.
Q. Would it be an average of less than a day?
A. No.
Q. I am talking about average.
A. I dare say eight to twelve hours.
114 Q. Eight to twelve hours is the average life time of male
spermatozoa in the vagina?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. What time did you have those smears run off?
A. At approximately a little after three o’clock.
C. N. Jo h n so n , having been duly sworn, was examined and
testified as follow s:
D irect Exam in ation .
By the Solicitor:
Q. Where are you employed?
A. Out at the Maxwell Air Force Base in Montgomery.
Q. What is your occupation?
A. I am Chief Laboratory Supervisor of the entire lab.
Q. You are Chief Laboratory Supervisor?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. What training have you had for that position?
A. I have a B.S. Degree from Mississippi State in 1932, and
had 18 years experience, and certified Civil Service in laboratory.
Q. Did you run a test on three smears submitted to you by
Colonel Kojac on July 28th, smears taken from Mrs. Ann Crowder?
A. Yes, sir; I did.
Q. What did you find from those smears?
A. They had live spermatozoa cells that apparently wasn’t
more than three or four hours old.
Q. Your findings were they were alive?
A. Yes, sir.
C ross-exam ination .
By Mr. M cGee:
Q. Still alive when you made the tests?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. You made the examination of the specimens yourself?
A. Yes, sir.
84 JEREMIAH REEVES, JR., VS. STATE OF ALABAMA
Q. To determine if there was spermatozoa in the specimens?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. And were alive?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. And were not older than three or four hours?
115 A. That is right.
Q. You put your findings down on a slip of paper?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Dr. Kojac wasn’t with you at the time you made the exami
nation?
A. No, sir. I carried the report directly to him.
Q. The reason you run a test of the three stnears was because
Dr. Kojac came to you and asked you to run a test of the three
smears for spermatozoa?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. You personally ran them by yourself?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. He wasn’t with you?
A. No, sir.
Q. You found they were live spermatozoa three or four hours old?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. You wrote it on a slip of paper?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Did you return it to Dr. Kojac yourself?
A. I returned it to him personally.
Q. He had your report today when he was sitting on the stand?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. You received a B.S. Degree at Mississippi State in 1932?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. What kind of lab training did you have at college?
A. I took a regular course in general science.
Q. Were you given a good bit of laboratory work during the
time you were in college?
A. Yes, sir, full line of the biological sciences.
V irgil R . Zarling , having been duly sworn, was examined and
testified as follow s:
D irect E xam ination .
By the Solicitor:
Q. By whom are you employed?
A. By the United States Air Force.
Q. You are an officer in the United States Air Force?
A. Yes, sir.
JEREMIAH REEVES, JR., VS. STATE OF ALABAMA 85
Q. What is your rank?
116 A. Major.
Q. What institutions of higher learning have you attended
and what degrees have you received?
A. I have a Bachelor of Science, Bachelor of Medicine, and
Doctor of Medicine from the University of Minnesota; I have been
in post-graduate training at the Baltimore City Hospital, at Johns
Hopkins Hospital, Santa Clara University, University of Southern
California, and University of Minnesota.
Q. Did you complete training, internship?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Where?
A. Baltimore City Hospital.
Q. Do you specialize?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. In what?
A. In neurology.
Q. How long have you been practicing medicine?
A. I graduated from school in 1943—nine years.
Q. Have you been continuously practicing your profession since
that time?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Where are you presently stationed?
A. Maxwell Air Force Base.
Q. In Montgomery?
A. In Montgomery.
Q. Did you on July 28th examine a Mrs. Ann Crowder?
A. I did.
Q. Where did you examine her?
A. I saw her initially in the OBGYN Clinic in the Maxwell Air
Force Base Hospital, out patient clinic.
Q. What is that OBGYN?
A. Obstetrics and Gynecology Clinic.
Q. Approximately what time did you see her?
A. I don’t remember exactly, but it was around three or three-
thirty in the afternoon.
Q. What was her condition at that time?
A. At that time she was lying on an examining table in the
clinic. At that time she had swelling and bruises on the right
cheek, and in the parotid gland area behind the jaw on the right.
Swelling of the left cheek over the cheek bone. She had a
117 hemorrhage of the right eye, and she had swelling, much
swelling and bruises and lacerations of the right forehead
front and rear; had a swollen, red area over the entire back of the
head on both sides, with superficial skin lacerations there; had a
small bruise over the bridge of her nose.
Q. Did you find any bruises on her body?
86 JEREMIAH REEVES, JR., VS. STATE OF ALABAMA
A. She had, I believe, a bruise on one hip. I noticed no others
at that time.
Q. Did you treat her, or prescribe treatment for that condition?
A. I admitted her to neurology service at the hospital because
of the head injuries, and because of complaint of pains in the head
at that time, and as a precautionary measure we admit them to
the hospital and observe them for a period of time.
Q. How long did she stay in the hospital?
A. She was discharged the 31st of July, about three days.
Q. Has she been under treatment for head injuries, for these
same head injuries you have described, since that time?
A. I have seen her once since, and did an entire laboratory pro
cedure, to tell if the injury has healed during the period of her
crystallization.
Q. Is she still under treatment?
A. No, she isn’t under treatment now.
Cross-exam in atio n .
By Air. M cGee:
Q. What do you mean by laboratory procedure?
A. It is a specialized laboratory procedure. We take an electro-
corticogram.
Q. What is the purpose of that?
A. When you do an operation ECG, it is an electrical device
which records the electric activity in the brain through the skull
and scalp, which indicates the presence of distention of the brain
substance, brain cells.
Q. Is it an apparatus by which you can determine whether or
not the brain itself is injured?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Or functioning wrongfully?
A. Yes, sir. It is similar to an electro-cardiogram which are
recordings made from the heart. We have this made from
118 the brain. It is a much more sensitive and technical
apparatus.
Q. Do you know whether or not you made an X-ray of the
head to determine whether there was a skull fracture or anything?
A. I am quite sure I did— at least, I ordinarily do—but I don’t
remember it at this time.
Q. If she had a skull fracture you would remember it?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Probably she wouldn’t be discharged in three days if there
had been a skull fracture?
A. Probably.
Q. You say she was discharged about the 31st of July?
JEREMIAH REEVES, JR., VS. STATE OF ALABAMA 87
JEREMIAH REEVES, JR., VS. STATE OF ALABAMA
A. Yes, sir.
Q. And said she has been to you once since then?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Do you know when that was approximately?
A. I think about the 8th of October.
Q. And she is not under treatment now.
A. No.
Q. When you examined her and took this laboratory procedure
on her at this time in October, did you determine there was nothing
wrong with her brain?
A. In October there is an improvement from the previous record.
It was not completely recovered then, and not entirely recovered now.
Q. These head injuries you described were apparent to you at
that time?
A. Those are notes I made from the chart.
Q. Were those notes made at the time you examined her?
A. No.
Q. You testified from those notes, didn’t you?
A. Those are to refresh my memory.
Q. Were they made at the time you examined her?
A. No.
Q. Did you copy them from the chart this morning?
A. No.
Q. When did you copy them?
A. Yes, sir; I believe I copied them this morning.
Mr. M cGe e : I move to exclude the evidence from the case, his
description of the head injuries, on the ground he is testifying
from hearsay.
119 The C ourt : He has had that paper in his hand testifying
openly right from the beginning. The objection is overruled.
Mr. M cG e e : I would like an exception.
The C ourt: Y ou may have an exception. You had a right to
ask him while he had it in his hand. You always have a right to
ask about anything that is in a witness’ hand.
Mr. M cG e e : I didn’t know that.
(Exception noted for the defendant by direction of the Court.)
By Mr. M cGee:
Q. Anyway, you say she is not now under treatment?
A. No.
Q. Were you with Dr. Kojac at the time he made his pelvic
examination?
A. No; I wasn’t.
JEREMIAH' REEVES, JR., VS. STATE OF ALABAMA 89
C. J. R eh lin g , having been duly sworn, was examined and
testified as follows:
D irect E xam in ation .
By the Solicitor:
Q. Will you state your name to the Jury, please.
A. C. J. Rehling.
Q. What is your present occupation or position?
A. Director ef the State Department of Toxicology and Criminal
Investigation.
Q. What institutions of higher learning have you attended and
what degrees have you obtained.
A. I have received a Bachelor’s Degree from Auburn, Master’s
Degree from that institution, Doctor of Philosophy, University of
Wisconsin, Bachelor of Law’s from Jones Law School of Montgomery.
Q. How long have you been engaged in or have you been con
nected with the State Department of Toxicology and Criminal
Investigation?
A. Almost sixteen years.
Q. When did you become Director?
A. 1945.
Q. In the course of your employment, are you called upon to
investigate various crimes?
A. Yes.
120 Q. Are you called upon to make physical examinations of
both living and dead bodies?
A. Yes; I am.
Q. Were you asked or requested by the Police Department of
Montgomery to conduct an investigation at the home of Mrs. Ann
Crowder?
A. Yes.
Q. When did you go out there?
A. I will have to refer to my notes for that purpose. That was
the 31st of July when I received the case and when I went out there.
Mr. and Mrs. Crowder were there on that date.
Q. Now, when was the first time you ever saw this defendant?
A. On November 11th of this- year.
Q. Where did you see him?
A. Saw him at Kilby Prison.
Q. Did you make an examination of him?
A. Yes; I did.
Q. A physical examination?
A. Yes.
Q. Did you find, or did you not find, scratches on his body and
legs?
Mr. M cGee: I object to the question on the ground it is im
material whether the doctor observed scratches on the defendant’s
legs on November 11th. She has given the time of her rape back
on July 28th, 1952.
The Court : I don’t see the connection.
The Solicitor: Scratches is what I meant to inquire about.
The C ourt : The objection is sustained then as to any scratches.
B y the Solicitor:
Q. Did you find scratches which appeared to, which you might
say had happened in July of 1952?
Mr. M cGee: I object to the question on the ground it calls for a
conclusion. There has been no testimony as to show the defendant
was ever scratched, and no one says they scratched him that
resulted in a scar on him back in July.
The Solicitor: Mrs. Crowder testified she had two broken
fingernails.
The C ourt: I will sustain the objection. If you want
121 to ask him if he saw any evidence of scars upon him. The
weight to be given any witness’ testimony is for the Jury,
and will be covered by the Court in his charge.
By the Solicitor:
Q. Did you find any scars on his body?
A. Yes; I did.
Q. Did you find scars which appeared to have been made in
July or August of 1952, which would be consistent with a broken
fingernail?
Mr. M cGee: That is objected to as a conclusion of the witness.
The Court : Overrule the objection.
Mr. M cGee: I would like an exception.
The Court: Exception granted.
(Exception noted for the defendant by direction of the Court.)
The W itn ess : On his right forearm there were two scratches,
or scars I should say, that had been scratches which had completely
healed, and were inflicted, in my opinion— at most, I would say,
several months prior, and I cannot be more definite. The one
being just above the wrist of the arm. The other half way up the
right forearm, with the abrasion downward which changed direction
to the side and bilaterally turned in.
Mr. McGee: I object to that as not responsive to the question,
The Court: Objection overruled.
9 0 JEREMIAH REEVES, JR., VS. STATE OF ALABAMA
JEREMIAH BEEVES, JR., VS. STATE OF ALABAMA 91
Mr. M cGee: I would like an exception.
The C ourt: Exception granted.
(Exception noted for the defendant by direction of the Court.)
By the Solicitor:
Q. Would the type of scar you have testified about be con
sistent with a broken fingernail, a fingernail breaking as it scratched?
Mr. M cGee: That is objected to on the ground it is a legal
conclusion, and hypothecating a question to an expert when he has
no ground in the testimony in the case to support that hypothesis.
The Court: The Court, although he is an expert., sustains the
objection. We are getting into the realm of conjecture and specu
lation. On that ground I will sustain the objection.
122 By the Solicitor:
Q. Could that scratch have been made by a fingernail?
A. Yes.
Q. That is broken?
A. Yes.
Q. Did you take these pictures? (Indicating)
A. Yes, sir; I did.
Q. Did you take them at Kilby on November 11th, 1952?
A. Yes; I did.
Q. Is that a picture of the defendant in this case? (Indicating)
A. It is.
The Solicitor: We offer that picture in evidence.
Mr. M cGee: I object to the offer of the picture on the ground
it is prejudicial and immaterial.
The C ourt: Objection overruled.
Mr. M cGee: I would like an exception.
The C ourt: Exception for the defendant.
(Exception noted for the defendant by direction of the Court.)
(Photograph referred to and offered in exidence marked “State
Exhibit 1, 11/28/1952, W H I,” )
By the Solicitor:
Q. Does this picture show the scratches you have described?
A. Yes, it does.
Q. Will you step here in front of the Jury?
Mr. M cGee: I object to any further examination about that
picture to the Jury and referring to scratches on there. It is in
violation of the defendant’s constitutional rights granted under the
Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States.
The Court : The Court has already ruled on the objection and
the picture is in evidence, and the present objection is overruled.
M r. M cG e e : I would like to reserve an exception.
The C ourt : An exception is granted the defendant.
(Exception noted for the defendant by direction of the Court.)
By the Solicitor :
Q. I show you this picture which is marked Exhibit S 1. Will
you show the Jury the scratches?
Mr. M cG ee : I object to the Solicitor referring to scratches.
123 The Solicitor: I will change it to scars.
The C ourt: Changing it to scars you m ay testify.
By the Solicitor :
Q. Point out to the Jury the scars you referred to.
A. The low7er right forearm here consists of two scars concerning
which I have already given testimony. One is about midway of
the forearm, the other just above the wrist, with change of direction
in the center, and especially the one on the lower forearm, a sudden
turning, which I have described. (Indicating)
Q. About what time did you take these pictures?
A. Between 2:30 and 3 o’clock the afternoon of November 11th.
Q. Did you have a conversation with the Defendant?
A. Yes, a limited one.
Q. Who was with you?
A. There was no one in the immediate room while I was examining
him. The Deputy Sheriff, George Mosley, was out in the hall,
and three victims were out in the hall with him at that time, and
one of the Wardens was there.
Q. Did anyone threaten him, coerce him, offer him anything, or
make any promises to get a statement from him?
A. No.
Q. In your presence or hearing?
A. No.
Q. Did you?
A. No; I did not.
B y the C ourt:
Q. Did you say you talked to him with no one in the room when
you talked to him.
A. That is right.
92 JEREMIAH REEVES, JR., VS. STATE OF ALABAMA
JEREMIAH REEVES, JR., VS. STATE OF ALABAMA 93
By the Solicitor:
Q. Did he complain about being mistreated in any way?
A. He did not.
Q. Did you ask him how he was being treated?
A. No, not in those words. I asked him the question how he
was getting along.
Q. And what did he say?
A. He said all right.
124 Cross-examination.
By Mr. M cGee:
Q. You had him stripped completely naked, did you?
A. Yes; I did.
Q. And while he was completely naked you took several pictures
of him completely nude, didn’t you?
A. No; I did not.
Q. How many pictures did you take of him?
A. I took three or four different shots of him.
Q. Three or four different shots?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Were any while he was nude?
A. No. He was stripped to the waist when I took the photographs.
Q. You did have him strip completely first?
A. I examined him while he was completely stripped, yes.
Q. When you say you talked wuth him, did you carry on a dis
cussion or any other sort of conversation?
A. I asked him where he got the marks, or how, we have referred
to so often.
Q. At that time he didn’t tell you he raped Mrs. Crowder, did he?
A. No.
Q. Did you ask him about that?
A. I did not.
Q. Did you ask him anything about any of these cases?
A. Yes. I asked him relative to an injury on the side of his
neck, whether he didn’t receive that doing this, and he said yes.
Q. Did you ask him about any other rape?
A. No; I did not.
Q. How long were you out there?
A. I suppose I was with him thirty minutes, something like that.
Q. You are not a medical doctor?
A. I am not.
Q. Not a physician?
A. No, sir.
Q. Whether the marks on the skin wmre from a skin disease or
skin injuries, you don’t know anything about that?
94 JEREMIAH REEVES, JR., VS. STATE OF ALABAMA
A. I am not a dermatologist.
Q. These two scars, your investigation revealed nothing to indicate
they were made by a fingernail?
125 A. No.
Q. Could have been made by something else?
A. It is possible, yes.
Q. You say you made an examination out at the Crowder home?
A. Yes.
Q. You were not the first criminal investigator out there, were you?
A. No.
Q. Do you know if they found any fingerprints out there?
A. No; I don’t.
Q. You didn’t get any?
A. No.
Q. In the ordinary course of procedure this defendant was finger
printed as soon as he was picked up?
A. I don’t know.
Q. They normally fingerprint him before he is brought to trial
for a criminal, or capital offense?
A. That is the usual procedure. •
Q. Did you testify to fingerprints before the Grand Jury?
A. I did not. I didn’t handle that phase of it.
Q. What did your investigation consist of out there, examine
the bedroom?
A. Yes. I examined the bedroom for evidence of foreign sub
stance in the room.
Q. Did you find any?
A. I did not, not foreign material. I did not, I could distinguish
as such.
Q. Did you talk to Mrs. Crowder?
A. Just briefly.
Q. Did Mrs. Crowder tell you she had broken a couple of
fingernails?
A. No. I didn’t inquire.
Q. One of the first things done is to examine the fingernails of
the prosecutrix to see if you cannot find some trace of the anatomy
of the person who attacked her; isn’t that the normal procedure?
A. If her hands haven’t been cleansed meanwhile.
Q. Do you know whether Mrs. Crowder’s hands were examined
for that?
A. No; I don’t know.
R e-direct Exam ination .
By the Solicitor:
Q. In your examination of the defendant at Kilby did you
126 find any evidence whatsoever of any physical mistreatment?
A. I did not.
R e- cross Exam ination .
By Mr. M cGee:
Q. Didn’t you just testify he had some scratch on the side of
his neck?
A. I found a fingernail scratch on the side of his neck he
admitted receiving the day before.
Q. You said something about a blow on the side of the neck.
A. Apparently you heard wrong. I testified to no such thing;
I made no such statement.
Q. A scratch on the side of his neck?
A. It was a scratch on the side of his neck. This large. (Indi
cating.)
Q. And this is on Tuesday.
A. On Tuesday afternoon.
Q. You answered the scratch looked like it was made the day
before.
A. It was a fresh scratch which he admitted receiving the day
before.
Q. Do you know that he was first taken to Kilby the day before?
A. The day before is my information.
R e-direct Exam in ation .
By the Solicitor:
Q. Did he tell you where he got that scratch?
A. He did.
Q. Where did he say he got it?
A. He said Mrs. Prescott inflicted it upon him.
Clyde Jones, having been duly sworn, was examined and testi
fied as follow s:
D irect Exam ination .
By the Solicitor:
Q. State your name to the Jury.
A. Clyde Jones.
JEREMIAH REEVES, JR., VS. STATE OF ALABAMA 95
Q. What is your occupation?
A. City detective.
Q. City of Montgomery?
127 A. Yes, sir.
Q. Did you hold that position on July 28th of this year?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Did you conduct an investigation of the Ann Crowder case?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Did you go to Mrs. Crowder’s home?
A. I did.
Q. What time did you get there?
A. It was between 12:30 and quarter to one; closer to quarter
to one.
Q. Could you tell me how far the Crowder home is from the
corner of Cleveland and National Avenue?
A. It is what we term a good two blocks.
Q. Which way?
A. It is South of National Avenue.
Q. It is farther from the City than National Avenue is?
A. Yes, sir, it is.
Q. Did you talk to Mrs. Crowder?
A. I did.
Q. Where did you talk to her?
A. In Mrs. Struchko’s home. She lives next door. She lives
on the North side of Mrs. Crowder.
Q. What was Mrs. Crowder’s physical condition when you talked
to her?
A. She was pretty upset and pretty beat up.
Q. Were there any physical factors which you could see which
showed she had been beat up?
A. Yes. She was beat around her head, her head was bleeding,
one side of the head.
Q. Did she complain she had been raped?
A. She did.
Q. Did you go over to Mrs. Crowder’s house?
A. No, we didn’t go in there right then. We kept the house
locked up and wouldn’t let anybody in there at that time.
Q. Did you subsequently conduct an investigation in her house?
A. When Dr. Rehling was out there. We didn’t even let Mr.
Crowder go over there.
Q. What did you find; did you find any evidence of a scuffle?
A. Not much of anything to indicate a scuffle. With the
128 fingerprint man, Mr. Lackey, we tried to get some finger
prints off the doors.
Q. Do you know whether he was successful?
A. He was not.
96 JEREMIAH REEVES, JR., VS. STATE OF ALABAMA
JEREMIAH REEVES, JR., VS. STATE OP ALABAMA 97
Q. When you went into the house did you go into the front
bedroom?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. What did you find in the front bedroom, what was the con
dition of the bedroom?
A. There was a dresser in the far corner, which would be the
Northeast corner; there was a rocking-chair there and a bed.
Q. Was there any evidence of a struggle in that room?
A. You couldn’t tell too much about it at that time because there
wasn’t anything too disarranged, other than the cover on the bed.
Cross-exam ination .
By Mr. M cGee:
Q. You say the fingerprint man did check the house for finger
prints?
A. As far as I know, he checked the house pretty well.
W illiam M. Stanley , having been duly sworn, was examined and
testified as follows:
D irect Exam ination .
By the Solicitor:
Q. State your name to the Jury, please.
A. W. M. Stanley.
Q. What is your occupation?
A. Assistant Chief of Police.
Q. City of Montgomery?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Did you hold that position on July 28th of this year?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. On that day did you go to the home of a Mrs. Struchko?
A. I did.
Q. Where is that?
A. I think the number is about 3844 Cleveland Avenue.
Q. About what time did you get there?
A. About 12:30. Not that. I don’t remember the exact time
I got out there.
Q. Who did you find there?
129 A. A lady I afterwards learned to be Mrs. Crowder and
Mrs. Struchko.
Q. What was Mrs. Crowder’s physical condition at that time?
A. Well, at the time I went in she was sitting on a lounge, and
was crying, and Mrs. Struchko had a towel putting cold compresses
on her head, and she was very much upset and crying.
98 JEREMIAH REEVES, JR., VS. STATE OF ALABAMA
Q. Did she complain to you about being raped?
A. She did.
Q. Did she describe her assailant?
A. She did.
Q. Does that description fit this defendant?
A. Yes, sir.
C ross-ex am inatio n .
By Mr. M cGee:
Q. To refresh your recollection, I believe she told you he was
taller than her husband?
A. She didn’t mention her husband. She looked up at me and
said he was about as tall as I am.
Q. How tall are you?
A. Five feet eight and one-half.
Q. If she described to you and the police he was taller than her
husband, about 5.10, she was wrong, or are you right?
A. I am right on what she told me at that time. She was sitting
on the divan and looking at me, and said the man was about as
tall as I was but not quite as heavy, is the way she expressed it.
Q. Are you sure she didn’t tell you he was about five feet ten?
A. In attempting to say, she said he was about five feet eight or
ten before she looked at me. But then she looked at me and said,
“ he was about as tall as you are.” She didn’t ask me how tall I
was. She said about the same, but not as heavy.
Q. Did she mention his age?
A. She said he was young.
Q. Did she mention his age?
A. Approximately.
Q. Did she say somewhere between seventeen and twenty-five?
A. I understood her to say between seventeen and twenty-two,
along there.
Q. Did she tell you whether or not he had a mustache?
A. She did.
Q. Did or did not have one?
130 A. If I am not mistaken, she said he did have.
Q. He did have a mustache?
A. He did have.
Q. Have you ever seen this defendant before?
A. Not until I came to the Courtroom.
Q. Never interviewed him?
A. No, sir.
Q. Do you remember when you all had him picked up before?
A. No, sir.
Q. Last summer?
JEREMIAH REEVES, JR., VS. STATE OF ALABAMA 99
A. No, sir.
Q. You don’t know anything about that?
A. I don’t know anything about that at all.
Q. Were you in charge of the investigation at Mrs. Crowder’s
house?
A. I was cruising about when the word came out, and I was one
of the first officers there, and went in and listened to her description
of the way the man was dressed, and then I went back and put the
description on the radio.
Q. Do you remember how she said he was dressed?
A. She had said he had on a pair of blue slack pants, and a
flowered shirt with yellow, and with that and the approximate
size she gave I went back and put it on the radio.
Q. How about a hat?
A. She didn’t mention a hat to me.
Q. Didn’t mention a hat to you?
A. Not to me at all, no, sir.
Q. The official description you sent out didn’t mention a hat?
A. Didn’t mention a hat because she didn’t say anything about
it in the first statement that she made.
131 S. E. Sellers, having been duly sworn, was examined and
testified as follow s:
D irect ex am inatio n .
By the Solicitor:
Q. What is your name?
A. S. E. Sellers.
Q. What is your occupation?
A. Policeman, City detective.
Q. Did you go to Kilby Penitentiary on November 10th of this
year?
A. Yes, sir.
132-135 C ross exam ination .
By Mr. M cGee:
Q. How long were you at Kilby with him?
A. I imagine around from thirty to forty minutes.
Q. Was Mr. Dees one of the men in there?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. And George Mosley?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. At that time the nigger was next to the room where the elec
tric chair is?
100 JEREMIAH REEVES, JR., VS. STATE OP ALABAMA
A. Upstairs, yes, sir.
Q. Did you all question him while you were up there for forty
minutes ?
A. Did not.
Q. Others questioned him, didn’t they?
A. Two or three questioned him.
Q. During the forty minutes didn’t he deny having done this
at that time.
A. I didn’t hear anything he had to say.
Q. You didn’t hear him say anything?
A. I didn’t hear him say anything.
Q. Was he silent the whole time?
A. Kind of heard something several times.
Q. Don’t remember what he said?
A. No.
136 Parties present as before noted.
Mr. M cGee: I move the Court to exclude the evidence of the
State in this matter and discharge the defendant upon the follow
ing grounds:
One. The State has failed to prove the corpus delicti.
The C ourt: The motion is overruled.
Mr. M cGee: I ask for an exception.
The C ourt: Exception granted.
(Exception noted for the defendant by direction of the Court.)
D efendant’s E vidence
G eorge H arold K ojac, recalled.
D irect ex am in atio n .
By Mr. M cGee:
Q. I believe you said the laboratory test was sent back to you
of these smears, and from reports of the tests you determined there
were no live spermatozoas?
A. No motility.
Q. You concluded they were dead from that?
A. That is right.
Q. Is there any way medical science can take a blood test from
a human being, any test made of a man to determine whether or
not he is the man who injected that spermatozoa?
A. Not that I know of.
Q. I mean blood test which would compare.
JEREMIAH REEVES, JR., VS. STATE OF ALABAMA 101
A. Not that I know of. You are referring to typing the type
of spermatozoa?
Q. Yes.
A. No way that I know of to ascertain that fact. You are talk
ing about motility?
Q. Yes.
A. Right.
137 C arnella R eeves, having been duly sworn, was examined
and testified as follows:
D irect ex am inatio n .
By Mr. M cGee:
Q. What is your full name?
A. Carnella Reeves.
Q. You work?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. What is your occupation?
A Cook and nurse.
Q. Cook somewhere?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Still cook for them?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Do you know Jeremiah, Jr. here?
A. That is my son.
Q. How old is Jerry?
A. He is seventeen years old.
Q. When was he seventeen?
A. August the 8th.
Q. Of this year?
A. This year.
Q. Do you remember what date it was they first picked him up?
A. No, sir; I cannot even remember exactly the date of it.
Q. Wdiat day was it?
A. I would say it was—I cannot remember what day it was.
Q. I mean this time now.
A. The day they picked him up?
Q. Yes. Do you know?
A. On Monday.
Q. To refresh your recollection, was it the Monday before Armi
stice Day on Tuesday?
A. Yes, sir, it was Monday.
Q. W7hen did you first know he had been picked up?
A. The first fknowed he had been picked up, they called me up
on the telephone they had picked up my other son and wanted me
to come on home. I thought that something terrible happened,
police all over the house; they wouldn’t allow me to tell what
138 happened at my house. And then he said—
The Solicitor: 1 object to this.
The Court: Objection sustained.
By Mr. M cGee:
Q. Did you see Jerry that Monday?
A. I didn’t see Jerry that Monday.
Q. Did you go home?
A. I went home.
Q. Was there any officers there?
A. I got home around exactly four o’clock.
Q. Was there any officers there?
A. Officers came there just about ten minutes after I reached
home.
Q. Did the officers tell you where they had Jerry?
The Solicitor: I object to that as hearsay.
The C ourt: The objection is sustained.
Mr. M cGee: I want to show the fact the officers told the boy’s
mother on Monday afternoon her boy, he was out at Kilby, and
she couldn’t see him right then, and they would let her know when
she could see him, and it wasn’t until Wednesday afternoon Mr.
Armstrong told her then she could go to Kilby and see her boy.
The C ourt: I will let her testify to that.
My Mr. M cGee:
Q. Did you have a conversation with the police?
A. Yes, sir. They came to the house, Mr. Armstrong, and an
other one, and asked for Jeremiah’s personal belongings. I said,
“ he has two small boxes in the cabinet, and has a hat in the middle
room.” They said he did the other rapes. They took it too. I
gave them the small box in there Jeremiah keeps his papers and
all. They looked at them and kept a lot of the papers. I says,
“ Mr. Armstrong, can I see him?” He said, “ no. I will let you
know when you can see him.”
Q. Did he tell you where he was?
A. Yes, sir, Kilby. I was coming home on Wednesday afternoon
quarter of five from my job— he said, “ Carnella, you can go on
over to Kilby.”
Q. Where were you then?
A. In front of Mr. Armstrong’s house.
Q. You pass his house?
102 JEREMIAH REEVES, JR., VS. STATE OF ALABAMA
JEREMIAH REEVES, JR., VS. STATE OF ALABAMA 103
A. Yes, sir.
139 Q. Going home?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. How did he come to do that?
A. He drove up in a car, and he told me to go on over to Kilby
and tell Mr. Dees to let me see my boy.
Q. When was this?
A. This is Wednesday afternoon.
Q. The 12th?
A. That is right.
Q. Did you go to Kilby?
A. Went on home and got a man to drive me over in a truck.
I had to wait about forty-five minutes before I saw him. When I
got there, I said, “ Mr. Dees, I would like to see my boy,” when
I walked in.
The Solicitor: I object to any conversation.
The C ourt: Sustain the objection.
By Mr. M cGee:
Q. What position does Mr. Dees occupy?
A. “ I would like to visit my boy.”—
Q. Is he a Deputy Warden at Kilby?
A. Yes, sir.
The Solicitor: I object to any conversation between her and
Mr. Dees.
The C ourt: She hasn’t been asked a question about any conver
sation. I better hear the question before I rule.
By Mr. M cGee:
Q. Did you have a talk with Mr. Dees?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. What did you tell him about seeing your boy?
The Solicitor: I object.
The C ourt: Objection sustained. You can ask her whether or
not she got to see her boy at that time.
By Mr. M cGee:
Q. When did you get to see your boy?
A. See my boy?
Q. What time did you get in?
A. Wait around about forty-five minutes before I could see him.
Q. And did you get to see him?
A. I got to see him about forty-five minutes after I got
there.140
Q. He never saw anybody before that?
A. That is right,
Q. That is in Kilby Penitentiary out there in Montgomery?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Was your boy picked up before this?
A. Yes, sir.
The Solicitor: I object.
The C ourt: A blanket objection doesn’t give me anything to
rule on.
The Solicitor: I object on the ground that it is irrelevant and
immaterial. It is not an issue in this case if he was picked up
before.
Air. M cGee: I promise you I can connect- it up. The testimony
as to what happened to him, and what was said, is going to be
apparent throughout the trial. It would have to be an issue.
The Court: I don’t see where picking him up at another time at
this stage of the proceedings has anything to do with it.
Mr. M cGee: It is, knowledge the papers stated he confessed to
attacks on several women.
The Solicitor: The State is not offering any evidence except in
this case.
Mr. M cGee: If I told you the complete conversation between
this defendant and the police at Kilby it will come out.
The Solicitor: If you bring it out.
Mr. M cGee: This boy here received three days of mental torture
in Kilby, and that is what prompted him to confess to all these
cases and to conduct himself as he did. They know I can bring
in those other witnesses who failed to identify him.
The C ourt: I sustain the objection. I will give you the right at
this time if it becomes a matter of relevancy in the case, to recall
this witness and examine her on direct examination. I am keeping
her under summons here until such a time as it becomes an issue
in the case, if it does.
Mr. M cGee: I would like an exception.
The C ourt: An exception for the defendant.
(Exception noted for the defendant by direction of the Court.)
By Mr. M cGee:
Q. How far did he go in school?
141 A. Eight.
Q. Went through the 8th grade?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Is he going to school now?
A. No, sir.
Q. He quit in the 8th?
104 JEREMIAH REEVES, JR,, VS. STATE OF ALABAMA
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Has he lived with you all his life since he was bom?
A. He has lived with me all his life with the exception of three
months.
Q. You had an opportunity to observe him very closely?
A. He lived down the street at his grandmother’s house just
about five houses from me on the corner.
Q. Did you ever observe him act peculiar or abnormal in any
way?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Describe that to the Jury, different actions you observed.
A. At the time of him being three years old or so we lived here
on Hall Street, and the house was up on a hill, up steep. The lot
wasn’t safe without concrete steps to get up there, a pretty bad hill.
He fell there and struck right back here, caused his nose to bleed.
We had considerable trouble with him before he fell, and after
that he got even worse, just bad all the time, and was running away.
When I started talking to him he would sit there rocking hours at a
time, and wouldn’t say anything. I said to his father one day—
The Solicitor: I object.
The Court: Objection sustained.
By the Court:
Q. Tell what you know when you answer the question.
A. Seen him when he couldn’t talk to us, seen him nervous, seen
him, walk out when I am talking to him, seen him just acting all
nervous, and then quiet, and laughs. I seen that.
By Mr. M cGee:
Q. Ever see any other abnormalities?
A. No more than just holding his hands over his head like that,
and was looking up and talk to himself. (Indicating)
Q. Did he talk to himself very often?
A. He talked to himself quite often.
Q. Ever see any evidence of crying and laughing in the last
year?
142 A. Yes, sir, he would cry. Nobody did nothing to him.
Q. In your opinion, is he normal, insane, or what?
A. In my opinion he is insane.
Q. Do you remember Monday, July the 28th of this year?
A. I found him at home then.
Q. Were you home on that day?
A. Not until four o ’clock.
Q. Did you see your boy that day?
A. Yes, sir. My boy was at home.
JEREMIAH REEVES, JR., VS. STATE OF ALABAMA 105
106 JEREMIAH REEVES, JR., VS. STATE OF ALABAMA
Q. When did you see your boy at home?
A. On Monday, July the 28th. He would usually be there all day
and cut my wood.
Q. What time did you leave home that day?
A. I never goes to work until 8 o’clock.
Q. Was he at home when you left?
A. He was at home when I left.
Q. Was he at home when you got back?
A. He was at home when I got back.
Q. Was he dry or wet with perspiration?
A. Wasn’t wet with perspiration when I got home. He wasn’t
wet with anything.
Q. Do you remember how he was dressed when you got home?
 Yes, sir; I do.
Q. How was he dressed?
A. He had on a brown shirt and some big blue jeans, too big for
him.
Q. Had on a brown shirt?
A. He had on a brown shirt, and blue jeans too large in the waist
for him.
Q. Did you see any scratches on him that day or afterwards?
A. I don’t know anything about that, no, sir.
Q. Didn’t see any scratches on him?
A. I didn’t see any scratches on him.
Q. Did he appear nervous or upset?
A. No, sir, he wasn’t nervous, not that day when I came home
then he wasn’t nervous, because he is back in the kitchen and said he
has got the water on the table.
Q. He said he had done what?
A. He has put the water on the table ready for me to get sup
per.
143 Q. You say he went the entire 8th grade?
A. He didn’t go to school this past year, not this one.
Q. He didn’t go to school this year at all?
A. No, sir. He studied music, go up every day.
Q. Where was he born?
A. Prospect Alley, right back of Crampton Bowd.
Q. Here in Montgomery?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. How much money do you make?
The Solicitor: That is objected to.
The C ourt: Objection sustained.
Mr. M cGee: I would like to note an exception.
The C ourt: Exception for the defendant,
(Exception noted for the defendant by direction of the Court.)
Mr. M cGee: I want to show he comes from a poverty stricken
community, a poor family. I would like to make an offer to show
he does come from a poverty stricken home which might have some
effect on his maturity.
The Solicitor: I object to the offer.
The C ourt : Objection sustained.
Mr. M cGee: I would like an exception.
The Court: Exception for the defendant.
(Exception noted for the defendant by direction of the Court.)
By Mr. M cGee:
Q. When you got home were the police at your house that
Monday?
A. They had been there I was told afterwards, and came back by
the time I got there.
Q. They got all his belongings?
A. They got all his belongings, and carried off seven shirts, some
papers and some pants.
Q. Has he got a blue or black shirt with a yellow-gold designs on
it?
A. Never been in my house.
Q. Does he wear a straw-hat?
A. Never.
Q. Does he have any kind of a hat?
A. Bareheaded. He ain’t got a hat he owns in my house.
144 Q. When you saw your son at Kilby on Wednesday, did
you ask him if he was guilty of all these offenses ?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. What did he say?
A. When I asked him, I said, “ son, did you do it?”
The Solicitor: I object to that.
The Court: Objection sustained.
Mr. M cGee: I would like to except to that. She already started
in answering without any objection on the part of the Solicitor.
The C ourt: The objection is sustained.
Mr. M cGee: I would like an exception.
The Court: Exception for the defendant.
(Exception noted for the defendant by direction of the Court.)
Cross exam ination .
By the A ssistant Solicitor:
Q. You say your name is Carnella?
A. Carnella Reeves.
JEREMIAH REEVES, JR., VS. STATE OF ALABAMA 107
Q. You say you remember this clay of Monday, July the 28th?
A. 28th?
Q. This last summer.
A. Yes, sir.
Q. You went to work at eight o’clock in the morning?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. And got home about four o’clock in the afternoon of the same
day?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. You don’t know where Jeremiah was from eight o’clock in the
morning to four o ’clock in the afternoon, do you?
A. I don’t.
Q. Do you recall whether it rained on that day?
A. I don’t recall any rain on that day.
Q. Would you say it was a fair day or a cloudy day?
A. I don’t recall any rain on that day at all.
Q. Let us take the Monday before that, Monday, July the 21st.
Did you go to work about the same time?
A. About the same time.
Q. What did your son wear on Monday, July 21st?
145 A. I don’t keep track of what he would wear every day.
Q. What did he wear on Monday, July 14th?
A. I don’t know. I only told you what he had on that day when
I came home. What he wore every day I couldn t tell you.
Q. Don’t know about any other day?
A. I don’t know about any other day. I don’t know, I didn’t no
tice exactly what he wore right then not until now.
Q. What did he wear on Monday, August the 4th?
A. I don’t have any idea what he had on.
Q. What did he wear on Monday, August the 11th?
A. I didn’t keep in touch with that.
Q. You tell us you don’t know any other but this one particular
Monday. How do you know what he wore that Monday?
A. I can tell you that he put on blue jeans that day that was give
to him. That is all I know.
Q. How do you know he put on blue jeans that day that were
given to him?
A. Because he didn’t have no other blue jeans to wear but those.
Q. How do you know they were the blue jeans?
A. They was too big, because they was give to him.
Q. Didn’t you tell the Court he was wearing brown pants when
you came back from work?
A. Wearing a brown shirt and blue jeans. He didn’t wear any
brown pants. A brown shirt and blue jeans.
Q. Tell me what he wore last Monday.
The Assistant Solicitor: He would be in jail at that time. I
withdraw that question.
108 JEREMIAH REEVES, JR., VS. STATE OF ALABAMA
JEREMIAH REEVES, JR., VS. STATE OF ALABAMA 109
By the A ssistant Solicitor :
Q. Tell me what he wore Wednesday three weeks ago?
A. Is that the day they picked him up?
Q. Tell me what he wore Wednesday three weeks ago.
A. I couldn’t tell you what he wore then.
Q. Yet you can tell me what he wore on Monday, July the 28th?
A. Yes, sir, because when I left on Wednesday three weeks ago
he was in bed.
Q. You testified in your opinion your son is insane?
A. Yes, sir, in my opinion.
Q. How? long have you known of it?
A. I have knowed it since he has been grooved as a boy, a way
back there around four or five I have knowed of that.
146 Q. From about four or five?
A. Because he don’t act like the others act.
Q. Have you ever taken him to a doctor, asked a doctor -whether
he was insane, or not.
A. I have not.
Q. Did you ever try to have him committed to an institution for
the insane?
A. I did not.
Q. Have you ever talked to anybody else about him being insane?
A. Several neighbors around there got angry with him.
Q. That was your excuse to them?
A. That is wrhat I would tell them.
Q„ Do you recall a few days ago a worker from the Welfare De
partment came and talked to you about Jeremiah?
A. That is right.
Q. She was seeking information in connection with this boy?
A. That is right.
Q. Did you tell that case worker you thought he was insane?
A. Told her the same thing I am telling now.
Q. Told her what?
A. I told her the way he laughed, the way he -went on. I am
telling you the same thing I told her.
Q. Did you tell her that he — a little brother and sister?
A. No, sir; I didn’t. She didn’t ask me that. She was asking
about him.
Q. Did you tell her he was an obedient lad?
A. That is right.
Q. Did you tell her that you had always taken him to Sunday
School and Church?
A. Still take him to Sunday School and Church and BTU. I got
proof.
Q. You remember you told her he was insane?
A. Yes, sir. And even told her about the fall he had on his head.
Q. You base your opinion he is insane on the fact he talks to
himself and puts his hands behind his back?
A. I do.
110 JEREMIAH REEVES, JR., VS. STATE OF ALABAMA
147 J. T. T hom as , having been duly sworn, was examined and
testified as follow s:
D irect ex am in a tio n .
By Mr. M cGee:
Q. You are J. T. Thomas?
A. Yes, sir, I am.
Q. What is your occupation?
A. Minister and cook.
Q. Cook and also a minister?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. What is your denomination?
A. Baptist.
Q. Do you know the defendant here?
A. Yes, sir; I know him well.
Q. How long have you known him?
A. I met him in 1947.
Q. Known him since 1947?
A. That is right.
Q. Does he go to your church?
A. He has been first a member of Shiloh Baptist Church, and Rev.
Smart, a friend of mine, is pastor there; a choire member at the
present time at my church. I am pastor of the First Baptist
Church Congregation, Washington Park.
Q. Are you acquainted with him in the community?
A. I don’t live in the community, but I am acquainted with many
around the community.
Q. When I speak of community, I refer to Montgomery County.
A. I have seen him several places, at the athletic field of Carver
High School. I am interested in young people playing football.
This was just practicing. My boy is on the team. He was on the
practice field with them.
Q. Are you acquainted with the defendant’s general reputation?
A. Yes, sir, very much so.
Q. In your opinion, is his general reputation good or bad?
A. It is as good as anybody, I guess.
Q. Have you had an opportunity to observe him pretty constantly
since you have known him?
A. Not too much, except once at the home of my mother-in-
law.
JEREMIAH REEVES, JR., VS. STATE OF ALABAMA 111
148 The Solicitor: I object to that.
The C ourt: W hat is the purpose o f this question?
Mr. M cGe e : I was going to ask him if he had observed any pe
culiar acts and traits, and ask him if he had any opinion about the
defendant’s insanity.
The Solicitor: I withdraw my objection.
The Court: G o right ahead.
B y M r. M cG e e :
Q. You have known him since 1947?
A. That is right.
Q. About what part of 1947?
A. It was in the spring.
Q. You testified he sings as a choire member of the Baptist
Church, he sings at your church?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. And you have seen him play football with your son?
A. Yes, sir. We call him “Tender” for a nickname all the time.
We tease him that way.
Q. Did you ever see anything that was peculiar?
A. Nothing peculiar, only one instant happened one time at my
mother-in-law’s home. I don’t remember when it was. He was
there with us. Her boys, of course, were some playful before ate
dinner. The first thing I knew Jeremiah was standing at the back
door crying and I asked him, “what is the trouble?” He didn’t say
anything. My mother-in-law said—
The Solicitor: I object.
The C ourt: Objection sustained. Testify to what you saw and
heard, not what somebody said.
The W itn ess : I got to tell what was said.
The C ourt: Y ou won’t be able to testify. I will sustain the So
licitor’s objection.
B y Air. M cGe e :
Q. What did he then say?
A. When she asked him—
The Solicitor: I object.
The C ourt: I will let him testify that he asked him what the
trouble was and give the reply. Overrule the objection.
B y the C ourt :
Q. What was his reply when you asked him what the trouble
was?
A. He said his arm, some of the boys twisted it, and he ran
up on the porch crying, and he got mad. She said, “you know
149
how young boys do things. You don’t have to cry about it.” That
is the only instance I noticed any abnormality.
By Mr. M cGee:
Q. Did you see anything else that particular day?
A. No, sir. That is all. He was just a kid.
Q. Do you think a normal person would have acted like that?
The Solicitor: 1 object.
The Court: Objection sustained. At this time he hasn’t quali
fied to give an opinion of what a normal person would do. He is
not testifying as an expert.
Mr. M cGee: I would like an exception.
The C ourt: Exception for the defendant.
(Exception noted for the defendant by direction of the Court.)
By Mr. M cGee:
Q. Do you think he appeared to- be insane or sane?
The Solicitor: I object. The question is whether he was sane or
insane when this offense was committed, not at that time.
The C ourt: Sustain the objection.
Mr. M cGee: I would like an exception.
The C ourt : Exception for the defendant.
(Exception noted for the defendant by direction of the Court.)
By Mr. M cGee:
Q. When was this?
A. This incident, I believe must have been—I am not sure when
it was, but since I got back from the service. I know that, I was
discharged from service in January of 1947. It was since I re
turned from service this instance was.
Q. In 1949 or 1950?
A. Before 1950. Could be 1948, 1949.
The Solicitor: I object to this testimony.
By Mr. M cGee:
Q. Did he appear at that time to be insane or sane?
The Solicitor: I object.
The C ourt: Unless you show a continued condition.
150 Mr. M cGee: I have other witnesses here who will.
The Solicitor: I withdraw the objection.
112 JEREMIAH REEVES, JR., VS. STATE OF ALABAMA
JEREMIAH REEVES, JR., VS. STATE OE ALABAMA 113
The Court: If you don’t want to ask it, say so. If you are going
to ask the question, go ahead, as to what his opinion is now.
Mr. M cGee: That is what the question is. The question is
whether he was insane or sane now.
The Court: Restate your question.
Mr. M cGee: Was he at that time insane or sane.
By the C ourt:
Q. At that time were you of the opinion this defendant was sane
or insane?
A. Insane, because I don’t think any normal person would make
such a statement and say he was mad.
151 C ross-exam ination .
By the A ssistant Solicitor :
Q. How long do you say you have known this defendant?
A. Since 1947.
Q. You saw something wrong four or five years ago? In your best
judgment, when did you first see something that possibly was not
right?
A. I said 1948, which would be about four years.
Q. About four years ago?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Do you know how old he is now?
A. I think that the paper states he was seventeen.
Q. How old would you say he wras on the occasion you have
testified about?
A. Thirteen, I would say.
Q. You tell this Court in your best judgment you believe this
boy is insane?
A. That is right.
Q. And you base that on just one thing, you say he was crying
on this occasion you testified about when he was thirteen years old?
A. The statement he made of why he cried.
Q. The statement he made you testified to?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. He is still insane; you base your opinion on that he is insane?
A. That is right.
Q. Did you tell anybody else you thought he was insane?
A. I do know I did.
152 Q. Don’t you know insane people need to be confined in an
asylum or mental institution?
A. I do.
Q. Do you think he belongs in a mental institution?
114 JEREMIAH REEVES, JR., VS. STATE OF ALABAMA
A. I do if he conducts himself in that manner since that time.
Q. Based on what you saw him do, crying on this occasion when
he was thirteen, you think he belongs in a State mental institution?
A. If his general conduct was such since that time, I think he
should.
Q. Based on what you tell the Court you saw him do, do you
think he belonged in a State mental institution?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Did you take any steps to see that he got there?
A. No, sir; I did not.
Q. You testified he has a general good character?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Has anyone ever told you he is on parole from the juvenile
court of this county?
Mr. M cGee: That is objected to on the ground it would be
hearsay.
The Court : Ask him if he knows.
Mr. M cGee: I would like an exception.
The Court : Exception for the defendant.
(Exception noted for the defendant by direction of the Court.)
By the A ssistant Solicitor:
Q. The Court says you may answer.
A. I don’t know that.
Q. You don’t know that?
A. No.
Q. If that were true and you had known that would you testify
he was a person of good character, his general reputation was a
person of good character?
A. I can only testify to what I know.
Q. Would that make any difference now if it were true in your
testimony?
A. I don’t know that. I can only testify as to what I know. I
cannot answer to something that never happened.
Q. If it is true.
153 A. No one could tell about that until it happens. I cannot
tell what I would say about him unless it happens.
Q. You testified you have seen this boy in his off hours with your
children playing football.
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Is that right?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Your children play football with him frequently, do they?
A. It has been pretty frequent out on the practice field.
Q. During the last few years?
A. No, sir. Just the last two years.
Q. You let your children associate with him in group play, did
you?
A. They were at school.
Q. You had no objection to your children associating with a boy
you considered insane?
A. They were at school. I didn’t say he was insane. I said at
the present time the way he conducted himself at that particular
time.
Q. Now you say he isn’t insane.
A. I don’t say that. My opinion is just like it was. I said nothing
about now.
Q. What is your opinion now, is he insane or sane?
A. I told you what his conduct was, his behavior at that particular
time—I would judge him as an insane person, but I couldn’t say
now. Now, we are talking about the football field. I said at that
particular time, because that is what was asked me by lawyer
McGee. He asked me about that particular time.
Q. You said he was insane back at that time in your best judg
ment; is that right?
A. That is right.
Q. Have you seen anything else to make you say he is now insane?
A. The way he sang in the choire, I said, and still does.
Q. That makes him insane?
A. He is not singing now. He sings the songs bad. And it is a
very good choire there at the Shiloh Baptist Church.
Q. Tell us what your judgment is, whether he is insane or sane
now.
A. At times his singing would be bad.
R e-direct ex am inatio n .
154 By Mr. M cGee:
Q. The boy couldn’t sing, is that what you mean?
A. Yes, sir.
Jerry R eeves, having been duly sworn, was examined and testified
as follows:
D irect exam ination .
By Mr. M cGee:
Q. Your name is Jerry Reeves?
A. That is right.
Q. You live in Montgomery?
A. Yes, sir.
JEREMIAH REEVES, JR., VS. STATE OP ALABAMA 115
Q. Do you know this boy here?
A. That is my boy.
Q. How old is he?
A. Seventeen.
Q. When was he seventeen?
A. August 8th.
Q. This year?
A. That is right.
Q. Is he in school now?
A. He go up and practice with the boys in the band all the time.
Q. Does he go to school?
A. He goes a pretty good bit.
Q. Is he enrolled as a member of that school?
A. He ain’t enrolled. He goes up there every day.
Q. Was he enrolled for part of a term?
A. I don’t know about that.
Q. What grade?
A. Eighth grade.
Q. When did he quit as a regularly enrolled pupil at the school?
A. I think last year; I believe it was.
Q. Do you remember when they first picked him up this month?
A. Yes, sir, on the 10th.
Q. What day was that?
A. Monday.
Q. Were you at work and away from home that Monday?
A. I working.
155 Q. Did you go home any time on this Monday?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. About what time?
A. 3:20.
Q. Was you there when your wife got there?
A. Yes.
Q. Did you see any policemen?
A. The house was full.
Q. Who did you talk to when you got home?
A. Mr. Armstrong.
The Solicitor: I object to any conversation.
The C ourt: Objection overruled. I will let him testify what he
said to him.
The W itn ess : I came in and he said he wanted to get his belong
ings, what belonged to Junior, and had two cigar boxes belong to
him, and give them to him. So he said I couldn’t see him.
By Mr. M cGee:
Q. Did he tell you where boy was?
A. Camp Kilby. I couldn’t see him. I asked him why. He said
116 JEREMIAH REEVES, JR., VS. STATE OF ALABAMA
he was the nigger committed them crimes, he would let me know
when he got some instructions from there. He said he committed
all them crimes, rape, and everything else. He said I couldn’t see
him now.
The Solicitor: This conversation with Mr. Armstrong isn’t ad
missible.
The C ourt: Objection sustained.
By Mr. M cGee:
Q. When did you see your boy next?
A. About three days afterwards.
Q. What day did you see him?
A. I think on Thursday I think it was.
Q. Did you go out to Kilby?
A. Yes, sir. I went to Camp Kilby around 1:15 and asked Mr.
Dees could I see him. The man at the door said, “you got to see
Mr. Dees, you better wait awhile and maybe you can see him. I
think he is questioning him.” And I waited about twenty minutes
afterwards and they taken me upstairs where the electric chair
was, so they say. I don’t know where it was. I couldn’t observe it
through the bars.
(No Cross-examination.)
156 M ary Jordan, having been duly sworn, was examined and
testified as follows:
D irect exam ination .
By Mr. M cGee:
Q. Your name is Mary Jordan?
A. That is right.
Q. Do you know the defendant here?
A. Yes, I certainly do.
Q. What is his name?
A. His name Jeremiah Reeves.
Q. How long have you known him?
A. Been knowing Jeremiah Reeves ever since he was a small boy.
Q. Did you see him frequently, or not?
A. Well, I didn’t live so far from him. When he lived on Hilliard
Street he go by on Hilliard Street. And I got acquainted with him
at the Shiloh Baptist Church.
Q. You all go to the same church?
A. We don’t belong to the same church, but I visit that church.
That is when I became acquainted with him.
Q. How old was he when you started knowing him?
JEEEMIAH REEVES, JR., VS. STATE OF ALABAMA 117
118 JEREMIAH REEVES, JR., VS. STATE OF ALABAMA
A. Well, when I first knowed him he was quite small, and I have
been knowing him right around sixteen years, Jeremiah Reeves.
Q. He was just a young baby when you first knew him?
A. That is right.
Q. Saw him in the community?
A. Saw him in the community.
Q. Have you seen him off and on ever since that time?
A. Sometimes I see him going to school and places, and sometimes
I see him passing my house.
Q. Talked to him and everything?
A. Sometimes talk to him, I speak to him; sometimes he speak and
sometimes he wouldn’t say anything.
Q. Did you ever observe him doing anything peculiar, or ab
normal, or anything?
A. I don’t accuse him of doing anything abnormal like that; just
kind of acting mean and all, like he was insane, or something or
other.
Q. What made you think so, in what way?
A. Sometimes he would never talk sometimes, and again he
157 would talk to me. I would speak to him, sometimes he
wouldn’t speak to me.
Q. Sometimes when you spoke to him he wouldn’t answer at all?
A. That is right. And sort of mean.
Q. Did you discuss anything else?
A. Well, see him turn and stop, and go head on wherever he was
going sometimes.
Q. Did you ever visit in his home?
A. I never has visited in the home, but I always have known
about it, known it.
Q. Do you know his general reputation out there where he lives?
The A ssistant Solicitor: We object to that. General reputation
as to what?
The Court : Objection overruled.
By Mr. M cGee:
Q. Do you know his general reputation in the community in which
he lives?
A. I don’t know where he stays at, where he live on Gravel Pit.
I wasn’t out there.
Q. When did they move?
A. Moved, I think, around about two years ago, I think they
moved out there.
Q. That is in Montgomery?
A. That is in Montgomery.
Q, I don’t mean the county is; I mean the community in and
JEREMIAH REEVES, JR., VS. STATE OF ALABAMA 119
around Montgomery. Do you know his general reputation in and
around Montgomery?
A. Oh, well, as far as I know about him around Montgomery here.
Q. You do?
A. I certainly do.
Q. Is it good or bad before this accusation?
A. That is right. I never heard him do anything.
Q. Is it good or bad?
A. It was good, whatever he was trying to do. That is as far as
I know about him.
C ross-exam in ation .
B y the A ssistant Solicitor:
Q. Is it your opinion this boy is insane?
A. That is my opinion.
158 Q. That is what you tell all these gentlemen right here?
A. That he is insane.
Q. The reason you tell us he is insane is because sometimes he
talks and sometimes he doesn’t talk, and doesn’t always answrer you
when you speak to him?
A. That is right.
Q. That is the reason you say he is insane?
A. He is insane. I said that.
Q. How long have you known that he was insane?
A. Well, he growed up, you know, to be a big size boy. I knowecl
him from a child. I mean he got twisted a little bit.
Q. Tell me how long in years, since he was a little boy?
A. After he growed up so he was a school boy, big enough to
school, he began to kind of act like he was insane to me.
Q. Insane people belong in a State hospital, don’t they?
A. In a hospital?
Q. In a mental hospital or asylum.
A. Oh, yes, sir, that is right.
Q. You think he belongs in an asylum, do you?
A. If he is insane. That is what he is supposed to be.
Q. Have you ever taken any steps to have him put in an asylum?
A. I certainly have not.
Q. Do you know of anybody else who has?
A. You know, he wasn’t any relation to me at all.
R e-direct exam ination .
By Mr. M cGee:
Q. If you had a boy who wasn’t quite right mentally would you
have him locked up or keep him home?
The A ssistant Solicitor: We object to that.
The C ourt: Objection sustained.
By Mr. M cGee:
Q. Do you think somebody should be locked up in a mental insti
tution if the parents want to take care of them?
The A ssistant Solicitor: We object.
By Mr. M cGee:
Q. If the parents are taking care of them?
The A ssistant Solicitor: We still object.
The C ourt: We are getting into a lot of side issues. I will let her
testify and stop without any more side issues.
159 By Mr. M cGee:
Q. Do you think if the parents are taking care of them at home
they should be locked up in an institution?
A. Usually if they could take care of them, if they could do that,
I think it would be fine if they could do that. That is what I think
about it.
F rances H all , having been duly sworn, was examined and testi
fied as follows:
D irect ex am inatio n .
By Mr. M cGee:
Q. What is your name?
A. Frances Hall.
Q. How long have you lived here in Montgomery?
A. All my life.
Q. Work here?
A. Yes, sir; I work.
Q. Do you know the defendant here, this boy?
A. Been knowing him all his life.
Q. And do you live anywhere close to him?
A. He was born right back of where I lived. I don’t live close to
him now. He lived to close where I lived until about four years ago.
Q. You say he was born right back of where you live at?
A. He was born right back of where I live at.
Q. That is here in Montgomery?
A- That is here in Montgomery.
Q. Do you know where he lives now?
120 JEREMIAH REEVES, JR., VS. STATE OF ALABAMA
A. He lives in the Gravel Pit.
Q. Did you ever visit him or did he ever visit you?
A. Quite often go to church club meeting.
Q. Do you all belong to the same church?
A. No, sir. I doesn’t belong to their church, but our church club
cooperated with their church club.
Q. You have been pretty close, in pretty close contact with Jerry
all his life?
A. His grandmother lived the second house from me. He mostly
was at his grandmother’s house every day until she moved about
two years ago.
160 Q. And I guess you know his general reputation in this
community around there?
A. He has been a good boy to my knowings. He has been in my
house playing with the children------
The Solicitor: I object.
By Mr. M cGee:
Q. Did you have an opportunity over the years as long as he was
there to observe his conduct and observe how he behaved?
A. As I say before, I------
The Solicitor: I object.
The Court: Is your ground he was insane?
Mr. M cGee: I want to ask about anything peculiar. She started
to answer before I finished my question.
The Solicitor: I will withdraw the objection.
By Mr. McGee:
Q. Did you observe him behave or conduct himself in a peculiar
manner?
A. Run around, always appeared to me he didn’t have good sense.
Q. In what way?
A. He always talked to himself, and sang, and read, and seemed
to be upset at times, or laughing a lot, and held his head in his lap,
and some of the time he grabbed his head and go to running in a
circle, and cried sometimes until he started laughing.
Q. You have seen him talk to himself and laugh and seen him
burst out crying?
A. Crying. He would just cry and then start laughing, and act
like somebody preaching, and all.
Q. Suddenly burst out and sing?
A. Dirty songs. And he would sing loud, sing out with some
kind of a roar, or something like that.
Q. And holds his head a lot—what do you mean by that?
JEREMIAH REEVES, JR., VS. STATE OF ALABAMA 121
122 JEREMIAH REEVES, JR., VS. STATE OF ALABAMA
A. Grabs his head and knees like that. (Indicating)
Q. Like that holding his head?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. How long have you seen him, how long has he been behaving
himself that way?
A. Been doing that all his life since------
Q. Has he always acted all right?
A. He acted all right sometimes. He acted sometimes all
161 right, and most of the time he didn’t act like himself.
Q. Do you know how old he is now?
A. Seventeen.
Q. In your opinion then, from observations you made of him
would you say Jerry is sane or insane?
A. Insane. We always thought that he was insane, he acted like
a person insane.
Cross-ex am in a tio n .
By the Assistant Solicitor :
Q. You know he went to school, don’t you?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. He went through the 8th grade, didn’t he?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. As far as you know did he then do all right?
A. I don’t know how he did in school. I don’t know why you ask
me a question like that.
Q. You know he sings in the choire at church, don’t you?
A. Yes, sir, he sings in the choire.
Q. Nothing unusual about singing in the church choire?
A. He don’t sing songs right in church.
Q. They didn’t make him stop?
A. They stopped him once, and everybody knowed he did this,
but didn’t bother about it.
Q. He plays in a dance band?
A. He plays in a band, he beats the drums.
Q. How long has he been playing in a band?
A. Why, I don’t know when he started beating the drum. I know
he beats the drum.
Q. He gets paid for that, don’t he?
A. I don’t know. I guess they pay him.
Q. What kind of a band does he play with?
A. It is the school band, Booker Washintgon school band. I know
he has been away with an orchestra some, and came home about
three or four weeks ago.
Q. About how many times have you seen Jeremiah in the last six
months?
JEREMIAH REEVES, JR., VS. STATE OF ALABAMA 123
A. I don’t know how many times. Sometimes I see him every
day.
Q. You have been seeing him pretty often in the last six months?
A. I have been seeing him quite a lot. Sometimes he stop
162 and talk to me.
Q. He stops in sometimes every day?
A. Not every day he come in. He come by every day.
R edirect exam ination .
By Mr. M cGee:
Q. The fact someone goes to school doesn’t indicate whether they
are insane or sane?
The Assistant Solicitor: Of course, we object to that.
The C ourt: Objection sustained.
Mr. M cGee: I would like an exception.
The C ourt: Y ou may have an exception for the defendant.
(Exception noted for the defendant by direction of the Court.)
E lizabeth A lford, having been duly sworn, was examined and
testified as follows:
D irect exam ination .
By Mr. M cGee:
Q. Speak up so everybody on the Jury can hear you. What is
your name?
A. Elizabeth Alford.
Q. You live in Montgomery?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. How long have you been here?
A. Been here about eight years.
Q. Do you know the defendant, Jerry Reeves?
A. Know him five years.
Q. Where do you live now?
A. I live 35 Gravel Pit.
Q. Is that out in his neighborhood?
A. Joining rooms to them.
Q. In other words, you all live in the same house?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. How long have you been living out there by him?
A. A year.
Q. Living out there by him a year?
163 A. Yes, sir.
Q. Know him five years?
124
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Where did you live before you went there?
A. Lived on Clarmont Street.
Q. Is that close to Gravel Pit?
A. Yes, sir, Gravel Pit just down below.
Q. Do you go to the same church?
A. Yes, sir. I always visit his mother’s church.
Q. Did you see him at the same church with his mother?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. In the five years did you have a chance to see him fairly
frequently?
A. Yes, sir. I have often seen him.
Q. Have seen him quite a bit?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Did you have a chance to observe whether he acted peculiar,
or behave in a way that was not normal?
A. He always did act peculiar around me, because I was------
Q. In what way?
A. Sometimes he came out and sat down by the side of my house
and just gazed and looked that way like his mind completely gone.
(Indicating)
Q. Sat there looking up?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. How many occasions have you seen that?
A. I didn’t count the minutes, but I watched him for a long time.
Came out and looked up that way. (Indicating) I saw him do
that many a time. Frequently when I was in his home he jumped
up, grabbed the back of his head and ran right on out. Probably
sometimes he turned around and went out the front door, and some
times he went out the back door.
Q. Did you ever see anything else he might have done?
A. Sometimes he cries. I didn’t know what he was crying about.
He just was a fool, I guess.
Q. Where have you seen him cry?
A. At Home.
Q. Be in the room?
A. Sitting down there talking and all of a sudden he would
164 burst into tears. And sometimes I wouldn’t be saying any
thing to him and he would start crying. I didn’t know what
he would be crying for.
Q. How was he crying, loud or low?
A. It was fairly loud at times—people heard the noise.
Q. Do you know his general reputation where he lives in the
community there?
A. Yes, sir.
JEREMIAH REEVES, JR., VS. STATE GF ALABAMA
JEREMIAH REEYES, JR., VS. STATE OF ALABAMA 125
Q. Would you say it is good or bad?
A. It is good.
Q. Based on your observing him crying and sitting for a long
time that way staring into space, would you consider him sane or
insane?
A. Insane.
Q. Consider him sane or insane?
A. Insane.
(No Cross-examination.)
5:55 O’clock P.M .
Adjourned Until 7:15 O’clock P. M.
(The Jury retired from the Courtroom in charge of the bailiff.)
7:15 O’clock P. M.
Present:
The Court.
The Jury.
The Solicitor and Assistant Solicitor.
The defendant, and his counsel.
(Defendant’s Evidence) (Continued).
Fannie M itchell, having been duly sworn, wras examined and
testified as follows:
D irect examination.
By Mr. McGee:
Q. Your name is Fannie Mitchell?
A. Rebecca Mitchell.
Q, Do you live here in Montgomery?
165 A. Yes, sir.
Q. How long have you lived here in Montgomery?
A. All of my life.
Q. All of your life?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Do you know the defendant here, this boy here?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. How long have you known him?
A. Five years.
Q. Where do you live?
A. 15 Gravel Pit.
Q. Where is that?
A. Out there near the T. B. Sanitarium.
Q. Way back over in North Montgomery?
126 JEREMIAH REEVES, JR., VS. STATE OF ALABAMA
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Is that anywhere close to where------
A. Right next door to him.
Q. Is that in the same house or the house next door?
A. House next door.
Q. How long have you lived out there?
A. Five years.
Q. You have lived out there five years?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. In other words, you have known him ever since you have lived
out there?
A. That is right.
Q. Do you remember back to the date of July 28th of this year?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. On a Monday?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. On that particular day did you at any time see this defendant?
A. I certainly did. He was around all that day.
Q. What time?
A. Well, from 11 o’clock until 4 o’clock.
Q. From 11 o’clock until 4 o’clock?
A. Yes.
Q. Where was he from 11 to 4?
A. At my house. We were playing dominoes. He wasn’t playing,
but he was there with us.
166 Q. You say he was playing dominoes in your house on
July 28th of this year?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. From 11 o’clock to 4 o’clock at night or what?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. From 11 o’colck to 4 o’clock at night or what?
A. Day.
Q. In the morning?
A. That is right.
Q. 11 o ’clock in the morning until 4 o’clock in the afternoon?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Are you positive?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. And that is next door to where he lives?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. You live way out here near the Fresh Air Camp, they call it?
A. That is right.
Q. In the five years you have known him do you know his gen
eral reputation in the community?
A. Yes.
Q. Is it good or bad?
JEREMIAH REEVES, JR., VS. STATE OF ALABAMA 127
A. It is good.
Q. It is good?
A. Yes.
Q. Have you some children in your home?
A. Yes.
Q. Who was you playing checkers with?
A. My next door neighbor, and me, and a girl friend from town.
Q. What next door neighbor, some other next door neighbor?
A. Yes.
Q. Who is that?
A. Willie Mae Bates.
Q. Anybody else there?
A. Well, me and the children and him.
Q. You and the children?
A. Yes.
Q. How many children have you?
A. Four.
Q. Are they small?
167 A. Yes, sir.
Cross-examination.
By the Solicitor:
Q. What day of the week was that?
A. On the 28th.
Q. What day of the week?
A. Monday.
Q. Did you see him the Monday before that?
A. Yes, sir. I have seen him every day during the week.
Q. You have seen him every day during the week?
A. Every day during the week.
Q. Did he play dominoes with you the Monday before?
A. Well, if there was anybody to play, he would always.
Q. Do you know about that day at all?
A. He would stop awhile and talk, and sit there talking. That is
every day he was around there.
Q. How was he dressed that day?
A. Well, he just had on his blue jeans and a shirt. That is all.
Q. Polo shirt?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. What color shirt?
A. White color shirt.
Q. White shirt?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Did he play dominoes over there every day that week?
A. Yes, sir.
128 JEREMIAH REEVES, JR., VS. STATE OF ALABAMA
Q. Every day that week?
A. Every day.
Q. Did he play dominoes every day the next week?
A. Sometimes he didn’t play every day, but he played sometimes.
Q. How many days during the next week did he play dominoes
over there?
A. When we could get up a game.
Q. Did he play dominoes over there the next Monday?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Did he play Tuesday?
A. No, sir, he didn’t play Tuesday.
Q. Did he play Wednesday?
A. Yes, sir, he played Wednesday.
168 Q. Did he play Thursday?
A. No, sir, he didn’t play.
Q. Did he play Friday?
A. No, sir.
Q. Did he play Saturday?
A. No, sir.
Q. Did he play Sunday?
A. No, sir, he didn’t play Sunday.
Q. July, I am talking about, the week of July the 28th. That
would be in August. During the first week of August did he play
Monday?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Play Tuesday?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Play Wednesday?
A. No, sir.
Q. Play Thursday?
A. No, sir.
Q. Play Friday?
A. No, sir.
Q. Play Saturday?
A. No, sir.
Q. Play Sunday?
A. No, sir, he didn’t play Sunday.
Q. How about the next week, the second week of August? Did
he play dominoes at your house that week?
A. No, sir, didn’t play that week.
Q. Didn’t play at all that week?
A. He played on Friday.
Q. How do you know that week he didn’t play?
A. Well, because every day during that time I wasn’t washing or
nothing he was around home he would play when I asked him.
Q. In other words, he played all the time you were not washing,
he played dominoes with you?
A. Yes, sir. And he was around there holding my baby.
Q. The second week of August you were washing?
A. I wash every day.
Q. How was he dressed, on Wednesday, the second week of
August?
A. In blue jeans and an old cotton shirt on.
169 Q. How was he dressed Wednesday the second week?
A. Well, he had on a shirt and blue jeans-pants.
Q. Have you ever seen him in other clothes besides that?
A. No more than Sunday he was dressed up going to church.
Q. Ever see him in these blue pants there? (Indicating)
A. Yes, sir; I have seen him in those a lot.
Q. That is when he was going to church?
A. He was going to church.
Q. Ever saw him in those clothes other than when he was going
to church?
A. When we went out and went to a dance. And, of course, he
kept them pants nice when he needed them to do something.
Q. Did he take you to the dance?
A. No, sir, he didn’t take me, he just went along.
Q. Just went along with you?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. He hung around your house quite a bit?
A. He wasn’t there all the time.
Q. Are you his girlfriend?
A. No, sir; I am not his girlfriend. Well, he is seventeen and
I am eighteen.
Q. Let us go back to the first week in June. Did you play
dominoes with him during that week?
A. Well, some.
Q. Do you know whether you played dominoes with him on
Monday, the first week of June?
A. No, sir; I don’t remember that.
Q. What about Tuesday?
A. Well, we played about twelve on Tuesday.
Q. What time did you start playing on Tuesday? This is the
first week of June.
A. Yes, sir.
Q. What time did you start playing?
A. About twelve, and played until about four.
Q. What time did you quit?
A. Played until about four o’clock.
Q. He played dominoes with you that day?
A. He sure did.
Q. How w7as he dressed that day ?
A. He had on the same shirt and pants.
JEREMIAH REEVES, JR., VS. STATE OF ALABAMA 129
170
Q. That is Tuesday, the first week of June?
A. That is right.
Q. Do you know what date that was?
A. No, sir; I don’t remember what date.
Q. How is it you know the 28th day of July and don’t know the
date of Tuesday, the first week of June?
A. We was looking at some names, and we all agreed they had
the wrong party, so we got a calendar and started looking to find
out.
Q. You tell me you played dominoes with him Tuesday, the first
week of June?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. You tell me you played Wednesday, the second week in
August, with him?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. What date was that?
A. Well, I don’t know what date.
Q. Do you remember what time you started that morning?
A. We would start around twelve, because that is the time I
get through doing my washing.
Q. Played dominoes with you every day?
A. Yes, sir, plays dominoes over there every day.
Q. Every day?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Hasn’t missed a day in a year?
A. Not since I have been living around there. In fact, since
I have been living there he is around his house and my house, as
far as I could see. He just acted like he wanted to stay home or
something or other. He just didn’t never act right.
Q. He played dominoes at your house on the 10th of November?
A. Well, let me see where we were on the 10th. He was there,
but didn’t play dominoes.
Q. He was there with you, but didn’t play dominoes?
A. Yes, sir. AYatched the children then.
Q. What time did he come over there that day?
A. He came over that morning, and he went back home and came
back again.
Q. What time did he get there that morning?
A. He got there when he got up. I reckon about eight o’clock,
or something.
171 Q. How long did he stay over there?
A. He stayed quite awhile.
Q. Did he stay until twelve or one o’clock?
A. No, sir. He went back home.
Q. Give the time.
A. About nine o’clock, I say.
Q. What time did he come back again?
130 JEREMIAH BEEVES, JR., VS. STATE OF ALABAMA
A. Came back over about one.
Q. How long did he stay there?
A, He sat around until his mother came in, because I remember
she called him during that time.
Q. That is on the 10th of November?
A. Yes.
Q. Do you know what day that was?
A. No, sir; I sure don’t. I don’t know exactly what day it was.
Q. You remember everything that took place on the 10th of
November; is that what you are telling us?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Don’t you know he was arrested and taken to Kilby Peni
tentiary about 2 o’clock on November the 10th?
A. November 10th?
Q. November 10th. That is what I said.
A. He was around there.
Q. He was arrested and taken to Kilby Penitentiary at 2 o’clock
on November the 10th.
A. I think he was around there.
Q. Who have you talked to about this case?
A. I haven’t talked to nobody about it.
Q. Haven’t mentioned it to anybody?
A. No, sir.
Q. Haven’t talked to any lawyer about it?
A. No, sir. I haven’t even seen a lawyer.
Q. They didn’t know what you were going to say when you got
up here?
A. No, sir. When he came after me I was doing washing.
Q. Your testimony about November 10th is just as true as any
thing else you have said?
A. As far as I know. They have it mixed up. As far as I know
it was.
172-173 Q. Could you tell us what you had for dinner on July 28th?
A. July 28th?
Q. That is right.
A. I think probably I could. July 28th we had turnip greens
and com bread and milk for dinner.
Q. Did you feed him on November 10th?
A. I didn’t feed him November 10th.
Q. You tell us he came at 1 o’clock and stayed until his mother
called him on November 10th; that is what you testified to, wasn’t
it?
A. I must have meant July the 28th.
JEREMIAH REEVES, JR., VS. STATE OF ALABAMA 131
Re-direct examination.
By Mr. M cGee:
Q. Are you positive it was Monday, July 28th, when he stayed
with you?
A. Yes, sir; I am positive of that.
Q. You said at that time he was dressed in a pair of blue jeans.
A. Yes, sir. I do remember that.
Q. And that is out at what place?
A. Out at the Gravel Pit.
Q. What address?
A. Route three.
Q. It didn’t have a house number?
A. 15.
Q. 15 Gravel Pit?
A. Yes, sir.
174 Elizabeth A lford, recalled.
The Solicitor: I am going to object to anymore direct
examination.
The Court: You may only examine a witness once on direct.
Mr. M cGee: This is entirely new evidence.
The Court: Of course, there has been nothing to rebut. You
can hold her until the State is through and call her back in rebuttal.
We cannot call back witnesses once they have testified and go
into something entirely new.
Mr. M cGee: I have several defenses in this case and I was
trying to offer witnesses who will corroborate each point.
The Court: You must examine them in full.
Mr. M cGee: I would like an exception.
The Court: You may have an exception.
(Exception noted for the defendant by direction of the Court.)
The Court: I will let you call this one witness, but no other, if
you are under a misapprehension of the rule of procedure.
Mr. M cGee: The only thing I wanted to show was about this
defendant’s mustache and how long he had it, if she knew.
The Court: I will let you call her back. You will have to fully
examine them as to everything at one time. I think this is a dis
cretionary matter with the Court. I will let her come back for
the limited purpose of testifying to that.
132 JEREMIAH REEVES, JR., VS. STATE OF ALABAMA
D irect examination.
By Mr. M cGee:
175 Q. You have already testified how long you have known
this defendant?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. You see the mustache the defendant is wearing?
A. Yes, sir. He didn’t have it only about three years.
Cross -examination .
By the Solicitor:
Q. Have you ever known him to shave it off?
A. Not since he had it.
H arvey Butts, having been duly sworn, was examined and testi
fied as follows:
D irect examination.
By Mr. M cGee:
Q. Your name is Harvey Butts?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. How long have you known the defendant?
A. Since 1946, about five or six years.
176 Q. You see the mustache he has got now?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. How long has he had it?
A. Pretty near between, somewheres in the neighborhood of two
or three years, I remember.
Q. Two or three years you remember?
A. That is right.
Q. I don’t know how many occasions you observed him, but I
just wondered in the period you have known him you have noticed
him behaving peculiarly or abnormally.
A. The onliest thing, I can tell you what he did. The onliest
conversation, I tried to talk with him one time, and during that
conversation— do you want to hear about it?
Q. What was it?
A. I was at church one Sunday. The church was having some
kind of special service. I was standing out toward the back, and
Jerry started to walk across to where I was with his daddy, and he
said he hurt his foot, take him home, he couldn’t walk. He walked
across the church yard to where I was. I couldn t see what was
going on out there and didn’t pay any attention to what it was.
JEREMIAH REEVES, JR., VS. STATE OF ALABAMA 133
When he saw his daddy he started hopping and said he couldn’t
walk. I know he walked across to where I was. That is what
attracted my attention. After he said he couldn’t walk he said
he got his foot hurt and wants his daddy to take him home. And
shortly after that we were ready to go in church. Before I went
in church he left there walking. I know that.
Cross-examination .
By the Solicitor:
Q. Do you see him every day?
A. No, sir.
Q. Every week?
A. I wouldn’t say every week. I visit church up there and see
him there in the church.
Q. You visit church up there?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. How often do you visit church up there?
A. I visit there nearly every Sunday. Sometimes I miss a Sunday.
Q. Sometimes you miss as much as a month, do you?
A. Well, when I first started I did. I went there about
177 every other Sunday when I first started going there, and
after that I go approximately every Sunday.
Q. If he was at church you saw him.
A. I would see him.
Q. How often did you see him?
A. I cannot say that. That is the onliest conversation I remem
ber having with him. That is the onliest one I can remember, to
tell the truth.
Q. What you are saying now is that you go to church almost
every Sunday?
A. Yes, sir; I do now.
Q. If he was at church you might see him and might not?
A. I might have seen him and might not.
Q. How many years approximately did you say he had a mus
tache?
A. Three years.
Q. He could shave it off and grow it back and you wouldn’t know
it? He could have shaved it off and grown it back in two or three
weeks and you wouldn’t have noticed it.
A. Probably so. I don’t know about that.
134 JEEEMIAH BEEVES, JR., VS. STATE OF ALABAMA
JEREMIAH REEVES, JR., VS. STATE OF ALABAMA 135
Jeremiah Reeves, Jr., having been duly sworn, was examined
and testified as follows:
D irect examination.
By Mr. M cGee:
Q. Your name is Jeremiah Reeves, Jr.?
A. Jeremiah Reeves, Jr.
Q. You are the defendant in this case, are you not?
A. Yes, sir, that is right.
Q. How old are you?
A. Seventeen.
Q. When were you seventeen?
A. 8th of August, 1952.
Q. Do you remember this lady who testified this morning, Mrs.
Crowder?
A. Yes, sir, I remember her.
Q. Do you remember seeing her down at Police Headquarters?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Had you ever seen her before that time?
178 A. No, sir.
Q. The 28t,h day of July, Monday, this year, do you re
member that?
A. Yes; I do.
Q. Remember that date?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Did you go out to Mrs. Crowder’s house on Cleveland Avenue
that day?
A. No, sir, did not.
Q. Did you go out and go in her house and attack her?
A. No, sir, did not.
Q. Had you ever seen her before you saw her at Police Head
quarters?
A. No, sir; I hadn’t met her until they brought her down there.
Q. Do you remember when you were first arrested?
A. Yes, sir; I do.
Q. When was that?
A. It was in the summer.
Q. I am talking about this time.
A. I was arrested November 10th, 2:10 P.M.
Q. Arrested about 2:10 P.M. November 10th this year?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. That is on Monday?
A. Yes, sir, it was.
Q. Do you remember who arrested you?
A- Yes, sir; I do.
136 JEREMIAH REEVES, JR., VS. STATE OF ALABAMA
Q. Who was it?
A. Mr. W. M. Armstrong and Mr. Tally.
Q. Where did they pick you up, where was you when they ar
rested you?
A. I was on the comer of Union and Washington.
Q. What part of town is that in?
A. The South or West.
Q. Where from here?
A. It is over this way. (Indicating)
Q. Eastern part of town?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. What did they do when they arrested you?
A. They arrested me. First called me to the car.
Q. What were you doing when they called you to the car?
A. I was walking up the street going back to school.
179 Q. Over to the Booker Washington High School?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. They called you over to the car?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. What happened?
A. I was up the street a piece from him. He called me, “ hey, boy,
come here.” So I came back to see what he wanted, just walked on
back. I wanted to know what it was all about. So I got in the
car, and then they started threatening me all the way going down
town— “you did this, you did that,” all the way downtown to the
County Jail.
Q. What did they say to you when bringing you downtown? You
say the officers pulled up and stopped?
A. Yes, sir, they did.
Q, Go on and tell the Jury what it was.
A. They looked at me and said, “yes, sir, you are the damn nig
ger.” I wanted to know what it was all about. And they started
questioning and talking, and I was the man, and I didn’t hardly say
a word. They was saying, “yes, this is him.” They brought me
downtown to the County Jail.
Q. You say they started accusing you of things. Did they ac
cuse you of things?
A. Yes, sir, they did.
Q. Tell the Jury what they said, tell everything they said you
can remember.
A. Say, “you are the one did this, you are the one damn nigger,
you are the one nigger messing with all the rest of the women
around here in town.”
Q. What did you say?
A. “ I ain’t the one.” I said, “ no, sir; I ain’t the one.” They told
me, “you ain’t the one?” They started threatening me, what they
would do to me, and everything else.
Q. What do you mean by started to threaten you? What did
they say?
The Solicitor: I object to unnamed people.
Mr. M cGee: He is talking about Armstrong and Tally, the two
Deputy Sheriffs of Montgomery County who arrested him.
The Court: He has identified the arresting officers. That is what
I am sure he is testifying about.
180 By Mr. M cGee:
Q. What kind of threats, what did they say?
A. Well, Mr. Tally told me, he said, “yes, sir, you are the damn
nigger doing this around town all the time. Ain’t- you the one?”
I said, “no; I am not the one.” Looked at me and said, “you are
look like the one.” I told them I wasn’t the one.
Q. What kind of threats did they make? You said they threat
ened you. Did they threaten you in any way?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. What did they say?
A. They said, “you might as well admit you did it. If you don’t
we will find out and you will get the electric chair.” That is what
they told me.
Q. What did they do with you when they got you to the County
Jail?
A. They was talking to me and talking among themselves.
Q. How long was you in the County Jail?
A. Not more than about approximately five minutes.
Q. After you were there approximately five minutes then what
happened?
A. They brought me out of the jail, two or three car loads of
officers, carried me to Kilby Prison.
Q. Did they let you make any phone calls before they carried you
to Kilby Prison?
A. No, sir, did not.
Q. Did they let you make any phone calls in Kilby?
A. No, sir. I asked them and they said nobody could see me
and I couldn’t call anybody.
Q. You asked if you could?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. And you couldn’t?
A. No, sir.
Q. What time did you get to Kilby?
A. It was about three P. M., something like that.
Q. Did they question you about anything before they got you
to Kilby?
A. Yes, sir, they did.
JEREMIAH REEVES, JR., VS. STATE OP ALABAMA 137
138 JEREMIAH REEVES, JR., VS. STATE OF ALABAMA
Q. At the County Prison anybody question you?
A. Yes, sir, by the newspapermen. One took a picture of me.
Q. One took a picture of you?
181 A. Yes, sir.
Q. Monday?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Monday, the 10th?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. It was a newspaperman?
A. Yes, sir, it was.
Q. Any prison officials there?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Who was they?
A. Mr. 0. R. Dees.
Q. How long did they question you during Monday?
A. They questioned me constantly until dark, and I asked them to
let me alone so I could go to sleep, and about the time I got to bed
and went to sleep Mr. Dees came back and he taken me out of there
and taken me in the room where the electric chair was.
Q. Where was that room located with respect to the cell where
you were locked in?
A. Right next to it.
Q. He took you in the room where the electric chair was ?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. What happened then?
A. We sat down and he told me, “ the only thing that is going to
keep you out of the electric chair, you are going to say you did it ’
I said, “ Mr. Dees, I won’t say I did it.” _ He said, “ the only
wav for you to keep out of the electric chair is for you to say you
did it,”
The Solicitor: The State has introduced no confession. He is
giving evidence of some kind of confession. We have a confession
but it has not been introduced. If he wants to introduce the con
fession, I will let the defendant introduce it.
The Court: No confession has been introduced taken at Kilby
Prison, in writing or otherwise.
Mr. M cGee: The prosecutrix testified this defendant was held at
Police Headquarters and she was carried down there, and while
down there asked him wdiy he did it while he was still being held m
custody. . ,
The Court: That is not what happened at Kilby Prison. What
he told her at Police Headquarters while being held in custody, the
Court has already held that statement to be admissible or
182 being voluntary.
Mr. M cGee: I would like to have an exception to the
Court’s remarks. The Court has already stated the defendant’s
remarks were made voluntarily.
I would like to move for a mistrial because of the remark of the
Court, about the statement of the defendant to her was voluntary.
It is prejudicial, and the defendant cannot receive a fair trial, and
violates the defendant’s rights under the the Constitution of the
United States.
The Court: Motion overruled. Exception for the defendant.
I want to explain the ruling of the Court just given. The cred
ibility of a statement given by a witness is simply for the Jury;
The Court has no opinion at all, and expresses none on the record.
(Exception noted for the defendant by direction of the Court.)
Mr. M cGee: I would like to make another motion for a mistrial
because of the comment by the Court that the statement by the
defendant was voluntary, and the comment by the Court as to evi
dence in this case, in violation of the defendant’s right of a fair
trial as guaranteed under the Alabama Constitution. And also,
that said comment is so prejudicial it could be used to prejudice
the Jury so they couldn’t give this defendant a fair trial.
The Court: Motion for mistrial overruled.
Mr. M cGee: I would like an exception.
The Court: Exception for the defendant.
(Exception noted for the defendant by direction of the Court.)
Mr. M cGee: What I am trying to do is show this boy was held
incommunicado for a period of three days, bombarded by State offi
cials with threats of the electric chair if he didn’t confess, until he
finally said, “ I will say anything.” And he talked to this woman
down there when he was still being held incommunicado. And there
has been no evidence to rebut it. His mother didn’t see him until
Wednesday afternoon. The prosecutrix saw him in Police Head
quarters at 11 o ’clock when she talked to him. He was refused coun
sel. At no time was he permitted to contact his folks, friends, or
lawyer.
183 The Court: I will sustain the objection. There is no evi
dence as to a confession here.
The Solicitor: I will let you introduce the confession and you
can question him if you want.
Mr. M cGee: The State has forfeited the right to introduce it,
because they know the State rested without trying to introduce it
because they know all of these women didn’t identify him.
The Court: You will have a right.to comment on that before the
Jury. If a confession is going to be introduced I will let you go in
into the circumstances.
Mr. M cGee: I am not going to introduce it. In the first place,
I haven’t attempted to extract from him a confession. On the other
hand, the Solicitor has introduced a confession made while in the
JEREMIAH REEVES, JR., VS. STATE OF ALABAMA 139
presence and custody of the officers which is alleged he made to the
woman prosecutrix. And they have introduced in the sworn testi
mony of the prosecutrix that he did confess, and made that state
ment to her in the presence of officers without any threats. I think
I have the right to rebut the accurateness of that statement, show
ing everything that happened to him from the time he was first
picked up and held incommunicado until the present time.
The Court: I would rule you were correct if a confession wms
taken from him under the circumstances you relate in Kilby
Prison. If this defendant made a statement somewhere else any
other time, I am not going to allow you to go into some other occa
sions. The Supreme Court recently ruled on that point. I am
bound by that ruling.
Mr. M cGee: I move the Court to permit the defendant to
show'------
The Solicitor: If we are going to have a long showing on it I
move that the Jury be excused.
The Court: The motion is overruled. I see no objection to
making the motion in the presence of the Jury.
Mr. M cGee: T o show the defendant, a seventeen year old negro
boy, who quit school in the 8th grade, was arrested at approxi
mately 2:10 P. M. on November 10th, 1952, and was carried within a
period of about fifteen minutes from then to the State Penitentiary,
Kilby Prison, Montgomery County, Alabama, where he was held
incommunicado by State and City officers and questioned
184 continuously the rest of the afternoon, and then permitted
to sleep only a short while, some fifteen or twenty minutes;
he was then carried into the next room where the electric chair was
and questioned some more by the Deputy Warden, 0. R. Dees, and
accused of having made various kinds of attacks on some six white
women of Montgomery County, Alabama. O. R. Dees further told
him that if he didn’t confess to these crimes that all the women
would identify him and he was going to the electric chair. And that
if he would confess that he would keep him out of the chair. After
questioning him all night he was finally permitted to go to bed
until the following morning, Tuesday. Tuesday morning early the
officers again began a series of constant questioning all day Tuesday
and part of Tuesday night. Then he was permitted to go to bed.
That on Wednesday morning he was again questioned. And all the
time the officers were telling him if he didn’t confess to these crimes
he would go to the electric chair, and if he did he would keep him
out of the chair, until sometime finally Wednesday morning he
agreed to confess to all of these crimes they had been accusing him.
That he was then carried by the State officers of Montgomery
County to Police Headquarters and there held by the Montgomery
County Police and City Police officers until the prosecutrix in this
case was permitted to view him.
140 JEREMIAH REEVES, JR., VS. STATE OF ALABAMA
And I move the Court to permit me to prove these allegations,
and in order to go to the credibility of the statement which is
alleged he made in her presence while he was held.
And I move the Court to permit me to do so on the ground that a
failure by the Court to permit me to do that is a denial to the de
fendant of his constitutional rights as guaranteed under the Four
teenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States.
Two. That the failure of the Court, the refusal of the Court, to
permit me to do that is a denial to the defendant of due process of
law as guaranteed by the Constitution of the sovereign State of
Alabama.
Three. That the refusal to permit this proof on the part of the
Court would constitute such a prejudicial error as to deny the de
fendant a fair trial in this case.
That is my motion to the Court.
The Court: The motion is overruled.
185 Mr. M cGee: I would like an exception.
The Court: Exception for the defendant.
(Exception noted for the defendant by direction of the Court.)
By Mr. M cGee:
Q. AVhen did you first see your folks after you were picked up?
A. I asked them to let me see them right away.
Q. When did you finally see them?
A. Wednesday about 5 o ’clock.
Q. 5 o’clock in the morning or afternoon?
A. Afternoon.
Q. 5 o’clock in the afternoon?
A. That is right.
Q. This isn’t the first time you have been picked up by Mont
gomery Police?
A. No, it isn’t.
Q. Were you picked up once before?
A. Yes, sir; I was.
Q. AVhen was that?
A. In the summer sometime.
Q. How long did they hold you in the summer?
The Solicitor: That is objected to, unless he fixes it before the
date of this trial.
Mr. M cGee: Before the date of this trial?
The Solicitor: I mean before this happened. If he was picked
up before July 28th he might have been picked up on anything.
Mr. M cGee: Most of the victims looked at him and failed to
identify him.
JEREMIAH REEVES, JR., VS. STATE OP ALABAMA 141
The Court: Was he picked up before or after the offense charged?
The Solicitor: Before this offense occurred.
The Court: Objection sustained.
Mr. M cGee:I would like an exception.
The Court: Exception for the defendant.
(Exception noted for the defendant by direction of the Court.)
By Mr. M cGee:
Q. Do you remember talking to the prosecutrix down at Police
Headquarters?
186 A. Yes, sir; I do.
Q. The police carried you down there from Kilby Peni
tentiary?
A. Yes, sir; they did.
Q. Had the arresting officers told you if you would admit having
raped the prosecutrix that would keep you out of the chair?
A. Yes, sir, they did.
The Solicitor: That is objected to.
The Court: Objection overruled. He is asking about the particu
lar admission introduced in evidence. I think it is relevant.
By Mr. M cGee:
Q. Had they?
A. Yes, sir, they did.
Q. Were you scared?
A. Yes, sir; I sure was.
Q. Did you think by saying you did it that would keep you out of
the chair?
The Solicitor: I object.
The Court: Overrule the objection.
By Mr. M cGee:
Q. Did you think that would keep you out of the chair?
A. Yes, sir. They told me that.
Q. At that time had you seen your mom or pop, or any of your
friends?
A. No, sir.
Q. Talked to a lawyer?
A. No, sir; I did not.
Q. Did you rape her?
A. No, sir; I did not.
Q. Where was you that day?
A. On July 28th?
142 JEREMIAH REEVES, JR., VS. STATE OP ALABAMA
JEREMIAH REEVES, JR., VS. STATE OF ALABAMA 143
Q. Yes.
A. I was at home.
Q. What did you do at home?
A. During these hot days in summer we was playing a game of
dominoes and cards in the front yard, and I was around home all
day.
Q. Your mom and pop were working that day, weren’t they?
A. Yes, sir.
187 Q. They didn’t come around later or during that time and
see you there?
A. No, sir, they didn’t, they was working that day.
Cross-examination.
By the Solicitor:
Q. You know who I am, you have seen me before?
A. A number of times.
Q. Do you remember a conversation I had with you on the after
noon of the 11th of November, 1952?
A. I remember it.
Q. Out at Kilby?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. And there were present at that time Mr. 0. R. Dees, Deputy
Warden, and Mr. Murphy, the Classification Officer?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Do you remember my asking you if I could help you?
A. I remember you telling me you could help me.
Q. Do you remember my saying there was nothing I could do for
you, the law would have to take its course?
A. That is right. Mr. Dees said if I admitted it he would do his
best to help me.
Q. Do you remember my saying to you I couldn’t agree to any
thing, the law would have to take its course?
A. You told me I couldn’t see anybody until I got straight with
you.
Q. Do you know Dr. Bazar?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Do you remember Dr. Bazar?
A. I do.
Q. You talked with Dr. Bazar after you were arraigned, didn’t
you?
A. He came out there.
Q. Did you talk to him at the County Jail?
A. Yes; I did.
Q. And you told Dr. Bazar at the County Jail you raped Mrs.
Crowder, didn’t you?
A. I didn’t tell him nothing.
Q. You are swearing that is not true?
A. I didn’t tell him I raped anybody.
Q. You didn’t tell him you raped anybody?
188 A. I did not.
Q. Did you ever tell him you raped anybody?
A. Out there at Kilby I did.
Q. You didn’t tell him that in the County Jail?
A. No, sir; I did not.
Q. You are swearing that is true?
A. Yes, sir.
Mr. M cGee: He is under oath.
By the Solicitor:
Q. How many people have you told you raped Mrs. Crowder?
Mr. M cGee: If we go into that I feel we should go into the details,
what he told these people, and when he told them, and why he told
them, if that is what the Solicitor wants to show.
The Court: This is cross examination.
Mr. M cGee: I withdraw the objection.
By the Solicitor:
Q. Who have you told since your arraignment you raped Mrs.
Crowder?
A. You say out there I told Tuesday?
Q. Since your arraignment?
By the Court:
Q. Do you understand what arraignment means?
By the Solicitor:
Q. Since you came in here and we read the indictment to you.
A. I never told nobody.
Q. You haven’t told nobody?
A. No, sir.
Q. Did you talk to Dr. Bazar over in the County Jail?
A. Yes, sir. I have talked to him twice.
Q. What did you talk about?
A. Came in and asked the same questions he asked me at Kilby.
Q. What did you tell him?
A. I didn’t tell him nothing.
Q. You didn’t tell him anything?
A. Not anything.
Q. How long did he talk to you?
144 JEREMIAH REEVES, JR., VS. STATE OP ALABAMA
JEKEMIAH BEEVES, JR., VS. STATE OF ALABAMA 145
A. I don’t know. I haven’t the slightest idea.
Q. About fifteen minutes or an hour?
A. I haven’t the slightest idea.
Q. Do you know what date it was?
189 A. No, sir; I don’t.
Q. You never made one single, solitary statement to him?
A. Not as I remember it. I don’t remember.
Q. You don’t remember?
A. I don’t remember.
Q. You remember talking to him?
A. Yes, sir; I remember talking to him.
Q. Where were you?
A. I was in the building across the street there.
Q. In the building across the street?
A. Yes, sir, the County Jail.
Q. Whereabouts were you in jail?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Whereabouts were you in the jail?
A. I was held in jail when I talked to him.
Q. Whereabouts in jail?
A. Took me down______
Q. They took you to the Sheriff’s office; is that right?
A. No, sir. Taken in the back dining room.
Q. Who was there with you and Dr. Bazar?
A. Nobody.
Q. Anybody with you and Dr. Bazar at Kilby Penitentiary?
A. There was one or two men together.
Q. Where did you talk to him?
A. I talked to him in my cell.
Q. In your cell?
A. That is right. That is where I first talked to him.
Q. Didn’t you talk to him in Mr. Murphy’s office?
A. That is when I first talked to him, and then we came back
down to the office.
Q. Are you sure about the day I am talking about? I am talking
about Dr. Bazar. Do you remember the day I am talking about?
A. I know the day you are talking about.
Q. You say you talked to him up in your cell. Didn’t you talk to
him in Mr. Murphy’s office by yourselves, nobody else but you and
him there?
A. Yes, sir. That is Dr. Rehling and myself.
Q. Dr. Rehling you talked to in your cell.
A. Yes, sir. And Dr. Bazar I talked to in Mr. Murphy’s
office.
190 Q. You had some fresh scratches on you when they talked
to you, didn’t you?
A. So the doctor said.
Q. You didn’t see them yourself?
A. No, sir.
Mr. M cGee : I object to that. The doctor didn’t say scratches,
and didn’t say they were fresh. He said scars, and your Honor
remarked the Solicitor’s scratches were not even admissible, scratches
in November from something that happened back in July. Any nig
ger would know the difference between a scratch and a scar, and
the Solicitor should know it.
The Court: I will sustain the objection. We are now trying one
case, and one incident that is alleged to have happened on the 28th
day of July. No other case, no other evidence in any other case is
before this Court and this Jury. I sustain the objection, and the
witness will not be required to answer the question.
By the Solicitor:
Q. You were examined at City Hall, weren’t you?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Two doctors examined you down there, didn’t they?
A. Yes, sir, they did.
Q. They asked you whether your statement was voluntary, didn’t
they?
A. I don’t remember.
Q. You don’t remember?
A. No, sir.
Mr. M cGee: I object to a question like that without identifying
the doctors asking him if his statement was voluntary.
The Court: Sustain the objection without the identification of the
doctors.
By the Solicitor:
Q. Do you know where you were on July 1st, 1952?
A. On July 1st, 1952,1 don’t think I was in town.
Q. You were not in town?
A. I don’t think I was.
Q. Where would you have been?
A. I was on the road with a traveling band.
Q. What day did you get back?
A. I just remember that is when I wasn’t at home or in town.
191 Q. You were in town on July 28th, weren’t you?
A. Yes, sir; I was.
Q. As a matter of fact, you went to Mrs. Crowder’s house on that
day, didn’t you?
A. No, sir; I did not.
Q. You broke in there and you raped her, didn’t you?
A. No, sir; I did not.
146 JEREMIAH REEVES, JR., VS. STATE OF ALABAMA
JEREMIAH REEVES, JR., VS. STATE' OF ALABAMA 147
Q. How did you recognize her down there at Police Headquarters?
A. I didn’t recognize her.
Q. You recognized her and you said to her, “you are the lady who
lives on Cleveland Avenue, the first one?” You knew her, didn’t
you?
A. No, sir. You said she is one of the witnesses, and you pointed
to me and said, “ that is the one,” and she said, “ that is the one.”
Q. As a matter of fact, she had already spoken to you?
A. I don’t know whether she had, or not. You had already twelve
pictures and you were pointing at me.
Q. You didn’t say that?
A. No; I didn’t.
Q. As a matter of fact, didn’t you have a conversation with four
women before you said anything to her and she said anything to you,
didn’t you?
A. I didn’t count them. I don’t know which one spoke to me.
Mr. M cGee: This is objected to.
The Court: Objection sustained. You may ask him if he talked
to somebody before he talked to her.
The Solicitor: That is exactly what I asked.
The Court: You may go into details of the conversation there
with the defendant.
Mr. M cGee: If he does, I can go into details.
By the Solicitor :
Q. Didn’t you say, “you are the lady who lives on Cleveland Ave
nue, the first one?”
A. They asked me if I seen Mrs. Crowder some place on Cleveland
Avenue.
Q. Didn’t she look at you and say, “ do you know me?” And you
said, “you are the lady who lives on Cleveland Avenue?”
A. No, sir; I didn’t.
Q. You don’t remember anything like that?
192 A. No, sir; I don’t.
Q. Didn’t she ask you why you raped her and you said
you didn’t know; isn’t that the truth?
A. That is what I said.
Q. And didn’t you at that time recognize her?
A. No, sir; I didn’t.
Q. Why did you say you recognized her if you didn’t?
A. I wouldn’t have said I did it if I hadn’t been threatened the
way I was—I would never have said it.
Q. How did you know she lived on Cleveland Avenue?
A. When she walked in there they said, “ this is Mrs. Ann
Crowder.”
Q. Who said,that?
148 JEREMIAH REEVES, JR., VS. STATE OF ALABAMA
A. Some man. I don’t know who it was.
Q. Didn’t three women walk in there?
A. I imagine they did.
Q. As a matter of fact, didn’t they all walk in there and look at
you and another one started talking to you, you talked to her awhile
too?
Mr. M cGee: I renew my objection to the general conversation.
The Solicitor: I am not asking any details.
Mr. M cGee : I am going to request the same kind of general con
versation if you are. I thought we were trying simply this one
case.
The Court: We are trying one case. I will let the Solicitor go
into details of the conversation pertaining to this one case.
Mr. M cGee: If he is making general reference to it, we should
have all the details.
The Court: The Court rules otherwise.
Mr. M cGee: I would like an exception.
The Court : Exception for the defendant.
(Exception noted for the defendant by direction of the Court.)
By the Solicitor:
Q. Didn’t you have a conversation with some other women?
A. I don’t know, sir.
Q. You don’t know?
A. No, sir.
193 Q. Didn’t Mrs. Crowder ask you, “do you know me?” And
you said, “yes, ma’m, you are the lady who lives on Cleveland
Avenue?”
A. No, sir; I didn’t.
Q. You didn’t say that?
A. No, sir.
The Court: We have been over that about three times, asked him
the same question three times. I don’t think we should be going over
the same question again and again.
By the Solicitor:
Q. Let me ask you this. You talked to Mr. Clark? You heard
him testify here today? You talked to him in the County Jail?
A. Who is Air. Clark?
Q. The man who testified here today and said he picked you up
at the corner of National Avenue and Cleveland.
A. I saw him.
Q. You saw him?
A. Yes, sir; I did.
Q. You saw him in the County Jail, didn’ tyou?
A. Yes, sir; I did.
Q. You told him he was the one who picked you up, didn’t you?
A. No, sir; I didn’t.
Q. In other words, you heard him testify about that, didn’t you?
A. Yes, sir; I did.
Q. And he wasn’t telling the truth?
A. No, sir.
Q. You didn’t make any such statement?
A. No, sir; I did not.
Q. Had you ever seen him before?
A. No, sir, not to my remembrance.
Q. Did he pick you up out there?
A. No, sir, he didn’t.
Q. Why did you tell him he was the one who picked you up?
A. I didn’t tell him.
Q. Did you have a conversation with him?
A. Very brief one.
Q. Why did you tell him he was the one if he wasn’t the one who
picked you up?
A. I didn’t hardly say anything to him. He asked me if I remem
bered him, ever talking to him.
194 Q. What did you say?
A. I told him, if I recall, I didn’t remember him.
Q. What gave you the idea he was a traveling missionary?
A. A traveling missionary?
Q. Yes.
A. I don’t know. He didn’t tell me he was a traveling mis
sionary. I didn’t see him.
Q. He talked about the church, is that what gave you the idea
he was?
A. He didn’t talk to me about the church or anything else. Never
saw him.
Q. You didn’t deny to him he picked you up in the County Jail.
A. Didn’t deny it?
Q. Yes.
A. I didn’t say anything to him after my lawyer came and told
me I wasn’t to talk to anybody about anything. Whatever they
said, I would just hear.
Mr. M cGee: When I came in the case I told him not to say any
thing to anybody, whatever they said to him to just hear.
JEREMIAH REEVES, JR., VS. STATE OF ALABAMA 149
R edirect exam in atio n .
By Mr. M cGee:
Q. How tall are you?
A. About five foot seven.
Q. That mustache, how long have you had it?
A. Ever since about thirteen, fourteen—I say about fourteen.
Q. Did you ever shave it?
A. No, sir, I have not.
Q. Didn’t have it shaved off?
A. No, sir.
Q. At the time this Clark guy saw you in the County Jail what did
he say to you when he came over there?
A. When he walked in the County Jail he was with officer Arm
strong, he looked at me and said, “yes, that is him. Don’t you look
at me, nigger. Don’t you know us white men don’t let nothing like
that happen to our women?” He stood there and looked at me a few
minutes and him and Armstrong went out.
Q. Did you say anything about remembering him picking you up?
A. No, sir.
Q. As a matter of fact, he couldn’t have picked you up
195 because you were never there ?
A. No, sir.
Q. Had you ever seen him before he went to the County Jail with
Armstrong?
A. No, sir.
Q. Have you got a straw-hat?
A. No, sir.
Q. Did the police after they arrested you go around and search
your house?
The Solicitor: I object.
By Mr. M cGee:
Q. Did you that day assault Mrs. Crowder?
A. No, sir; I did not.
Q. How far did you say you went in school?
A. To the 8th.
Q. What part of the 8th; did you finish the whole 8th grade before
you quit?
A. Just about to the last of it when I got sick.
Q, In other words, you didn’t finish the 8th grade.
A. No, sir.
Q. Did they take your fingerprints, fingerprint you?
A. Yes, sir, in the County Jail.
150 JEREMIAH REEVES, JR., VS. STATE OF ALABAMA
JEREMIAH REEVES, JR., VS. STATE OF ALABAMA 151
Q. You did discuss with the Solicitor about a trip to City Hall
before you left Kilby?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. An interview with all of these prosecutrices?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. On that day, did they take pictures of you down there?
A. Yes, sir, they did.
Q. How many?
A. About ten or more.
Q. Later they took some more of you out at Kilby?
A. Yes, sir, they did.
Q. On Monday or Tuesday Dr. Rehling took some?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Did they take some blood out of your arm?
A. Yes, sir, they did.
Q. Did they take anything else out of you?
A. Yes, sir.
196 Q. What did they take?
A. Took fluid out of my spine.
Q. They had to tap your spine to take the fluid out?
A. Sure.
Q. Who did that?
A. Doctor.
Q. Where were you when this was done?
A. At Kilby.
Q. Was it the prison physician?
A. No, sir, it wasn’t.
Q. Do you know who it was?
A. No, sir.
Q, Did they order you to do this, order you to strip to take the
pictures, or did you do it voluntarily?
A. No, sir, I didn’t do it voluntarily.
Charlie W illiams, having been duly sworn, was examined and
testified as follows:
D irect examination.
By Mr. M cGee:
197 Q. Do you see that mustache he has got there?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. How long has he had it, as far as you know?
A. As far as I could remember, since I have been knowing him.
Q. Had a mustache since you have been knowing him?
A- Yes, sir.
152 JEREMIAH REEVES, JR., VS. STATE OP ALABAMA
Q. Are you pretty well acquainted with his general reputation in
the community out there?
A. A few of them..
Q. What the neighbors think about him out there, are you
acquainted with that?
A. Yes, sir, everybody.
Q. Was it good or bad?
A. It is good.
Q. They think good of him?
A. Yes, sir.
Cross examination.
By the Solicitor:
Q. Do you see him every day?
A. No, I don’t see him every day because I works every day.
Q. Would you go for a period of weeks without even seeing him?
A. No, sir. I see him every week.
Q. Did you see him every week in July?
A. I saw him every week in July?
Q. That is what I asked you.
A. Yes, sir; I saw him.
Q. You saw him every week in July?
A. I don’t say every week in July because I work some nights,
three nights a week, and certain days of the week I don’t see him.
Q. Could you have gone two weeks or more and not seen him?
A. If he was playing. He beats the drum in John Collins or
chestra. Sometimes it would be late getting in and he would sleep
in the day time.
Q. In other words, you go a week or two weeks, or maybe a month,
without seeing him at all?
A. It could have been like that.
Q. As a matter of fact, he could shave his mustache off and grow
it back again two or three times and you wouldn’t know it?
198 A. No. It has never been cut clean since I have been know
ing him.
Q. If sometimes you didn’t see him for a month, he could have
shaved it off and grown it back again by the time you saw him?
A. Yes, sir, he could if he left this neighborhood.
Q. As a matter of fact, he was gone the first part of July and
August, wasn’t he?
A. I cannot say that.
Q. You just don’t know?
A. No, sir.
Q. Do you know whether you saw him during the month of July
around home?
A. July of this year?
JEREMIAH REEVES, JR., VS. STATE OF ALABAMA 153
Q. 1952.
A. Yes; I seen him in 1952.
Q. I know you saw him during the year. Did you see him the
first part of July?
A. Yes, sir; I seen him the first part of July.
Q. See him two or three times a week during the first part of July?
A. I might have. I don’t remember.
Q. He testified that he wasn’t here the first part of July, he was
playing with an orchestra and out of town on the road.
A. As I recollect, I seen him here the 1st of July.
Q. Saw him the whole month of July?
A. I don’t know. I wouldn’t say it was the whole month.
Q. Saw him every week in July?
A. I cannot say that.
R e -direct ex am in atio n .
By Mr. M cGee:
Q. You don’t think a sixteen year old boy could shave off his
mustache and grow it back in a month, do you?
The Solicitor: That is objected to.
The C ourt: Objection overruled.
By Mr. M cGee:
Q. Do you?
A. Yes, sir; I believe so.
Q. Shave it off and grow it back in a month, a sixteen year
old boy?
A. It would grow back some, it wouldn’t grow so long. Shave
a mustache, and the mustache would grow out in three
199-205 or four days.
Q. I doubt very much that is so.
A. In about a week, because when I was sixteen I had a mus
tache.
Q. Okay, if that is your idea you are entitled to it. Every time
you saw him in July he had a mustache then?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. If he was gone in July and August he couldn’t have been
here and it wasn’t him who beat the woman in this case if it hap
pened in July?
A. If away he sure couldn’t.
154 JEREMIAH REEVES, JR., VS. STATE OF ALABAMA
206-208 Berta Pollard, having been duly sworn, was examined
and testified as follows:
D irect examination.
By Mr. M cGee:
Q. What is your name?
A. Berta Pollard.
Q. Where do you live?
A. No. 16 Prospect Avenue.
Q. How long have you lived here in Montgomery?
A. I have been living around there on Prospect Avenue about
thirty years, and work at the Capital City about twenty-five.
Q. You work at the Capital City Laundry?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. About twenty-five years?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Do you know this defendant, Jeremiah, here?
A. Yes, sir. I named him Jeremiah when he was born.
209 Q. When you saw him about three months ago, did he have
a mustache then?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. You say he did have a mustache then when you saw him three
months ago?
A. I saw him walk by and I could see he had a mustache.
(No Cross Examination.)
R ebecca Goins, having been duly sworn, was examined and
testified as follows:
D irect examination.
By Mr. M cGee:
Q. What is your name?
A. Rebecca Goins.
Q. Where do you live?
A. On Houston Street.
Q. How long have you been in Montgomery?
A. About sixteen years.
Q. Do you know the Defendant here?
A. Yes; I know him.
Q. How long have you known him?
A. About ten years.
Q. Do you live anywhere near where he lives?
A. No, sir.
Q. Whereabouts did you know him at?
A. I have been knowing him from the church. We go to the same
church.
Q. You met him at church meetings, and so forth?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Do you know his family?
A. Yes.
Q. Do you see the mustache he has got?
A. I didn’t know he had a mustache until today.
Q. How old are you?
A. Fifty-six years old.
Q.. In the ten years you know him did you have a chance to see
him very often?
210 A. No, sir, I didn’t see him a whole lot.
Q. Do you think you know his reputation in the com
munity where he lives?
A. It is all right as far as I know about it.
(No Cross Examination.)
211 J. Lewis M iller, having been duly sworn, was examined
and testified as follows:
D irect examination.
By Mr. M cGee:
Q. Your name is J. Lewis Miller?
A. J. Lewis Miller, correct.
Q. You are Captain of the detective force of Montgomery City?
A. I am.
Q. You have been with the City quite awhile?
A. That is correct, yes, sir.
Q. You have been investigating some of these cases around here?
A. I have.
212 Q. Do you remember when you all picked this defendant
up on a prior occasion?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Do you remember that one of these victims, a Mrs. Burson,
refused to identify him as her attacker?
A. Mrs. Burson never looked at him that time.
Q. When I was talking to you and Earl James, which was before
I excused Mr. James, didn’t you tell me in the presence of Mr. Earl
James Mrs. Burson didn’t identify him?
A. I didn’t tell you Mrs. Burson didn’t identify him. Mrs. Burson
never looked at him the first time.
Q. You kept him in three days?
A. I beg your pardon. He was picked up August 30th, 1951, and
kept there over night until we checked up his alibi and released.
JEREMIAH REEVES, JR., VS. STATE OF ALABAMA 155
156 JEREMIAH REEVES, JR., VS. STATE OF ALABAMA
Q. And at that time when I was talking to you and Earl James
didn’t you tell me, and didn’t I ask you if he was picked up after
the fifth offense, and you said after the fourth one.
A. After the second one, after Mr. Dowe’s case. That is when he
was picked up.
Q. Nevertheless, the Montgomery Police Force was satisfied he
wasn’t the party in two of those cases at that time and you released
him.
A. That is correct.
Cross-exam in atio n .
By the Solicitor:
Q. Did anybody look at him?
A. No, sir.
Q. Any witnesses in any case?
A. No, sir, they didn’t.
Q. Were you present at Police Headquarters on November the
12th, 1952, when Mrs. Crowder talked to this defendant?
A. I was.
Q. Do you remember the conversation?
A. Mrs. Crowder asked him if he knew her, and he said he did,
that she was the first lady on Cleveland Avenue. And she further
asked him why he raped her, and he said he didn’t know. And she
asked him how he entered the house, and he says through the back
door.
M r. M cGe e : I m ove to exclude that on the ground the proper
predicate hasn’t been laid.
213 The C ourt: You better examine. I will overrule the ob
jection.
By the Solicitor:
Q. Did anyone, did you or anyone in your presence or hearing
threaten this defendant, coerce him, offer him any promise or hope
of reward?
A. Did not.
Mr. M cGe e : I would like to have a subpoena issued for Eari
James.
The C ourt: He is over here.
E arl D . Jam es , having been duly sworn, was examined and tes
tified as follow s:
D irect exam in atio n .
By Mr. M cGee:
Q. When I was talking to you and Captain Miller, didn’t Cap
tain Miller tell me that Mrs. Burson didn’t identify this defendant?
A. I didn’t understand him to make such a remark.
Q. And didn’t I tell him then if he would so testify I would re
lease you from the rule and also release you as a witness?
A. In our conversation you asked which was the case in regard to
Mrs. Crowder, and we told you which number it was.
Q. In our conversation at that time, Mr. James, didn’t I say to
Captain Miller it was after the fifth, and he said it was not, it was
after the fourth attack this boy was picked up? Didn’t he correct
me when I said after the fifth attack?
A. I believe you are right.
Cross-ex am in a tio n .
By the Solicitor:
Q. Do you know the date he was picked up?
A. Do you mean the last case?
Q. No.
A. No; I do not. Mr. McGee asked me that question when I
came back from lunch, and I told him I naturally didn’t know when
it was, and I told him I would find out, and I called Mr. Miller.
214 The Solicitor : W e have a rebuttal witness who is not here.
He said he preferred to testify tomorrow morning. His wife
is expecting a baby, and if the Court is going to adjourn for the
night I would like to put him on tomorrow morning.
The C ourt: The Court is of the opinion we cannot finish this
case tonight. I was hoping we could conclude all the evidence.
There is only one more rebuttal witness to be heard, unless the
defense has something in answer to that, and the Court is going to
adjourn until 9 o’clock in the morning. Let us get an early start
in this case. It wouldn’t be fair to the Defendant, or to the attorney
for the Defendant, to the Solicitor, and to you members of the Jury
to have an argument of this case tonight. We are all tired, and I
know that you are tired. The bailiff has made arrangements for you
down at the hotel and everything wall be done to make you com
fortable, he will take you to breakfast in the morning, and we will
all come back and get a good start.
As I told you before, you are not to discuss this case. You are
not to discuss the evidence or anything that occurred here. Wait
JEREMIAH REEVES, JR., VS. STATE OP ALABAMA 157
to do that in the Jury room after you hear the Court’s Charge as
to the law. You won’t even be allowed to read any newspapers. I
know it is not the most pleasant place in the world to spend the
night, and after all this is an important civic duty. If you want to
communicate with your homes, or have anything sent to you from
your homes to make you comfortable, you can arrange that through
the bailiff. You cannot communicate with anyone directly.
The Court is going to take a recess now until 9 o’clock in the
morning, and be in your places at that time and we will then pro
ceed to conclude the case.
I presume we can excuse the witnesses unless the State and de
fense agrees that some need to come back. Do you have any wit
nesses you want to call back?
The Solicitor: I am going to ask Mr. Murphy to be back to
morrow morning.
Mr. M cGee: I don’t know what they are going to say. The
defendant’s witnesses are requested to be back, and the State’s wit
ness, Mr. Murphy, is requested to be back.
9:32 o’clock P. M.
215 Adjourned until Saturday, November 29th, 1952, at 9
o’clock A. M.
(The Jury retired in charge of the bailiff.)
Saturday, November 29th, 1952, 9 o’clock A. M.
Present:
The C ourt.
The Jury.
The Solicitor and A ssistant Solicitor.
The Defendant and his counsel.
State ’s R ebutting E vidence
R obert D . M u r ph y , having been duly sworn, was examined and
testified as follow s:
D irect exam ination .
By the Solicitor:
Q. State your name, please.
A. Robert D. Murphy.
Q. What is your occupation?
A. Classification Officer, Department of Corrections and Institu
tions.
Q. Where is your office?
A. Kilby Prison.
158 JEREMIAH REEVES, JR., VS. STATE OF ALABAMA
Q. Were you present in your office in the late afternoon, approxi
mately 5:30 or 6 o ’clock, November 11th of this year?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Was the defendant there?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Did you hear a conversation between myself and the de
fendant?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Did you hear me, or did you hear the defendant------
By the C ourt:
Q. Was anybody else present at that time?
A. Those in charge of him.
By the Solicitor:
Q. Did either you or anyone in your presence or hearing
216 threaten this defendant, offer him any promise or hope of
reward or coerce him in any manner?
A. No, sir.
Q. Did you hear this defendant ask me whether I could help him?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. What did I say?
A. You told him you couldn’t.
Q. Would you state all of the conversation as far as you remem
ber it.
A. You told him you could make no promises—I don’t remember
the exact words—-you said you couldn’t make any promises of any
kind, the State would furnish him a lawyer if he didn’t hire one.
I think you made some statement to the effect you didn’t know for
sure just what the offense would be, the law would have to take its
course, some words to that effect.
Cross-ex am inatio n .
By Mr. M cGee:
Q. You say you are an officer at the State Penitentiary?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. That is where this nigger was first carried and held up there
five days, wasn’t he?
A. I don’t know exactly how long he was out there.
Q. What is your position out there?
A. Classification officer.
Q. What kind of duty does that position entail?
A. The processing and classification of new prisoners as well as
old prisoners.
JEREMIAH REEVES, JR., VS. STATE OF ALABAMA 359
Q. Take a man like this not formally charged, do you classify
him?
A. As a rule we don’t.
Q. In this case did you?
A. No, sir; I didn’t classify him.
Q. When they discharge prisoners and send them other places,
do you handle all that, changing records, and so forth? Do you
keep up with the incoming and outgoing of inmates at Kilby; is
that what your duties are?
A. Actually from the time he is brought in and processed. Once
a man is classified and placed in a position and serial number, and
on discharge he goes.
Q. Mr. Thetford was out there quite a bit when this boy
217 was first picked up.
A. I don’t believe I saw him but one time.
Q. That is this particular time you are talking about now; is that
correct?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. You talked with Mr. Thetford and Mr. Stewart last night
after this case recessed?
A. I don’t know that I did last night. I don’t believe I did last
night. I was outside and talked to him this morning.
P hilip S. B azar, having been duly sworn, was examined and testi
fied as follow s:
D irect ex am inatio n .
By the A ssistant Solicitor:
Q. State your name to the Court.
A. Dr. Philip S. Bazar.
Q. You are a practicing psychiatrist in Montgomery, are you?
A. I am.
Q. Please state the institutions which you have attended, the
institutions of higher learning and degrees you have had from those
places.
A. I am a graduate of McGill University of Montreal, Canada,
was graduated in 1936, with degree of B.A., and Doctor of Medicine,
and Master of Surgery.
Q. You are qualified in medicine and surgery as well as in psy
chiatry?
A. Yes, sir; I am.
Q. At what hospitals have you had training following your gradu
ation?
A. I interned in New Jersey and in Montreal, chief resident in
psychiatry at the Verder Institute, chief medical assistant at M c
Gill University, and in Montgomery here.
160 JEREMIAH REEVES, JR., VS. STATE OF ALABAMA
JEREMIAH REEVES, JR., VS. STATE OF ALABAMA 161
Q. Did you have psychiatric training, and did you work along that
line in the service?
A. Yes, sir; I did.
Q. What was the nature of that work?
A. I was chief of the neuro-psychiatric section of the 134th Sta
tion Hospital in the Solomons, and on my return to the United
States I was chief of the receiving hospital at Fort Bragg, North
Carolina.
218 Q. What professional associations and societies do you
belong to, and a member of what hospital staff here in Mont
gomery?
A. I am chief of the neuro-psychiatric section of St. Jude’s,
have a staff appointment at St. Margaret’s, a member of the Mont
gomery County, Alabama State and American Medical Societies,
member of the Alabama Neurologic and Psychiatric, and a member
of the American Psychiatric Association.
Q. How long have you been engaged in the practice of psychiatry
and medicine and surgery?
A. Since 1936.
Q. Did you at our request examine the defendant in this case,
Jeremiah Reeves, Junior?
A. I did.
Q. State the number of times you have examined him, and the
length of your examinations, and tell us what type of examination
that you have made, and the tests you have made on this particular
defendant.
A. Well, the direct examination, I saw him on two occasions, the
first time at Kilby Prison on the afternoon of November 13th, 1925,
for approximately two and one-half to three hours, and again at
the County Jail on November the 20th for approximately two and
one-half hours. I supplemented this examination with a report from
the Welfare Department, and with the reports of tests made on this
man, intelligence tests, and Minnesota multiphasic test made m
Kilby Prison.
Q. State for what purpose these intelligence tests were given, what
kind of tests were they—not about this man, but in general.
A. The basic test was the intelligence test, comprehension, and
arithmetical reasoning of the patient. The Minnesota multiphasic
is a test exploring phases, neurotic and psychopathic. By psycho
pathic we mean tendencies toward insanity.
Q. Based on your examinations of this man, the tests given him,
the information which you have had available to you, are you of the
opinion Jeremiah Reeves, Junior, is sane in that he is able to dis
tinguish right from wrong?
Mr. M cGee: I object to that.
The A ssistant Solicitor: Let me finish my question.
By the A ssistant Solicitor:
Q. Even though he may know right from wrong applied to a case
of this type, if he can recognize what is right, would you consider
this man sane or insane?
219 Mr. M cGee: I object to that question on the ground it
is based on facts that are misleading.
The C ourt : Sustain the objection. There has been no quali
fication of him what this case is. For that reason I sustain the
objection to the question in its present form.
By the A ssistant Solicitor:
Q. We are trying Jeremiah Reeves for an attack and rape on a
Mrs. Ann Crowder. Let me ask you if in your discussions with
Jeremiah Reeves the case of Mrs. Ann Crowder was discussed with
him? She is a lady who lives on Cleveland Avenue.
A. Yes.
Q. Was that discussed with him?
A. Yes, sir.
Mr. M cGee: I object to that question.
The C ourt: Overrule the objection if the conversation he had
with him was in reference to the matter now on trial.
B y th e A ssistant Solicitor:
Q. I will repeat the question. In regard to this offense of rape,
and this particular offense involving Mrs. Ann Crowder, are you
of the opinion that Jeremiah Reeves was able to distinguish right
from wrong, in that he knew his act upon this -woman would be
wrong, and was he able to distinguish between right and wrong,
was he able to have elected from the facts either to do or not to do
this particular act involving Mrs. Crowder and, therefore, in your
opinion, based upon the facts, would he be sane?
Mr. M cGee: I object to the question on the ground it assumes
a fact in issue. And on the further ground the question contains
more than one question. That is the objection.
The C ourt: I sustain your objection on the ground that it in
vades the province of the Jury as to whether or not in this particular
case the defendant did, or did not, rape Mrs. Crowder. You may
ask the witness whether or not this defendant was able to dis
tinguish right from wrong, in his opinion. I am not going to let
you assume the defendant is guilty of a particular act. The ques
tion will have to be phrased in such a way that it is not assumed.
162 JEREMIAH REEVES, JR., VS. STATE OF ALABAMA
By the A ssistant Solicitor:
Q. In your opinion is Jeremiah Reeves sane in that he is able to
distinguish right from wrong in relation to this particular offense
with Mrs. Crowder? Is he able to distinguish right from
wrong?
220 Mr. M cGee: I object to the question on the ground it
assumes a fact.
The Court: I am going to sustain the objection unless you elimi
nate from it this particular offense. It is a matter for the Jury to
decide.
The A ssistant Solicitor: What I am trying to do is find out
whether he can distinguish right from wrong in an offense of rape.
The C ourt: If you want to put the question in the form of an
assumption, assuming this act occurred, then in that event the
question would be in proper form. It has to be on the basis of
assuming and not the plain statement the offense did happen.
By th e A ssistant Solictor:
Q. Assuming that Jeremiah Reeves had raped Mrs. Ann Crowder,
are you of the opinion at the time the act was done he was sane
in that he could distinguish right from wrong and could adhere
to the right?
Mr. M cGee: I object to the question on the ground it is a
hypothetical question not supported by any evidence in the case.
And, ground two, it assumes a fact in issue.
The Court : Overrule the objection.
Mr. M cGee: I ask for an exception.
The C ourt: Exception for the defendant.
(Exception for the defendant by direction of the Court.)
By the A ssistant Solicitor:
Q. You may answer.
A. It is my opinion that Jeremiah Reeves has the capacity to
distinguish right from wrong, and has the capacity to adhere to the
right, having made that distinction.
Mr. M cGee: I move to exclude the answer of the witness on the
ground it is answering a hypothetical question that is not supported
by evidence. On the further ground it is an answer to a question
assuming a fact in issue.
The C ourt: Overrule the objection.
Mr. M cGee: I would like an exception.
The Court : Exception for the defendant.
(Exception noted for the defendant by direction of the Court.)
JEREMIAH REEVES, JR., VS. STATE OP ALABAMA 163
By the A ssistant Solicitor:
221 Q. I want to go a little further with you into this matter
now. In your discussions with Jeremiah Reeves I believe
you testified the name of Mrs. Crowder was discussed?
A. Yes, we did.
Q. Did you make any threats to him, offer him any reward, or
hope of reward, or coerce him to talk to you?
A. No.
Q. At the time of your interviews with this defendant was any
one present with you?
A. No.
Q. Did Jeremiah Reeves admit to you he had raped Mrs. Ann
Crowder?
Mr. M cGee: That is objected to.
The C ourt: Objection overruled.
Air. M cGee: I object to the question on the ground, one, it calls
for an answer which is a deprivation of the defendant’s constitu
tional rights under he 14th Amendment to the Constitution of the
United States.
Two. A proper predicate hasn’t been laid that the defendant’s
alleged statement was a voluntary one.
Three. The admission of his statement, or alleged confession
of the defendant, is a deprivation of the defendant’s constitutional
rights and due process of law as guaranteed by the sovereign State
of Alabama.
Four. Such admission is a direct violation of the defendant’s
constitutional rights under the 14th Amendment of the Constitu
tion of the United States.
The Court : Overrule the objections.
Mr. M cGee: I ask for an exception.
The Court : Exception for the defendant.
(Exception noted for the defendant by direction of the Court.)
Mr. M cGee: I would like to move the Court to permit us to
have a hearing on whether or not this statement which the doctor
is about to give, whether or not it was voluntarily made. I move
the Court for permission to make this showing, upon ground one—
the defendant is a seventeen year old nigger boy who was arrested
on the 10th day of November at 2:10 P. M., and incarcerated in
the State Penitentiary incommunicado until Wednesday at ap
proximately 5 P. M.; during that period of incarceration, while
held incommunicado, the defendant was held in a cell ad-
222 jacent to the room in which the electric chair is located,
and the defendant was constantly questioned by a series of
officers, State officers, and threatened continuously with death in
the electric chair. The defendant was then placed in the room
164 JEREMIAH REEVES, JR., VS. STATE OF ALABAMA
at night time with the electric chair, and there questioned by
Deputy Warden R. 0. Dees until finally, after various officers
told him the only thing he could do to save his life and keep out
of the chair was to confess to these various cases, and after being
subjected to much mental torture the defendant did agree to con
fess to anything they wanted him to.
That further, while being held there the defendant was stripped
naked and forced to submit to photographs taken by Dr. C. J.
Rehling, the State Toxicologist. He had his spine tapped, and
right arm, and fluid extracted by the prison doctor. We want an
opportunity to show that this statement taken by the witness was
not a voluntary statement.
The C ourt: Before I rule on the motion I want to ask you whether
you have any evidence that you wish to make a showing of if
anyone was present at the time Dr. Bazar talked to the defendant,
or if anyone at that time used any coercion or force on him? Not
at some other time, but at the time or times Dr. Bazar talked
to him?
Mr. M cGee: What I want to show is a whole series of force and
coercion continuously from the time he was taken out to Kilby
until he was brought over to the County Jail without seeing an at
torney. He was still out at Kilby at the time the doctor talked
to him.
The Court: The motion is overruled.
Mr. M cGee: I would like an exception.
The C ourt: Exception for the defendant.
(Exception noted for the defendant by direction of the Court.)
By the A ssistant Solicitor:
Q. Did he admit to you he had raped Mrs. Ann Crowder?
A. Yes, sir, he did.
Q. Do you recall any statements he made to you about this
particular act?
Mr. McGee: I object to the question on the ground it is as
suming a fact in issue.
223 The C ourt: Objection overruled.
Mr. M cGee: I would like an exception.
The Court: Exception for the defendant.
(Exception noted for the defendant by direction of the Court.)
By the A ssistant Solicitor:
Q. Do you recall any statement he made to you about this
particular act?
A. Yes. In attempting to explore the motivation for his act,
JEREMIAH REEVES, JR., VS. STATE OF ALABAMA 165
which he admitted had occurred, I attempted to learn whether
there was a physical, sexual gratification associated with the
episode, and inquired whether he recalled having had an ejaculation
in the course of the act, and he admitted that he had.
Mr. M cGee: I move to exclude the answer on ground, one, the
answer isn’t responsive to the question. Ground two, the answer
is in response to a question that assumes a fact in issue.
The C ourt: Objection overruled.
Mr. M cGee: I would like an exception.
The Court: Exception for the defendant.
(Exception noted for the defendant by direction of the Court.)
By the A ssistant Solicitor:
Q. Do you recall whether or not he told you how he entered
that particular house?
Mr. M cGee: I object to the question on the ground it assumes
a fact in issue.
The C ourt: Objection overruled.
Mr. M cGee: I would like an exception.
The C ourt: Exception for the defendant.
(Exception noted for the defendant by direction of the Court.)
The W itn ess : I don’t recall if he indicated how he made his
entry in the house.
Mr. M cGee: I object to the answer, and move to exclude the
answer on the ground the answer is in response to a question that
is assuming a fact in issue, and move to exclude it.
The Court: The motion is overruled.
Mr. M cGee: I would like an exception.
The C ourt: Exception granted for the defendant.
224 (Exception noted for the defendant by direction of the
Court.)
By the A ssistant Solicitor:
Q. You stated you were exploring his motives. Again, with
reference only to this particular case, did he state to you what
his motives were in going to Mrs. Crowder’s house? I will add
another part to that. And did he ever make any change in the
statement of his motives?
Mr. M cGee: I object to the question on the ground it assumes
a fact in issue.
The Court: I will sustain the objection in the form in which
the question is put.
The A ssistant Solicitor: I will not press the question.
166 JEBEMIAH BEEVES, JR., VS. STATE OF ALABAMA
Cross ex am in atio n .
By Mr. M cGee:
Q. What time did you say you first saw this defendant?
A. I didn’t say what time. I said in the afternoon of Novem
ber 13th.
Q. You say you talked to him approximately how long?
A. About two and one-half to three hours.
Q. You made one more examination of him, I imagine?
A. That is right.
Q. Where was that examination made?
A. At the County Jail.
Q. While he was being held in Kilby Penitentiary, on the first
examination you testified you gave him an intelligence test, I
believe you said, and also gave him the Minnesota multiphasic
test.
A. Yes, sir.
Q. What kind of an intelligence test was it?
A. I didn’t give him those tests. I reviewed them. They were
administered by, as I understand, Mr. Murphy.
Q. Were you present when Mr. Murphy administered those in
telligence tests?
A. No, sir.
Q. Do you know whether Mr. Murphy is a medical physician?
A. It doesn’t take a medical physician.
Q. I didn’t ask you that. I asked if you know whether Mr.
Murphy is a medical physician or medical doctor.
225 A. I know he is not a medical doctor.
Q. You were not present when the tests were made?
A. That is correct.
Mr. M cGee: I move to exclude that part from the direct ex
amination as far as these two tests are concerned.
The C ourt: I sustain the objection to any tests he didn’t give
or didn’t supervise.
The A ssistant Solicitor: He simply testified he had the bene
fit of those tests.
The Court: There is no evidence of the way in which they were
given, as I remember. I am ruling out any reference now to
those particular tests.
By Mr. M cGee:
Q. Let us explore the examination you made of him on your
first visit out there. In that examination do you recall some
of the questions you put to him in an endeavor to determine
■whether he was insane pr sane.
JEREMIAH REEVES, JR., VS. STATE OF ALABAMA 167
168 JEREMIAH REEVES, JR., VS. STATE OF ALABAMA
A. Yes, sir.
Q. I would like you to repeat them, if you will be so kind.
A. Well, we follow a form or, rather, I did. The test involves
first providing him with an opportunity to describe whatever he
wanted to in relationship to acts of which he stood accused. It
also involved a review of the highlights of his childhood, funda
mental history. It involved an examination of his mental re
sources in terms of intellectual equipment. A review of his psy
chologic progress. A review of his social relationships, queries that
would reveal any evidence of adolescent material, highlights of
daily experiences, orientation as to time and places and values,
moral values, attitudes, capacity to calculate, the use of tests
that would determine the patient’s capacity to do abstract think
ing, to reveal his capacity to distinguish absurdities in pictures,
and statements used to test or determine his capacity to make
sound judgments. I think that constitutes about the whole circle.
Of course, I went into detail about skills, and attitudes, and prefer
ences, his sexual development, the highlights in terms of his sexual
development, his social relationships and attitudes. That con
stitutes approximately the scope of the examination.
Q. Speaking of education, assuming a man has the ability to
complete a college education, that doesn’t indicate he is sane or
insane.
226 A. No. That is part of the examination.
Q. And as far as a man’s ability at some particular skill,
work at carpentry, does not indicate sanity or insanity?
A. No.
Q. A man’s ability to execute a will himself, that doesn’t neces
sarily indicate his sanity or insanity, does it?
A. Not of itself.
Q. Have you done any work in the State mental institutions
like Bryce Institute?
A. Yes, sir. My training was in Verdun Protestant Hospital at
Montreal. And, of course, my Army experience, in which I headed
up the nervous diseases for three years.
Q. Do you know that they have an instrument installed at
Bryce Institute to determine whether an insane person would
know the difference between right and wrong?
A. No; I don’t believe I do.
Q. At Verdun—
A. Verdun Protestant Hospital.
Q. At the Verdun Protestant Hospital when someone was con
fined— do they commit people there for observation in order to
see if they were insane?
A. There was such a thing as a voluntary commitment, and
such a thing as commitment by compulsion.
JEKEMIAH REEVES, JR., VS. STATE OF ALABAMA 169
Q. When you were up at the Verdun Hospital, how many did
you have under observation?
A. It would vary. The commitment, of course, was accom
plished by an outside physician generally, or frequently, when he
was not able to make a diagnosis. Sometimes a diagnosis could
have been readily made on the first day. Sometimes the problem
was more assiduous and sometimes required a more prolonged
observation.
Q. Where is this institution located?
A. In Verdun, Quebec.
Q. In Canada?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Do you know at the Bryce Hospital, which is in Tuscaloosa,
Alabama, that the average period of time before they can deter
mine whether a person is sane or insane would run four months?
Is that consistent with your knowledge of psvchiatrv?
A. No.
227 Q. That is not consistent?
A. No.
Q. What is your idea about that matter? Be a little bit more
specific.
A. There is no arbitrary rule or length of time. It depends
upon the case—
The A ssistant Solicitor: Let him finish.
Mr. M cGee: How do you know he isn’t finished?
The Court: Proceed.
The W itn ess : It is no definite problem. There are some cases
that require considerable study, but to take four months to arrive
at a diagnosis would, of course, be quite long. There are other
cases that are so subtle in their manifestations that the length
of time varies before we can give a definite diagnosis of that
particular case. The Bryce Hospital is staffed so small and the
population so large, the length of time would not necessarily be in
dicative of the severity of the case.
Q. Do you know how large the staff at Tuscaloosa is?
A. It fluctuates.
Q. Do you know how large it is?
A. Not of my own knowledge.
Q. Have you been over there?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Been over there lately?
A. No, sir.
Q. You don’t know what time I was referring to?
A. No.
Q. What do you mean by the selection of the staff?
170 JEREMIAH REEVES, JR., VS. STATE OF ALABAMA
A. I said fluctuation. It would be determined in some respects
by the ability of the examiner to apply himself to that specific
examination.
Q. What I wras asking you was— apparently you don’t want to
answer—in your opinion, assuming a man appeared to be a healthy,
strong individual, it would take a long period of time to deter
mine whether that man was normal, or not.
A. They can be so subtle the manifestations are not as easily
identified.
Q. That kind of person would take a considerable period of time?
A. Again I say it would depend largely on the type of manifesta
tions, and time the examiner could devote to the examina-
228 tion.
Q. It is not possible for a person to be absolutely insane,
as insane as any psychiatrist could determine, and still at times
have normal periods for hours at a time without any indication
of insanity, and be absolutely as normal as you are; isn’t that so?
A. As far as the behavior might go, his insanity would probably
be there.
Q. When you talked to this boy it was at the request of Mr.
Thetford, the State Solicitor, and Mr. Stewart?
A. That is right.
Q. You are being paid for your examination?
A. I don’t know yet.
Q. You are going to bill the State of Alabama?
A. I haven’t made any arrangement as to how it would be paid
and when it would be paid if there was to be any forthcoming.
Q. You said if there is any forthcoming you will get paid?
A. I will get paid. As I say, I don’t have any assurance about
it, that I would be paid.
Q. Will you bill the State for it?
A. That I couldn’t tell. If the fund is available.
Q. If you are told the fund is available you will bill the State?
A. That is right.
Q. Have you any doubt you will be paid for it?
A. Yes.
Q. Any serious doubt?
A. Yes,
Q. You have?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. When you went out there you went to examine this boy,
wouldn’t you consider it an examination of a patient?
A. Beg pardon?
Q. Wouldn’t you consider your examination of that boy an ex
amination of a patient?
A. Yes.
JEREMIAH REEVES, JR., VS. STATE OF ALABAMA 171
Q. Isn’t it a rule of medical ethics that doctors don’t testify
about a private examination they make of a patient?
The A ssistant Solicitor: That is objected to. He is here under
subpoena at the request of the State.
The C ourt: Objection sustained.
229 By Mr. M cGee:
Q. Would you say any person who for long periods of
time would sit alone by himself,, gaze up into space for a period of
hours, and maybe after having dinner go without saying anything
to anyone for a period of hours, grab the back of his head a few
minutes and take off running, and conducts himself that way
repeatedly off and on on various different occasions; and, further,
at times would be subject to violate attacks of crying and laughing
—would you consider a person like that an insane or sane person?
A. I wouldn’t venture a judgment or express an opinion.
Q. Would you consider him having a normal mentality, or would
he have a normal mentality?
A. Yes, sir, in terms of insanity.
Q. He might be insane also?
A. Yes, sir, he might be.
Q. I believe you all examined this boy about two and one-half
hours at Kilby and a couple of hours across the street?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Four or five hours all together?
A. That is right.
Q. Based on that you say he is insane?
A. Yes.
R e-direct ex am in atio n .
By the A ssistant Solicitor:
Q. In reference to counsel’s inquiry into your financial arrange
ment, do you recall anything I said to you about financial arrange
ments when I first talked to you about examining this boy?
A. My recollection is that you asked me to examine him; that
you didn’t know whether I would have a fee; that maybe some
thing could be arranged, and would I take it on that basis.
Q. And you agreed to do it, didn’t you?
A. I did.
Q. Since that time I told you we hope we can pay you.
A. That is right.
Q. And we will try to arrange for payment?
A. Yes, sir.
T estimony C losed
230 9:45 A. M. Recess
(The Jury retired to the Jury Room in charge of the bailiff.)
10:03 A. M. Court Resumed
Parties present as before noted
C olloquy
Mr. M cGee: I would like to make a motion at this time for
a mistrial upon the ground, one, that a member of the Jury when
questioned on his voir dire answered falsely.
Ground two, that the panel was questioned as a whole by the
Court as to their interest and bias in this matter, and by counsel
for the defense as to their activities, and it has just been brought
to my attention, to the attention of defendant’s counsel, that one
member of the Jury, who is the chief of the Montgomery Reserve
Police Force, which Police Force was organized for the dual pur
pose of tracking down alleged negro rapists and night time bur
glaries; that said chief of the Montgomery Reserve Police Force
was active in the work on this case. His name is Jack Page, and
I would like to call him as a witness to support my motion. Had
that been brought out he wouldn’t be on that Jury. And I don’t
believe with him on there there is any possibility of this man
getting a fair trial. This is a horrible case against this guy and
means everything to him, and we can certainly have a Jury with
out that in Montgomery County.
The C ourt: The Jury was qualified by the Court separately
and individually. The Jury was also qualified as to every ques
tion propounded and asked that they be qualified by you. I
would like to have a hearing on it outside of the presence of the
Jury. I would be glad to grant you a hearing on it.
The Solicitor: There was no question asked whether any mem
ber of the panel was a member of the Reserve Police Force. I am a
member of the Naval Reserve and that doesn’t enter into my
qualifications. He has been working on cases, but has not worked
on or had any connection with this case, and didn’t have any
opinion or bias in this case.
231 Mr. M cGee: If he is working, active in the Reserve Force,
that is part of his occupation. He was active in these cases
and still is, and certainly has an interest and bias in this case. He
has been investigating them with the Police Force. He is bound
to have independent knowledge. It is to the honor of Montgomery
County to establish a fair case, and I am sure the Solicitor would
be glad to have a mistrial and give every defendant a fair trial
who might be tried in this County.
172 JEREMIAH REEVES, JR., VS. STATE OF ALABAMA
JEREMIAH REEVES, JR., VS. STATE OF ALABAMA 173
The Solicitor: I don’t think you can unqualify anybody after
the trial has reached this stage.
Mr. M cGee: His Honor can enter a mistrial.
The C ourt: I don’t think that disqualifies him unless you show
Mr. Page has an opinion about this case. He said he had no
opinion about this case.
Mr. M cGee: That is part of his occupation. I think it is prima
facie to show interest and bias, a member of the Reserve Police
Force organized to track down alleged rapers. I am not trying
to sell horses in this. I am talking about honest to goodness Chris
tian facts.
The Court: Have you any evidence to show he is biased?
Mr. M cGee: By questioning him, that is all.
The Solicitor: I would object to questioning him. He cannot
go back into that.
Mr. M cGee: He is the chief of the Montgomery Reserve Police
Force on active duty running down this defendant and acquainting
himself with the facts connected with this case, with this defend
ant. I would like to put him on the stand.
The Solicitor: I object to any questions being propounded to
him.
Mr. M cGee: I would think the State wouldn’t want to accept
any verdict rendered by this Jury. It is not worth taking that
chance. There is no reason why this nigger could not be tried
by a juror without excepting to one member.
The C ourt: The Jury has been qualified and there is no duty
on the Court to requalify the Jury. Motion overruled.
Mr. M cGee: I would like an exception.
232 The Court: You may have an exception.
Court.)
(Exception noted for the defendant by direction of the
10:09 A. M.
The Assistant Solicitor opened the final argument to the Jury
on behalf of the State.
10:33 A. M.
Mr. McGee presented final argument to the Jury on behalf of
the defendant.
11:13 A. M.
The Solicitor presented final argument to the Jury on behalf of
the State.
During the closing argument of the Solicitor to the Jury:
Mr. McGee: I object to him saying I questioned the integrity
of the Jury. I only objected to one of the jurors.
The C ourt: Go ahead, Mr. Thetford, with that qualification.
174 JEREMIAH REEVES, JR., VS. STATE OF ALABAMA
233 C harge of t h e Court
James J. C arter,
Special Judge.
G entlem en of th e Ju r y : It now becomes my duty as the
Judge presiding at this trial to charge you as to the lawr governing
this case. You have been selected to serve on this Jury, and upon
you, as citizens of Alabama, selected to sit on this Jury, devolves
the duty to pass upon an issue which involves the life and liberty
of a fellow citizen. Bring to the discharge of this duty all the
wisdom, patience, impartiality and courage that you possess. Give
to the evidence in this case your faithful, earnest and impartial
consideration, examine it deliberately, coolly and dispassionately,
and let the evidence in this case be the great pole star, in the light
of which you are to pursue your quest in your investigation after
the truth of the matters submitted for your consideration and
decision. Let nothing interfere with your fair judgment, all to
the end that under the law and the evidence full and complete jus
tice may be done between the State of Alabama and this defend
ant.
Now, gentlemen, with reference to your duty as the Jury in
this case, and my duty as the Judge presiding at this trial, let me
say that you as a Jury, and I as a Judge, have each a separate
and distinct province, within the bounds of which each of us must
keep if justice is to be done according to law. It is my duty as
Judge to preside at this trial, to rule on points of law, and to in
struct you as to the law governing the case. As the Judge pre
siding at the trial of this case, I have no opinion as to the facts,
and if I did have, it would be highly improper for me to express
an opinion. I have no opinion as to the facts, and I instruct you
that you are not to consider in your deliberations any ruling
or statement made by me at any time during the course of this
trial as being an indication I have any opinion at all as to the facts,
for I have none.
In this case, gentlemen of the jury, you, and you alone, are
the sole judges of the facts, and the weight and sufficiency of the
evidence is for you alone. All questions of fact are to be deter
mined by you, and it is not for the Judge to give you in-
234 structions as to matters of fact.
In this case, gentlemen of the jury, we are trying one
action and one offense, you are to try that action and that action
alone, on the evidence that comes from that stand and nothing
else. You, and you alone, will be the judges of the truth, and
you are to find the truth. The credibility of the witnesses and
the weight to be given their testimony is for you as the triers of
fact. You have seen the witnesses on the stand, you have heard
them testify, you have had an opportunity to observe their de
meanor on the stand; you may consider their interest in the case,
the relation of the witnesses to the parties involved, and whether
they are willing, or unwilling, or too willing witnesses. From
the evidence you are to determine the truth. If you find that a
witness testified falsely as to any material fact, you may, in your
discretion, disregard all the testimony of that witness, or you may
accept that which you find to be true and reject that which you
find to be false.
Now, as to any statement, or alleged confession or admission
which may have been made, the weight of such a statement or ad
mission is for you and you alone, and you are to determine the
weight and credibility of the evidence here in the light of the cir
cumstances that were existing at the time such statement was
given.
Now, gentlemen of the jury, the defendant in this case has tes
tified in his own behalf, and this he has a perfect right to do. You
cannot capriciously disregard his testimony anymore than that
of any other witness. The law is that you must take his testimony
and consider it along with all the other testimony in the case, but
while you are considering his testimony you may take into con
sideration the fact that he is the defendant in the case and is in
terested in the result.
Now, gentlemen, when a defendant is placed on trial charged
with the commission of a public offense he is, under the law, pre
sumed to be innocent. This defendant enters this trial with this
presumption of innocence in his favor, and it is a fact that is to
be considered as evidence and should not be disregarded, and this
presumption of innocence remains and abides with the defendant
throughout the trial until overthrown by evidence which convinces
the Jury of the defendant’s guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.
235 The defendant here is being tried under an indictment
charging the offense of rape. The mere fact that the de
fendant was arrested and accused of the alleged offense, and the
further fact that the Grand Jury found an indictment against him
therefor, are not facts or circumstances to which the Jury is al
lowed to look in determining the guilt or innocence of the defend
ant, nor is the accusation, arrest or indictment circumstances in
law or in fact showing or tending to show that the defendant is
guilty of the offense charged. These things were merely the
authorized procedure by which an accused may be put upon trial,
and are in no sense facts or circumstances from which it may be
judged that he is guilty. Gentlemen, the presumption of in
nocence, evidentiary in its nature, under all the rules of law, at
tends the accused throughout the trial, and until the presumption is
overcome by the evidence in the case, and until it is shown beyond
JEREMIAH REEVES, JR., VS. STATE OF ALABAMA 175
a reasonable doubt and to a moral certainty that the presumption
must fall and that the defendant is guilty.
Now, in this case, the burden of proving that the defendant is
guilty as charged in the indictment rests upon the State, and before
a conviction can be had in this case the State must satisfy the Jury
of the defendant’s guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. Unless the
State so satisfies you of the defendant’s guilt beyond a reasonable
doubt, then the defendant is entitled to an acquittal at your hands.
For a verdict of guilty to be returned in this case, the entire Jury
shall believe from the evidence, beyond a reasonable doubt and to
a moral certainty, that the defendant is guilty as charged in the
indictment, to the exclusion of every probability of his innocence,
and every reasonable doubt of his guilt, and, if the prosecution
has failed to furnish such measure of proof, and to so impress the
minds of the Jury of the defendant’s guilt, the Jury should find
the defendant not guilty.
Now, the phrase “reasonable doubt,” is self-explanatory and ef
forts to define it do not always clarify the term, but if may help
you some to say that a doubt which would justify an acquittal
must be an actual and substantial doubt, not a mere possible doubt.
A reasonable doubt is not a mere guess or surmise, and it is not a
forced or a captious doubt. If, after considering all the evi
dence in this case, you have an abiding conviction of the truth of
the charge, then you are convinced beyond a reasonable
236 doubt, and it would be your duty to convict the defendant.
The reasonable doubt which entitles an accused to an ac
quittal is not a mere fanciful, vague, conjectural or speculative
doubt, but a reasonably substantial doubt, arising from the evi
dence and remaining after a careful consideration of the testi
mony, such as reasonable, fairminded and conscientious men would
entertain under all the circumstances.
Now, you will observe, gentlemen, that the State is not required
to convince you of the defendant’s guilt beyond all doubt, but
simply beyond all reasonable doubt and to a moral certainty. Now,
moral certainty is that degree of assurance which induces a man
of sound mind to act, without doubt, upon the conclusions to
which it leads, a certainty that convinces and directs the under
standing and satisfies the reason and judgment of those who are
bound to act conscientiously upon it.
I am going to define what is meant by circumstantial evidence.
Circumstantial evidence is the proof of certain facts and circum
stances in a given case, from which a Jury may infer other con
nected facts which usually and reasonably follow, according to the
common experience of mankind. Now, the humane provision of
the law is, that upon circumstantial evidence there should not be
a conviction unless to a moral certainty it excludes every other
176 JEREMIAH REEVES, JR., VS. STATE OF ALABAMA
reasonable hypothesis than that of the guilt of the accused. No
matter how strong may be the circumstances, if they can be recon
ciled with the theory that some other person may have done the
act, then the guilt of the accused is not shown by that full measure
of proof which the law requires.
Now, gentlemen of the jury, you have heard the testimony in
this case as to the good character of the defendant. The law on
that subject is this: “ Good character, if proved by the defendant,
and taken in connection with all the other evidence, may generate
a reasonable doubt which would entitle the defendant to an ac
quittal, even though without such proof the Jury would con
vict.”
Now, the indictment in this case charges as follows: “ The Grand
Jury of said County charge, that before the finding of this indict
ment Jeremiah Reeves, Junior, whose name is to the Grand Jury
otherwise unknown, forcibly ravished Mrs. Ann Crowder, a woman,
against the peace and dignity of the State of Alabama.”
237 Under this indictment the defendant is charged with the
offense of rape. Now, under Section 395 of Title 14 of the
Code of Alabama of 1940 it is provided: “Any person who is
guilty of the crime of rape shall, on conviction, be punished at
the discretion of the Jury, by death or imprisonment in the
penitentiary for not less than ten years.”
Now, rape, gentlemen of the jury, is having unlawful carnal
knowledge of a woman, forcibly and without her consent. The
law of Alabama is that, “ to sustain an indictment for rape, proof
of actual penetration is sufficient, when the act is shown to have
been committed against the consent of the person on whom the
offense was committed.”
Force is an indispensable element of the offense of rape. The
consent of the female yielded at any time before the act of pene
tration relieves the act of its felonious character. The force need
not be actual physical force. The force may be actual physical
force overcoming the resistance of the woman, but it is sufficient
if the force is constructive force such as duress or being put in fear.
The offense of rape is complete if the woman is made to yield
through fear, and does not consent voluntarily to the act of sexual
intercourse. Thus, one who by force and against the consent of the
female has sexual intercourse with her is guilty of rape.
Now, gentlemen, the indictment charging rape also includes the
lesser offense of assault with intent to ravish. The law of Alabama
provides that any person 'who commits an assault on another with
intent to ravish, shall, on conviction, be punished by imprison
ment in the penitentiary for not less than two nor more than twenty
years. Assault wuth intent to ravish must be a forcible attempt
to have sexual intercourse with a female against her consent. The
JEREMIAH REEVES, JR., VS. STATE OF ALABAMA 177
offense of assault with intent to rape includes all elements of rape
except the sexual act, and with an intent to have intercourse with
a female by force and against her consent. To justify a convic
tion for assault with intent to rape, the evidence must show acts
and conduct on the part of the defendant leaving no reasonable
doubt of the accused’s intentions to gratify his lustful desire
against the consent of the female and regardless of resistance.
The indictment charging rape also includes the lesser
238 offense of assault and assault and battery. The Alabama
law provides that “ any person who commits an assault, or
an assault and battery on another, shall, on conviction, be fined
not more than five hundred dollars, and may also be imprisoned in
the County Jail, or sentenced to hard labor for the County, for not
more than six months.”
Now, an assault is an attempt or offer, with force or violence, to
do a corporal hurt to another, whether from malice or wanton
ness, with such circumstances as denote at the time an intention
to do it, coupled with a present intention to convey such intention
into effect. And any touching of another in rudeness or anger
is an assault and battery.
Now, gentlemen of the jury, to the indictment in this case the
defendant has interposed two pleas. One is the plea of not guilty,
and the other is the special statutory plea of “not guilty by reason
of insanity.”
The plea of not guilty is what we call a plea of the general
issue, and under this plea the burden is upon the State to satisfy
the jury by the evidence of the defendant’s guilt of the offense
charged beyond a reasonable doubt. The State has the burden
of proving every element of the crime charged against the defend
ant, and the law requires that in order to convict, the jury must
be satisfied of the defendant’s guilt beyond a reasonable doubt
and to a moral certainty.
The plea of not guilty by reason of insanity is a special plea,
and the burden of proving this plea is upon the accused, and under
the law he has the burden of proving to the reasonable satisfac
tion of the jury his defense of insanity. Under our law, the ques
tion of the accountability of a person for criminal action can be
triable only under a special plea of insanity interposed at the
time of the arraignment of the defendant. The defense of in
sanity must be specially pleaded, and it has been pleaded in this
case, because the plea of the general issue “not guilty” does not
put in issue the question of the irresponsibility of the accused by
reason of the alleged insanity; and, without this special plea the
defendant could not offer evidence of his insanity. The purpose
of the statute has been set to separate, as far as possible, the two
defenses, “not guilty” and “not guilty by reason of insanity,” and
178 JEREMIAH REEVES, JR., VS. STATE OF ALABAMA
JEREMIAH REEVES, JR., VS. STATE OF ALABAMA 179
to have the proof directed to each of the two defenses, and
239 the verdict to respond to each of such defenses.
It has been said by an Alabama Jurist that, reason being
the common gift of God to every man, every man is presumed to
be sane—that is, of natural and normal mental condition; and, I
charge you that under the laws of Alabama every person over the
age of fourteen years charged with crime is presumed to be re
sponsible for his acts.
Now, the burden of proving that the defendant is irresponsible
is cast upon the accused, and under the law he has the burden
of clearly proving to the reasonable satisfaction of the Jury his
defense of insanity.
The proper legal rule of responsibility in criminal cases is well
settled in Alabama, and one who is so insane as to be incapable
of entertaining the criminal intent cannot be guilty of crime or
held criminally responsible for his acts. The legal tests by which
one’s responsibility for crime is judged are now as follows:
1. Where there is no capacity to distinguish between right and
wrong, as applied to the particular act, there is no legal respon
sibility.
2. Where there is such capacity, a defendant is nevertheless
not legally responsible if, by reason of the duress of mental disease,
he has so far lost the power to choose between right and wrong
as not to avoid doing the act in question, so that his free agency
was at the time destroyed; and, at the same time, the alleged crime
was so connected with such mental disease as the relation of cause
and effect, as to have been the product or offspring of it solely,
these are the tests by which you are to be guided in considering
the special plea of “not guilty by reason of insanity.”
Insanity to relieve from criminal responsibility must be caused
by or result from a disease, lesion or disorder of the brain or mind.
Not every transient departure from normal conduct is insanity.
For example, anger itself is often said to be a sort of madness, but
it is not such insanity as confers legal irresponsibility for crime.
Irresistible impulse generated by wdcked propensities will not
excuse the violation of law. Depravity is not a disease. High
240 temper, hot blood, and passion are not such mental ailments
as will excuse the commission of crime.
Now, gentlemen of the jury, in this case you have heard evidence
concerning alibi. Now, an alibi is defined as this. It is a term
used to express that mode of defense to a criminal prosecution, where
the party accused, in order to prove that he could not have com
mitted the crime with which he is charged, offers evidence to show'
that he was in another place at the time. When the defendant at
tempts to prove an alibi, the burden of proof is upon him to prove
it successfully. The burden of proof is on the State to convince the
Jury by the evidence beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant
is guilty as charged, and this burden is never discharged until after
a consideration of the whole evidence, including the evidence offered
as to an alibi, and the Jury is so convinced. In order for the evi
dence as to an alibi to be sufficient in law to generate in the minds
of the Jury a reasonable doubt of the defendant’s guilt, it must be
strong and cogent enough to reasonably satisfy the Jury, when
taken and considered with all the other evidence, that the defend
ant was at some other place, and could not have committed the act
charged. The great weight of authority supports the well established
rule, that the defendant is entitled to an acquittal if the evidence
concerning the alibi, together with all the other evidence in the case,
raises a reasonable doubt of guilt.
Now, gentlemen of the jury, if after fairly and fully considering
the evidence you are not satisfied of the defendant’s guilt beyond a
reasonable doubt and to a moral certainty, then you should acquit
the defendant, and in that event your verdict will be, “ we, the Jury,
find the defendant not guilty.”
If you are satisfied from the evidence beyond a reasonable doubt
and to a moral certainty that the defendant had sexual intercourse
with Mrs. Ann Crowder, forcibly and without her consent, and if
the defendant in this case has clearly proved to your reasonable
satisfaction his defense of insanity, then it is your duty to render
a special verdict that the defendant is not guilty by reason of in
sanity. In that event the form of your verdict would be, “we, the
Jury, find the defendant not guilty by reason of insanity.”
241 In the event the State has convinced you by the evidence
beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant is guilty of
rape as charged in the indictment, and the defendant has not
proved to your reasonable satisfaction his defense of insanity, the
form of your verdict will be, “we, the Jury, find the defendant
guilty as charged and fix his punishment at death,” or, “ We, the
Jury, find the defendant guilty as charged and fix his punishment
at (so many) years in the penitentiary,” the number of years not
being less than ten.
If you are not convinced by the evidence beyond all reasonable
doubt and to a moral certainty that the defendant is guilty of rape,
but you are convinced from the evidence beyond all reasonable
doubt and to a moral certainty that the defendant is guilty of an
assault with intent to ravish, and the defendant has not- proved to
your reasonable satisfaction his defense of insanity, your verdict
will be in this form, “We, the Jury, find the defendant guilty of an
assault with intent to ravish.” Under that verdict you do not
decide the punishment. That is entirely for the Court. You only
fix the punishment if you find the defendant guilty of rape itself.
180 JEREMIAH REEVES, JR., VS. STATE OF ALABAMA
If you are not convinced by the evidence beyond all reasonable
doubt and to a moral certainty that the defendant is guilty of rape,
or an assault with intent to ravish, but you are convinced from the
evidence beyond all reasonable doubt and to a moral certainty
that the defendant is guilty of an assault or an assault and battery,
and the defendant has not proved to your reasonable satisfaction
his defense of insanity, your verdict will be, “We, the Jury, find the
defendant guilty of an assault (or an assault and battery) and fix
his fine at (so many) dollars, not more than $500, or decline to
assess a fine.” In which event, if the Jury declines to assess a fine,
it becomes the Court’s duty to impose a hard labor sentence not
exceeding six months by imprisonment in the County Jail.
Now, members of the Jury, any verdict you reach in this case
must be a unanimous verdict, all twelve of you must agree upon that
verdict. You take this case and deliberate upon it. As I told you
before, bring to it everything you can in the way of fairness and
impartiality, consider it fairly from the evidence coming from that
stand as to the offense charged in this indictment, nothing
242 else. Designate one of your number as foreman, and let
whatever verdict you render be written on the back of the
indictment, and then I will ask that it be signed by one of your
number as foreman. I have prepared a number of forms of verdict
which I will give you to take into the room with you, to aid you
in writing on the back of the indictment whatever verdict you
reach. These are the possible verdicts that may be returned in the
case.
Is the defense satisfied?
Mr. M cG ee : Yes.
The C ourt: Is the State satisfied?
(Side bar conference between the Court and counsel, not re
quested to be taken by the Reporter.)
The C ourt: N ow, Gentlemen of the Jury, at the request of the
defendant, as he has a right to do, he has requested certain written
charges as to the law. They are principles of law which are not in
consistent with anything I have told you in the oral charge. They
are to be considered by you in your consideration of the charge.
“ The Court charges you, gentlemen of the jury, that a person
charged with a felony should not be convicted unless the evidence
excludes to a moral certainty every reasonable hypothesis but of
the defendant’s guilt; no matter how strong the circumstances are
they do not come up to the full measure of proof which the law
requires if they can be reasonably reconciled with the theory that
the defendant was innocent.”
“ The humane provision of the law is, that upon circumstantial
evidence there should not be a conviction unless to a moral certainty
JEREMIAH REEVES, JR., VS. STATE OF ALABAMA 181
182 JEREMIAH REEVES, JR., VS. STATE OF ALABAMA
it excludes every other reasonable hypothesis than that of the guilt
of the accused. No matter how strong may be the circumstances,
if they can be reconciled with the theory that some other person may
have done the act, then the guilt of the accused is not shown by that
full measure of proof the law requires.”
“ If the facts, no matter how strong, can be reconciled with the
theory that another may have committed the crime, the accused
should be acquitted.”
“ Gentlemen of the Jury, unless the evidence against the prisoner
should be such as to exclude to a moral certainty every hypothesis
but that of his guilt of the offense imputed to him, you must find
the defendant not guilty.”
243 “ I charge you, gentlemen of the jury, that you are author
ized to take into consideration any pecuniary interest any
witness may have in the result of your verdict, as to what weight
you will give the testimony of such witness.”
“ If there is a conflict in the testimony of the witnesses offered by
the State, and those offered by the defendant, the Jury must deter
mine which of said witnesses they will believe; and in determining
what weight they will attach to the testimony of any particular
witness, they may look to the manner of such witness on the stand,
and to his interest and feeling (if any) in the case, and as to whether
or not he has been contradicted by other witnesses in the cause,
or by his own previous statements.”
“ If any of the State’s witnesses have exhibited malice against
the defendant or anger, or have testified to contradictory statements
and thereby satisfied the Jury that they have not testified truly,
and are not worthy of belief, and the Jury think their testimony on
these accounts should be discarded, they may discard it altogether.”
“The Court charges you, gentlemen of the jury, that if any of
the State witnesses have exhibited bias against the defendant, or
anger, and satisfied you that they had not testified truly, and were
not worthy of belief, and you thought their testimony should be
disregarded, you may disregard it altogether.”
“A well settled rule of law that if there be two reasonable con
structions which can be given to facts proven, one favorable and
the other unfavorable to the defendant, it is the duty of the Jury
to give that which is favorable, rather than that which is unfavor
able, to the accused.”
“The Court charges you, gentlemen of the jury, the law says that
it is far better that the guilty should go unwhipped of justice than
that the innocent should be punished.”
“ The Court charges that if the State’s witnesses have exhibited
prejudice or anger against the defendant, and satisfied you that they
have not testified truly and are not worthy of belief, and you think
their testimony should be disregarded, you may disregard it alto
gether.”
“ The Court charges that, if there is a probability of defendant’s
innocence, you should acquit him.”
244 “ You may consider the pecuniary interest that any wit
ness may have in the result of your verdict in weighing the
testimony of such witness.”
“ The Court charges the Jury that if they find, from the evidence,
that Mrs. Ann Crowder, has made contradictive statements as to
the material facts in the case, or to any of such facts the Jury may
look to such contradictory statements in determining what credence
it will give to the testimony of Mrs. Ann Crowder.”
“ If any witness testifying has been impeached, then the Jury may
disregard his testimony, unless his testimony be corroborated by
other testimony.”
Gentlemen of the Jury, take the case, consider it, and arrive at a
verdict. As I have told you, it must be a unanimous verdict. Write
the form of your verdict on the back of the indictment and have it
signed by one of your number as foreman. I will give you all possi
ble forms of verdict that could be rendered in the case.
Gentlemen, take the case.
12:11 o ’clock P. M. The Jury retired to the Jury room to de
liberate.
12:45 o ’clock P. M.
JEREMIAH REEVES, JR., VS. STATE OF ALABAMA 183
Present:
The Court.
The Jury.
The Solicitor and Assistant Solicitor.
The defendant and his counsel.
V erdict
The C ourt: Gentlemen of the Jury, have you agreed upon a
verdict:
A Juror: W e have.
The Court : Let the Clerk read the verdict.
The Cl e r k : “ We, the Jury, find the defendant guilty as charged
and fix his punishment at death.”
245 The Court: Let the record show all twelve of the jurors
separately and severally and individually acknowledge this
as their verdict.
246 In the C ircuit C ourt of M ontgomery C ounty, A labama
N ovember T erm , 1952
No. 5121
State of A labama
184 JEREMIAH REEVES, JR., VS. STATE OF ALABAMA
Jerem iah R eeves, Junior
Offense— R ape
West Court Room, Court House, Montgomery, Alabama, Wed
nesday, December 3rd, 1952, 9 o’clock A. M.
Present: Hon. James J. Carter, Special Judge. William P.
Thetford, Esq., Circuit Solicitor. John N. McGee, Jr., Esq., for the
defendant. Jeremiah Reeves, Junior, the defendant.
The C ourt: Bring Jeremiah Reeves to the bar.
Jeremiah Reeves, you have been tried by a Jury and found guilty
of rape and punishment fixed at death. The judgment of the Court
is that you are guilty. Have you anything to say at this time as
to why the sentence of the law should not now be pronounced upon
you?
The D efendant : N o, sir.
The C ourt: It is, therefore, considered and ordered by the Court,
and it is the judgment and sentence of the Court, that the Sheriff of
Montgomery County shall remove the said defendant, Jerem iah
R eeves, Junior, forthwith to Kilby Prison at Montgomery, Ala
bama, where the said Jeremiah R eeves, Junior, shall remain in
custody until the 23rd day of January, 1953, and on said day in
strict accordance with the law the Warden of Kilby Prison at
Montgomery, Alabama, or such other person as may be authorized
by law, shall put the said Jerem iah R eeves, Junior, to death by
causing to pass through the body of the said Jeremiah R eeves,
Jun ior , a current of electricity of sufficient intensity to cause the
death of the said Jeremiah R eeves, Junior, and that the applica
tion and continuance of such current of electricity to pass through
the body of said Jeremiah R eeves, Junior, until he, the said Jere
m iah R eeves, Junior, is dead.
247-254 And it is further ordered by the Court that the Clerk of
this Court will issue the necessary warrant for the execu
tion of the said Jeremiah R eeves, Junior, as required by law.
The defendant appeals from the judgment of the Court and ques
tions of law arising in this case for the decision of the Supreme
Court of Alabama,
It is further ordered by the Court that pending said appeal to the
Supreme Court of Alabama, the said defendant, Jerem iah R eeves,
Junior , be confined in Kilby Prison pending said appeal to the Su
preme Court.
It is so ordered.
Mr. M cGee: I would like to sign a pauper’s oath.
The Court: I can go ahead and enter an order at this time if
you do so move. I think that is in accordance with the law, and we
can definitely know whether a transcript will be ordered for him.
The Court stands adjourned at this time. (9:05 o’clock A.
M.)
255 I n the Supreme Court of Alabama
[Title omitted]
Order of Supreme Court Passing Cause to Call of 8th D ivision
— May 14, 1953
I t I s Ordered that this cause be and the same is hereby passed to
the Call of the 8th Division, to-wit: Thursday, May 21, 1953.
256 Argument and Submission— M ay 21, 1953
(Omitted in printing)
257 [File endorsement omitted]
In the Supreme Court of Alabama
The State of Alabama— Judicial Department
Special Term 1953
3 Div. 663
Jeremiah R eeves, Jr.
JEREMIAH BEEVES, JR., VS. STATE OF ALABAMA 185
State of A labama
Appeal from Montgomery Circuit Court
Opinion— Filed August 6, 1953
M errill, Justice:
Appellant, Jeremiah Reeves, Jr., age seventeen years, was indicted
for rape by a grand jury of Montgomery County. Upon trial, the
jury found him guilty and imposed the death penalty. Judgment
and sentence were in accord with the verdict. After his motion for
a new trial was overruled, he brought this appeal.
There is no reason to make a detailed statement of the evidence.
The following summary will suffice.
The prosecutrix, a white woman, testified that about 12:15 P. M.
on July 28, 1952, a negro male entered her home and forcibly
ravished her, beat her about the head, took some money and de
parted. A neighbor testified that the prosecutrix came to her house
about 12:40 P. M. in a state of shock and hysteria; that she was
badly bruised and bleeding and asked her to report the attack to the
police. The testimony of two doctors who treated her that day
tended to support her claim that she had been ravished. Reeves was
arrested Monday, November 10,1952 at 2:10 P. M. On Wednesday
morning prosecutrix identified him at Montgomery Police Head
quarters.
258 On the trial a witness for the State testified that he saw
defendant running along a street about two blocks from
where prosecutrix lived; that he picked him up in his automobile
a short time before one o ’clock P. M. and carried him six or seven
blocks. The defendant offered some testimony that he was insane,
some as to his good character, denied his guilt and claimed certain
statements he had made were the result of coercion and promises.
He sought to prove an alibi, that he was present where a group of
people were playing dominoes, and this claim was supported by the
testimony of one witness. Certain parts of the evidence will be
more fully developed in the discussion of the matters raised in
appellant’s brief.
Counsel for defendant argue many points in brief and we consider
them as they are raised, numbering them for convenience.
1. Defendant was denied due process because he was arraigned
on the day following the return of three indictments against him by
the grand jury and required to plead to same when no copies had
been served on him.
The indictment was returned on November 14, 1952 and defend
ant was arraigned November 15th. A copy of the indictment and
venire was served on him on November 17th. Our statute requiresE
that the venire and a copy of the indictment be served on the de
fendant in a capital case at least one entire day before the day set
for trial, and that is all the notice to which he is entitled.—Title 30,
section 63, Code. In the instant case the trial was set for November
26th. “ The law neither requires that a defendant in a criminal case
shall have previous notice of the indictment nor a copy of it previous
to his arraignment.”—Dix v. State, 147 Ala. 70, 41 So. 924. The
defendant pleaded not guilty and not guilty by reason of insanity.
The record shows the arraignment to be regular in all respects.
2. Local Act No. 118, 1939 Local Acts of Alabama establishing
186 JEREMIAH REEVES, JR., VS. STATE OF ALABAMA
the jury commission of Montgomery County violates section 105
of the Constitution, and the jury commission is without legal
authority.
The local act referred to provides that the jury commission of
Montgomery County shall be composed of the circuit judges, the
judge of probate, the sheriff and the clerk of the circuit court. This
act is not violative of section 105 of the Constitution on authority
of State, ex rel. Brandon v. Prince, 199 Ala. 444, 74 So. 939. In that
case a local act which provided that the members of the board
259 of revenue of Tuscaloosa County should constitute the jury
commission was held not to violate section 105 of the Con
stitution.
3. That negroes are systematically excluded from jury service
by the jury commission.
The defendant filed a motion to quash both the indictment by the
grand jury and the petit jury panel on the ground that negroes have
been systematically excluded from the jury rolls. Circuit Judge
Eugene W. Carter recused himself on the ground that he had become
a witness in said cause and Mr. James J. Carter was appointed
special judge to try the case.
Circuit Judge Eugene W. Carter and Circuit Clerk John R.
Matthews were called as witnesses for the defendant to testify in
support of his motion to quash; Circuit Judge Walter B. Jones,
James E. Pierce, a negro school teacher, and D. Caffey, a negro
real estate dealer, were called as witnesses for the State. The testi
mony of the jury commissioners showed that there was no discrimi
nation as to race or creed and that both races were represented on
the panel to try the instant case. The negro witnesses testified that
they had been previously called for jury duty, one having served
at least six times, and that they had been requested to furnish
names of negro citizens to the jury commission. Title 30, section
20, Code, requires the names of jurors to be printed on plain white
cards all of the same size and texture and printed thereon the
name, occupation, place of residence and place of business of the
juror. Neither the' card nor the actual jury list shows the race of
the juror. Defendant showed none of the circumstances to be
present which were the basis of the holding in the case of Avery v.
Georgia, United States Supreme Court No. 648, May 25, 1953, nor
anything in conflict with our holding in Vaughan v. State, 235 Ala.
80, 177 So. 553. There was no evidence to sustain defendant’s
motion and it was properly overruled by the Court.
4-10. These propositions are concerned with the contentions that
Special Judge James J. Carter was without authority to act, and
that he did not receive the consent of the defendant as required by
section 160 of the Constitution and section 125 of Title 13, Code.
The following is quoted from the record and comes immediately
JEREMIAH REEVES, JR., VS. STATE OF ALABAMA 187
after the recording of the announcement of Judge Eugene W. Carter
that he would recuse himself:
“ The defendant’s attorney and the solicitor were called to
the bar in the presence of the defendant, and they stated
260 that the State of Alabama and the defendant has agreed
that the Hon. James J. Carter be appointed as Special
Judge in the trial of said cause, in accordance with section 124,
Title 13 of the 1940 Code of Alabama. The said James J.
Carter was called to the bench and was informed of the agree
ment that he serve as Special Judge in the case, and asked if
he would serve. He stated in addition to agreement of counsel
he would prefer to have an appointment by the Governor of
Alabama to make it doubly sure that no objection be made to
his appointment as Special Judge. The defendant’s attorney,
in the presence of the defendant, stated that at no time would
he make any objection to the appointment of James J. Carter
as Special Judge.
“ Hon. Eugene W. Carter, presiding, thereupon recused him
self from sitting at said trial; and the case was then continued
for trial until November 28th, 1952.”
The defendant offered no evidence at any time to show that the
above statement in the record is incorrect.
The Governor of Alabama did appoint James J. Carter as Special
Judge to hear the case, and defendant’s attorney agreed and stated
he had no objection thereto.
The statutory grounds of disqualification of a judge, section 6,
Title 13, Code, are not exclusive so as to eliminate grounds for dis
qualification under the common law.—Ex parte Benson, 254 Ala.
47, 47 So. 2d 180. Judge Eugene W. Carter was eminently correct
when he recused himself on the ground that he had become a witness.
The rule is stated in 48 Corpus Juris Secundum 1068, Judges, section
83 (b ) : “ A trial judge should not preside in a case in which he is
a material and necessary witness.”
11. Defendant was denied due process of law and denied his con
stitutional rights because the assistance of a private stenographer
was denied his counsel.
On the morning of November 26th, prior to Judge Eugene W.
Carter recusing himself, he had ruled that only officials of the court,
witnesses and relations of the accused could remain in the court room.
Defendant’s counsel stated that Mr. Ira Fred Watson, a private
stenographer, was supposed to be present and he wanted Mr. Watson
to assist him in the trial. The solicitor objected on the ground that
Mr. Watson was not a court official and the court denied counsel’s
request. However on November 28th, prior to the noon recess and
prior to the taking of the testimony of the State’s first witness at
188 JEREMIAH REEVES, JR., VS. STATE OF ALABAMA
JEREMIAH REEVES, JR., VS. STATE OF ALABAMA 189
two o’clock P. M., Special Judge James J. Carter presiding, the
following took place:
“ The Court : What about your motion to have a stenogra
pher assist you? You may have one if you like.
“ Mr. M cGee: I will not press that. I cannot locate him
now.”
261 12-13. Inculpatory admissions or admissions in the nature
of confessions or a confession of actual guilt by defendant
were admitted into evidence although defendant offered to show
that a previous confession had been obtained from him based on
the promise that the only way to keep out of the electric chair was
to confess this and another criminal assault.
Certain statements made by defendant to the prosecutrix and a
psychiatrist were admitted in evidence. The defendant objected
and offered to show that defendant had confessed that he had com
mitted this and other offenses after he had been taken into the
room at Kilby prison where the electric chair is located and there
told by the deputy warden of the prison that the only way to keep
out of the electric chair was to say that he committed the offense.
No such alleged confession was ever offered or introduced in evi
dence. The court permitted the defendant to testify to the above
mentioned conversation with the deputy warden but would not allow
the particulars of the alleged confession to be given in evidence
because no confession made at Kilby prison had been introduced.
The defendant contends that the rule in Huntley v. State, 250
Ala. 303, 34 So. 2d 216, applies, the rule being:
“Where a confession has been obtained, or inducement held
out, under circumstances which would render a confession in
admissible, a confession subsequently made is not admissible
unless, from proper warning of the consequences, or from other
circumstances, there is reason to presume the hope or fear
which influenced the first confession is disspelled, and in ab
sence of any such circumstances influence of the motives proved
to have been offered will be presumed to continue, and to have
produced the confession unless the contrary is shown by clear
evidence.
"**We come now to the consideration of defendant’s statements
which were admitted in evidence.
The prosecutrix testified that after the assault she next saw
defendant at police headquarters in Montgomery on Wednesday,
November 12th, that she identified him and a few minutes later
talked with him in the presence of two other women, a Lieut. Miller
and other policemen in the room. A proper predicate was laid for
the introduction of the conversation and defendant objected by
written motion. The jury was excluded and defendant was per
mitted to examine prosecutrix as to what happened in her presence.
After hearing the evidence, the court ruled the statement was volun-
ary; the jury was recalled and the following took place:
262 “ Q. I am going to ask you the question over again.
The question I asked was this. Did he make any state
ment to you at police headquarters on the 12th, Wednesday,
the 12th of November? Did you have a conversation with him?
“A. Yes, sir; I did.
“ Q. I would like you to tell the jury what conversation you
had with him, who asked the first question, what the reply was,
as best you remember.
“ A. I asked the first question.
“ Q. What was the question, what did you ask him?
“A. ‘Why did you do it?’ And to that he just shook his head,
and later he said, ‘I don’t know.’
“ Q. Did he deny he raped you?
“A. No, he did not.
“ Q. Did he recognize you?
“A. Yes.
“ Mr. M cGee: I object.
“ By the Solicitor:
“Q. Let me put it this way. Did he say anything that would
show he recognized you?
“A. Yes, he did.
“ Q. What did he say?
“ A. He was asked which house was I in— ‘where do you re
member her from?’ And he told them, ‘Cleveland Avenue, the
first one.’
“ Q. ‘Cleveland Avenue, the first one’?
“ A. Yes.
“ Q. He said that to you at that time?
“A. He was speaking to someone else, but I was in the room.
“ Q. Did you have any other conversation with him yourself?
“ A. Yes. I asked him by which door he entered the house,
and he said he entered by the back door.
“ Q. I want you to look at this defendant. Now, do you
positively identify him as the man who raped you?
“A. Yes.”
While these statements of defendant are not direct confessions of
guilt, we think they are inculpatory admissions in the nature of a
confession—that is, directly relating to the fact or circumstances of
190 JEREMIAH REEVES, JR., VS. STATE OF ALABAMA
JEREMIAH REEVES, JR., VS. STATE OF ALABAMA 191
the crime and connecting the defendant therewith, and as such are
subject to the same rules of admissibility as direct confessions, and
are therefore prima facie involuntary and inadmissible. McGehee
v. State, 171 Ala. 19, 55 So. 159; Herring v. State, 242 Ala. 85, 5 So.
2d 104; Tillison v. State, 248 Ala. 199, 27 So. 2d 43. They there
fore require a predicate showing that they were voluntary.
263 Another witness testified to a confession of defendant. The
admission of this testimony was not discussed in appellant’s
brief but it is our duty to consider it under the automatic appeal
statute.—Section 382 (1), 382 (13), Title 15, Code 1940, Pocket
Part. During the cross examination of defendant he both denied
and admitted telling Dr. Bazar, a Montgomery psychiatrist, that
he had raped prosecutrix. On rebuttal by the State, Dr. Bazar
testified that he had examined the defendant on November 13th
and November 20th for approximately twro and a half hours each
time, seeking to determine the sanity of the accused. After a
proper predicate had been laid and the court had offered to allow
defendant to present any evidence showing that anyone at that time
used any coercion or force on him, Dr. Bazar testified that the de
fendant told him that he had raped the prosecutrix. He also testi
fied that in his judgment defendant was sane.
As we have already observed, the court went into the matter of
the voluntariness of these statements out of the presence of the
jury and held them to be voluntary. This Court said in the case of
Dennison v. State, 5 Div. 550, Supreme Court, MS: “ The duty, as
we have said so many times, of determining the voluntariness vel
non of a confession so as to authorize its admissibility is addressed
to the trial court in the exercise of an enlightened discretion,” and
in Fewell v. State, 6 Div. 483, Supreme Court, MS, we find this
statement: “ This Court has held that the court’s decision allowing
a confession in evidence will not be disturbed unless it appears that
it is palpably contrary to the great weight of the evidence.—Vernon
v. State, 239 Ala. 593, 196 So. 96.” The court charged the jury on
this point as follows:
“ Now, as to any statement, or alleged confession or admission
which may have been made, the weight of such a statement or
admission is for you and you alone, and you are to determine
the weight and credibility of the evidence here in the light of
the circumstances that were existing at the time such state
ment wras given.”
The defendant was questioned from 2:10 P. M. to 7:30 P. M.
Monday, most of the day Tuesday and part of the forenoon on
Wednesday. He did not claim any physical violence or threat of
it to procure any statement from him.
We come now to the question of the psychological coercion. Un
192 JEREMIAH REEVES, JR., VS. STATE OF ALABAMA
der defendant’s own description of his interrogation it was not shown
that he was deprived of refreshment, rest or relief or that it was so
prolonged and unremitting as to accomplish extortion of an in
voluntary confession. There was no evidence or claim of the
264 employment of the “ relay technique” .
It is not disputed that defendant was held incommunicado
until the afternoon of November 12th, but there is no claim made
that he was illegally detained. The Supreme Court of the United
States has held that the requirements of the Fourteenth Amend
ment do not “ impose rules of evidence on state courts which bind
them to exclude a confession because, without coercion, it was ob
tained while a prisoner was uncounseled and illegally detained.—
Stroble v. California, 343 U. S. 181, 197; Lisbena v. California, 314
U. S. 219.”—Stein v. New York, U. S. Supreme Court No. 391, June
15, 1953.
At this point we should recall that although defendant testified
that he had been told if he would admit having raped the prosecu
trix that would keep him out of the electric chair, there was no
evidence of a confession on direct testimony offered by the State.
That came only on rebuttal from Dr. Bazar after the defendant
had been questioned about his conversation with Dr. Bazar and the
proper predicate had been laid as to the voluntariness of the state
ment. The inculpatory admissions made to the prosecutrix did
come on direct presentation of the State’s evidence. In consid
ering all the evidence, especially the fact that the solicitor told the
defendant on the afternoon of November 11th (Tuesday) that he
could make him no promises and the law would have to take its
course, and that there is no claim of coercion or promises made to
defendant when he had the conversation with the prosecutrix
Wednesday at police headquarters and the finding of the Court, after
taking evidence, that the statements were voluntary, we cannot say
that the admission of these statements was reversible error. More
over, the admissions to the prosecutrix and the confession to Dr.
Bazar did not form the basis of a conviction. The State had es
tablished the identity of this defendant as the perpetrator of the
crime by very convincing proof “ and the matter of confession was
but cumulative and approached what might properly be termed
supererogation,” Johnson v. State, 242 Ala. 278, 5 So. 2d 632, cert,
denied 316 U. S. 693, 713, or as stated in Stein v. New York, supra,
“Here the evidence of guilt * * * is enough apart from the con
fessions so that it could not be held constitutionally or legally insuffi
cient to warrant the jury verdict” .
14. After the testimony closed defendant moved for a mistrial
on the ground that counsel had just learned that one juror was
chief of the Montgomery Reserve Police Force, organized for the
purpose of tracking down rapists and burglars.
JEREMIAH REEVES, JR., VS. STATE OF ALABAMA 193
265 This motion was denied by the court on the ground that
each juror had been qualified separately and individually and
the juror had not been disqualified. Counsel for defendant then
asked to be allowed to question the juror himself. This request
was properly refused by the court under the rule of Vernon v.
State, 239 Ala. 593, 196 So. 96, and Ball v. State, 252 Ala. 686, 42
So. 2d 626, that “ objections going to the venire of the petit jury or
any member thereof, must be made before entering upon the trial
of the case on its merits under the defendant’s plea of not guilty,
and a failure to make such objections constitutes a waiver.—Peter
son v. State, 227 Ala. 361, 150 So. 156.” See also Shepherd v. Ken
drick, 245 Ala. 541, 17 So. 2d 763; Batson v. State, 216 Ala. 275, 113
So. 300.
15. The expression of an opinion by the trial judge as to a fact in
issue was reversible error.
During the trial defendant’s counsel was referring to the conver
sation of the prosecutrix with the defendant and the court stated
that it had already held that statement to be admissible as being
voluntary. Counsel for defendant moved for a mistrial which was
overruled and the court made this statement to the jury:
“ I want to explain the ruling of the court just given. The
credibility of a statement given by a witness is simply for the
jury; the court has no opinion at all, and expresses none on the
record.”
It is clear that the remark of the trial judge that he had pre
viously held the statements to be “voluntary” did not injuriously
affect the substantial rights of the defendant or make any intima
tion which tended to prejudice the defendant’s case before the jury.
The cases of Pate v. State, 19 Ala. App. 243, 96 So. 649, and Hair v.
Little, 28 Ala. 236, cited by defendant, are not applicable here.
16. The evidence is insufficient to support a conviction of rape.
The evidence was not only sufficient to take the case to the jury
on the charge of rape, but was amply sufficient to support the verdict
of the jury.
On the whole evidence with respect to the inculpatory admissions
to the prosecutrix and the confession to the doctor, there is nothing
to show that the trial court’s action in admitting them was mani
festly wrong or that defendant’s rights under the Federal Consti
tution were infringed.—Phillips v. State, 248 Ala. 510, 28 So. 2d
542; Peoples v. State, 256 Ala. 612, 56 So. 2d 665; Thomas v.
State, 257 Ala. 124, 57 So. 2d 625; Lyons v. Oklahoma, 322
266 U. S. 596; Stroble v. California, 343 U. S. 181; Stein v. New
York, supra.
In accordance with our duty in cases of this character, we have
examined the record for any reversible error, whether pressed upon
our attention or not. We have dealt herein with all questions call
ing for treatment. We find no reversible error in the record and the
cause is due to be and is affirmed.
Affirmed.
All the Justices concur.
267 In the Supreme Court of Alabama
The Court met pursuant to adjournment.
Present: Chief Justice Livingston and Associate Justices Lawson,
Simpson, Stakely, Goodwyn, and Merrill.
Montgomery Circuit Court
No. 5121
(Electrocution)
3 Div. 663
Jeremiah R eeves, Junior
v.
T he State of A labama
Judgment—August 6, 1953
Come the parties by attorneys, and the record and matters therein
assigned for errors, being submitted on briefs and duly examined
and understood by the Court, it is considered that in the record and
proceedings of the Circuit Court there is no error.
It is therefore considered, ordered, and adjudged that the judg
ment of the Circuit Court be in all things affirmed.
The time fixed by the judgment and sentence of the Circuit Court
for the execution of the prisoner, Jeremiah Reeves, Junior, having
expired pending this appeal, it is now ordered that Friday, Septem
ber 18, 1953, be and the same is hereby fixed as the date for execu
tion of the Defendant, Jeremiah Reeves, Junior.
It is further ordered that the Sheriff of Montgomery County,
Alabama, deliver the Defendant, Jeremiah Reeves, Junior, to the
Warden of Kilby Prison at Montgomery, in Montgomery County,
Alabama, and that the said Warden at Kilby Prison in Montgomery
County, Alabama, execute the judgment and sentence of the law on
Friday, September 18, 1953, before the hour of sunrise on said date
in said prison, by causing a current of electricity of sufficient in
tensity to cause death to pass through the body of the said Jeremiah
194 JEREMIAH REEVES, JR., VS. STATE OP ALABAMA
Reeves, Junior, until he is dead, and in so doing he will follow the
rules prescribed by the statutes.
It is also considered, ordered, and adjudged that the appellant,
Jeremiah Reeves, Junior, pay the costs of appeal of this Court and
of the Circuit Court, for which costs let execution issue accordingly.
(Opinion by Merrill, J. All the Justices concur.)
268 [File endorsement omitted]
In the Supreme Court of Alabama
[Title omitted]
M otion for R ehearing— Filed August 21, 1953
Comes now the Appellant in the above styled cause and moves
The Honorable Court to set aside the affirmation of the verdict and
judgment of The Lower Court and to grant unto the Appellant a
rehearing, and Appellant assigns the following grounds separately
and severally for this motion:
1. For that The Honorable Court erred in sustaining the action
of the Regular Judge in recusing himself after making certain
preliminary orders, including setting a day for trial, determining the
number of special jurors to be drawn, and drawing the said special
jurors.
2. For that The Honorable Court erred in upholding the admis
sion of the alleged inculpatory admission in the nature of a con
fession made to the prosecutrix and the alleged confesison made to
Dr. Bazar.
3. For that The Honorable Court erred in upholding the action
of The Lower Court which forced the Defendant to trial without an
opportunity for preliminary pleadings.
4. For that The Honorable Court erred in upholding the validity
of the acts of The Special Judge.
5. For that The Honorable Court erred in declaring the Jury
System of Montgomery County to be constitutional.
6. For that The Honorable Court erred in upholding the action of
The Special Judge which denied Defendant the right to testify upon
the preliminary inquiry as to the admissibility of the alleged in
culpatory admission made to prosecutrix.
7. For that The Honorable Court erred in declaring the evidence
in the instant case to be sufficient to support the conviction.
V irgil M cGee,
John N . M cGee, Jr .,
H enry H ellar,
Attorneys for Defendant.
JEREMIAH REEVES, JR., VS. STATE OF ALABAMA 195
196 JEREMIAH REEVES, JR., VS. STATE OF ALABAMA
269 In the Supreme Court of Alabama
Certificate R ecalling C ertificate of A ffirmance and C opy of
Opinion Pending Consideration of th e A pplication for R e
hearing—August 21, 1953
To the Clerk of the Circuit Court of Montgomery County, Greeting:
Whereas, in the matter of Jeremiah Reeves, Junior, Appellant, vs.
The State of Alabama, Appellee, recently pending in the Supreme
Court of Alabama, on appeal from the said Circuit Court of Mont
gomery County, our Supreme Court did on the 6th day of August,
1953 render a Judgment of Affirmance in said cause; and,
Whereas, a certificate of such action of the Supreme Court was
duly issued to you, and thereafter an application for rehearing of
said cause was filed in this Court by the Appellant on August 21,
1953:
Now, it is hereby certified, that our Supreme Court, or one of the
Justices thereof, did, on the 21st day of August, 1953, order that
the said certificate be recalled. And you will accordingly return the
same to this office at once, together with copy of the opinion in said
cause issued to you.
Witness, J. Render Thomas, Clerk of the Supreme Court of Ala
bama, at the Capitol, this 21st day of August, 1953.
J. R ender T hom as,
Clerk of the Supreme Court of Alabama.
August 26, 1953. Certificate of affirmance and copy of opinion
returned to Supreme Court pending consideration of appellant’s
application for rehearing.
270 In the Supreme Court of Alabama
[Title omitted]
Order Overruling A ppellant ’s A pplication for R ehearing etc.
—November 27, 1953
It is ordered that the application for rehearing filed by the appel
lant in this cause on August 21st, 1953, after being duly examined
and considered by the Court, be and the same is hereby overruled.
The time fixed by the judgment and sentence of the Circuit Court
for the execution of the prisoner, Jeremiah Reeves, Junior, having
expired pending this appeal, as shown by the former Order of this
Court, and the time heretofore fixed by the order, judgment and
sentence of the Supreme Court of Alabama for the execution of the
prisoner, Jeremiah Reeves, Junior, having expired pending con
sideration of the application for rehearing,
It is now ordered that Friday, January 22nd, 1954, be fixed as
the date for the execution of the Defendant, Jeremiah Reeves,
Junior.
It is therefore ordered that the Sheriff of Montgomery County,
Alabama, deliver the Defendant, Jeremiah Reeves, Junior, to the
Warden of Kilby Prison at Montgomery, in Montgomery County,
Alabama, and that the said Warden of Kilby Prison, in Montgomery
County, Alabama, execute the order, judgment and sentence of the
law on Friday, January 22nd, 1954, on said day in said prison, by
causing a current of electricity of sufficient intensity to cause death
to pass through the body of the said Jeremiah Reeves, Junior, until
he is dead, and in so doing he will follow the rules prescribed by the
Statutes.
It is also considered, ordered, and adjudged that the Appellant
pay the costs of appeal of this Court and of the Circuit Court, for
which costs let execution issue accordingly.
(All the Justices concur.)
271 In the Supreme Court of Alabama
[Title omitted]
P etition for Stay of E xecution P ending Petition for C ertiorari
Comes now the appellant in the above-styled cause and petitions
the Honorable Court to suspend execution of the sentence in the
above case and to stay execution of the Death Sentence heretofore
set for January 22, 1954, and as grounds for his said petition appel
lant shows the Honorable Court the following:
1. That a Petition for a Writ of Certiorari is now being prepared
for presentation to the Supreme Court of the United States asking
that Honorable Court to review questions of Federal Consitutional
Law which arose on the trial of the said case and on appeal of said
case to this Honorable Court.
2. That execution of the sentence in this case should be suspended
until the Supreme Court of the United States rules upon the said
Petition for Writ of Certiorari.
(S.) V irgil M cG ee.
Peter A. H all.
Orzell B illingsley, Jr .
Duly sworn to by Virgil McGee. Jurat omitted in printing.
JEREMIAH REEVES, JR., VS. STATE OF ALABAMA 197
198 JEREMIAH REEVES, JR., VS. STATE OF ALABAMA
272 I n th e Supreme C ourt of A labama
[Title omitted]
Order G ranting P etition for Stay of E xecution P ending P eti
tion for Certiorari— January 14, 1954
W hereas, the Judgment of the Circuit Court of Montgomery
County, Alabama, in the case of Jeremiah Reeves, Junior, Appellant,
v. The State of Alabama, Appellee, 3 Div. No. 663, was affirmed by
this Court on the 6th day of August, 1953, and the date of the
execution of the sentence of the Circuit Court was reset and fixed
by this Court and the said Jeremiah Reeves, Junior, was ordered to
be electrocuted on Friday, September 18, 1953; and,
W hereas, the said Jeremiah Reeves, Junior, thereafter filed an
application for rehearing on the 21st day of August, 1953, which
said application for rehearing was overruled by this Court on the
27th day of November, 1953, and the date of execution of the Su
preme Court of Alabama was reset and fixed by , this Court for
Friday, January 22, 1954; and,
W hereas, the said Jeremiah Reeves, Junior, by his Attorneys, has
petitioned this Court for a suspension and stay of the execution of
said sentence, in order to give sufficient time to petition the Su
preme Court of the United States for a Writ of Certiorari to be
directed to this Court for a hearing of said cause in the Supreme
Court of the United States, or to perfect an appeal of said cause to
the Supreme Court of the United States.
Now, T herefore, I t I s Ordered on petition of the Defendant,
Jeremiah Reeves, Junior, that the date of the execution of the death
sentence heretofore entered in this cause for Friday, January 22nd,
1954, be and the same is hereby reset and fixed for Friday, March
26th, 1954, and the sentence of the Court will, on said date,
273 be carried out in all respects according to the law of this
State.
I t I s F urther Ordered that until final execution of the sentence
of the Court, jurisdiction is hereby retained over said cause.
I t I s F urther Ordered that the Sheriff of Montgomery County,
Alabama, deliver the Defendant (Appellant) Jeremiah Reeves,
Junior, to the Warden of Kilby Prison at Montgomery, Alabama,
and that the said Warden of Kilby Prison at Montgomery, Ala
bama, execute the judgment and sentence of the law on Friday,
March 26, 1954, on said day in said prison by causing a current of
electricity of sufficient intensity to cause death to pass through the
body of the said Jeremiah Reeves, Junior, until he is dead, and in
so doing he will follow the rules prescribed by the Statutes.
JEREMIAH REEVES, JR., VS. STATE OF ALABAMA 199
It I s A lso Considered that the Appellant pay the costs of appeal
of this Court and of the Circuit Court.
(All the Justices concur.)
274 (Clerk’s Certificate to foregoing transcript omitted in
printing.)
275-276 Supreme C ourt of T he U nited States, October
T erm , 1953
No. —
Jerem iah R eeves, Jr ., petitioner
State of A labama
Order Extending T ime to F ile Petition for W rit of Certiorari
—February 17, 1954
Upon Consideration of the application of counsel for petitioner,
I t Is Ordered that the time for filing petition for writ of certi
orari in the above-entitled cause be, and the same is hereby extended
to and including March 12th, 1954.
E arl W arren,
Chief Justice of the United States.
Dated this 17th day of February, 1954.
277-282 Petitioner ’s D esignation of the R ecord— Filed July
21, 1954
[Omitted in printing]
283-287 R espondent’s Cross D esignation of th e R ecord— Filed
July 29, 1954
[Omitted in printing]
200 JEREMIAH REEVES, JR., VS. STATE OF ALABAMA
288-289 Supreme C ourt op T he U nited States
No. 481 Misc., October Term, 1953
[Title omitted]
Order Granting Certiorari—June 7, 1954
On petition for writ of Certiorari to the Supreme Court of the
State of Alabama.
On consideration of the motion for leave to proceed herein in
forma pauperis and of the petition for writ of certiorari, it is or
dered by this Court that the motion to proceed in forma pauperis be,
and the same is hereby, granted; and that the petition for writ of
certiorari be, and the same is hereby, granted, and the case is trans
ferred to the appellate docket.
And it is further ordered that the duly certified copy of the
transcript of the proceedings below which accompanied the petition
shall be treated as though filed in response to such writ.
☆ U. S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE: 1954 309115 177