Jackson v. Georgia Appendix

    A P P E N D IX

Bwpttm Ctmtri uf llj? Ittttefc #tatra
Term, 1971

N o. 69-5030

Lucius J ackson,

— V.— .

Georgia

Petitioner,

ON WRIT OP CERTIORARI TO THE SUPREME COURT OF GEORGIA

PETITION FOR CERTIORARI FILED MARCH 4, 1970 
CERTIORARI GRANTED JUNE 28, 1971



Petitioner,

ON WRIT OP CERTIORARI TO THE SUPREME COURT OP GEORGIA

Bnprmt (ftmtrt uf %  Mntfrft States
Term, 1971 

No. 69-5030

Lucius J ackson, 

Georgia

i n d e x

Page
Record from the Superior Court of Chatham County, Georgia

Relevant Docket E ntries ___________________________  1
Indictment filed November 5, 1968 ___________________  2
Verdict of the Jury, December 10, 1968 _____________  4
Motion for continuance and Psychiatric Examination _ 5
Order denying continuance, November 26, 1968 ______ 7
Order of Court for Psychiatric Examination before the 

tria l of the case, November 26, 1968 _______________  9
Motion for change of venue and order denying, dated 

December 10, 1968 _______________________________  10
Defendant’s special plea of insanity, filed December 10,

1968 ___________________________________________ ’ 12
Jury verdict on special plea of in san ity ______________ 13
Sentence of the C o u rt____ _________________________  13

Clerk’s Certificate, dated August 12, 1969—Copy of rec­
ord from Superior Court of Chatham County, Georgia 
to Supreme Court of Georgia _____________________  14



11 I N D E X

Page
Record from the Superior Court of Chatham County, Georgia 

—Continued

Transcript of trial, December 10, 1968, No. 17,914 ___  15
Testimony (Pre-Trial) ________________________ 16
Motion for continuance ________________________ 16
Motion for Psychiatric Examination _____________  16
Motion for change of venue ____________________  17
Special Plea of Insanity _______________________  17
Testimony on Special Plea of Insanity __________  21

Voir Dire ________________________________  21
Testimony of Dr. Henry A. Brandt 

—direct ____________________________  22
—cross _____________________________  30

Charge of the Court ___________________________  31
Trial testimony _______________________________  33

Voir Dire Excerpts ________________________  33
Motion for change of venue ________________  41
Trial before ju ry  __________________________  42

Testimony of Mrs. Mary Rose 
-—direct ____________________________  42

Testimony of Dora Southward 
—direct ____________________________  60

Melba Lanier
—direct ____________________________  63

Detective Billy W. Fields 
—direct ____________________________  65
■—cross _____________________________  67

Doctor Joseph Doolan
—direct ____________________________  69

Leman Alan Lanier
—direct ____________________________  70

Sergeant James Stevens 
—direct ____________________________  73
—cross ________    77

Robert J. Hazen
—direct ____________________________  78



I N D E X iii 

Page
Record from the Superior Court of Chatham County, Georgia 

—Continued
Transcript of trial, December 10, 1968, No. 17,914— 

Continued
Sergeant James Stevens (recalled)

—direct ___________________________  82
—cross ___________________________  83

State Rests ___________________________________  83
Defense rests _________________________________  84
Exhibits ______________________________________  85
Charge of Court _______________________________  107
Certificate ____________________________________  111

Opinion and Judgment of the Supreme Court of Georgia,
Felton, J., December 4, 1969 __________________________  112

Order granting motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis
and granting petition for w rit of certiorari _____________ 117



IN THE SUPERIOR COURT
OF CHATHAM COUNTY, GEORGIA

1

State of Georgia

v.
Lucious J ackson

CHRONOLOGICAL INDEX OF 
RELEVANT DOCKET ENTRIES

1968
November 5 Indictment
November 26 Motion for Continuance and Psychiatric Ex­

amination and Orders Thereon
December 10 Motion for Change of Venue and Order 

Thereon
December 10 Special Plea of Insanity
December 10 Jury Verdict on Special Plea of Insanity
December 10 Jury Verdict on Indictment
December 10 Sentence of the Court

1969
August 8 Notice of Appeal



2

GEORGIA, CHATHAM COUNTY

THE GRAND JURORS SELECTED, CHOSEN, AND 
SWORN FOR THE COUNTY OF CHATHAM, TO- 
WIT:

1 Dwight J. Bruce Foreman
2 Fred L. Shearouse 13 T. L. McCumber
3 David L. Meddin 14 Nancy T. Collier
4 Perry J. Singer 15 Guy W. Witmer
5 James E. Averett 16 Richard R. Chase
6 Francis M. Brannen 17 Charles A. Worden
7 Samuel B. Nichols 18 Edward A. Garvin
8 Oscar B. Hadden 19 Louis C. Matthews
9 Thomas M. Wise 20 J. B. McKlerley

10 Claude R. Sills 21 B. B. Jones
11 Julian B. Space 22 E. L. Cowart
12 Lee A. Rivers 23 Robert D. Reid

in the name and behalf of the citizens of Georgia, charge 
and accuse LUCIOUS JACKSON, JR. of the county and 
State aforesaid, with the offense of RAPE for that the 
said Defendant in the County of Chatham and State of 
Georgia aforesaid, on the 3rd day of October in the year 
of our Lord one thousand nine hundred and sixty-eight, 
with force and arms, In and upon one Mrs. Mary Rose, 
a female, in the peace of God and said State, then and 
there being, did feloniously make an assault, and her the 
said Mrs. Mary Rose, did then and there unlawfully beat, 
and did then and there forcibly and against her will did 
ravish and carnally know; contrary to the laws of the 
State of Georgia, the good order, peace and dignity there­
of.

/ s /  Andrew J. Ryan, Jr. 
Solicitor General 
Eastern Judicial Circuit of 

Georgia



3

IN THE SUPERIOR COURT 
OF CHATHAM COUNTY

September Term, 1968 

No. 177914 

State

vs.
Lucious J ackson, J r. 

RAPE
B. W. F ields 
Prosecutor

True Bill 
11/5 1968

,/s/ Dwight J. Bruce 
Foreman

Minute Book 442 Folio 435
499

Andrew J. Ryan, J r. 
Solicitor General E. J. C. of 

Georgia



4

Witnesses for the State:
B. W. Fields, W. R. Freeman, Daniel Rose, J. R. 
Harley, Mary George Rose, Dr. Joseph Doolen, L. A. 
Lanier, Dora Southward, Melba Lanier, Robert J. 
Hazen, James Stevens, C.C.P.

The Defendant Lucious Jackson, Jr. being in open 
Court, waives arraignment, pleads Not Guilty, and puts 
self upon the country.

/ s /  Bobby L. Hill 
Atty. for Deft.

The State says that he is Guilty, and will so prove 
this 10 day of Dec. 1968.

,/s/ Andrew J. Ryan, Jr.
Solicitor General E. J. C. of 

Georgia

We the jury find the defendant Guilty as charged.

Respectfully submitted,
,/s/ Margaret Oswald 

Dec. 10, 1968

This indictment was returned into Open Court, on the 
5 day of November, 1968.

,/s/ Ben P. Axson 
Clerk
Superior Court of Chatham 

County, Georgia



IN THE SUPERIOR COURT
OF CHATHAM COUNTY

Rape, Burglary, Larceny, Assault and 
Battery, and Escape

State of Georgia

vs
Lucious J ackson, J r.

Motion for Continuance and 
P sychiatric E xamination

Now comes the defendant in the above-styled case by 
and through his attorney, and moves this Honorable 
Court for an order continuing the trial of his case for 
a period of sixty days in order that the aforesaid de­
fendant may receive a thorough and complete psychiatric 
examination by persons selected by his attorney, and to 
be reimbursed by the State. As grounds, therefore, the 
defendant shows:

1.
That he is a pauper without funds and unable to pay 

any doctor for the expense of examining him.

2.

That he is unable to plead knowingly and intelligently 
to the charges against him, or to aid his attorney in his 
defense, unless and until he is ensured of his sanity at 
present and at the time when the crimes of which he 
has been accused and indicted were allegedly committed.

3.
That his counsel had good reasons to believe that the 

aforesaid defendant is not in full possession of his mental 
facilities at the present, nor was he at the time of his 
alleged crimes, and that he is therefore unable to know­
ingly and intelligently aid in his defense or stand trial.



6

WHEREFORE, the defendant prays that:
(A) This trial be continued for a period of sixty (60) 

days from the date originally scheduled, being December 
9, 1968.

(B) That psychiatrist and psychologist selected by the 
defendant’s attorney be permitted to examine the afore­
said defendant.

(C) That the reasonable bills of such doctors be borne 
by the State of Georgia.

(D) That such other and further relief be granted as 
it meet and just.

/ s /  Bobby L. Hill
Attorney for Defendant 
458y2 West Broad Street 
Savannah, Georgia, 31401



7

Rape, Burglary, Larceny, Assault and 
Battery, and Escape

State

IN THE SUPERIOR COURT
OF CHATHAM COUNTY, GEORGIA

vs

Lucious J ackson, J r.

Order

After consideration of the Motion for Continuance and 
for Psychiatric Examination filed by the defendant in 
the above case,

IT IS ORDERED that the Motion for Continuance be, 
and the same is, denied.

The Motion for a Psychiatric Examination is granted, 
and an order has today been entered referring the de­
fendant to Dr. Henry A. Brandt, a qualified psychiatrist 
of this city, for such examination and report.

This 26th day of November, 1968.

/ s / Dunbar Harrison 
Judge
Superior Court, E.J.C. of

Ga.



8

SUPERIOR COURT

17912
17914

State of Georgia

vs
Lucious J ackson, J r.

[Filed in Office, Nov. 27, 1968, / s /  P. R. Schreck, 
Dep. Clerk, Superior Court, Chatham County, Ga.]

Bobby L. H ill 
Attorney at Law 
458% West Broad Street 
Savannah, Georgia 31401



9

Rape—17914 
Burglary—17912

State

vs
Lucious J ackson, J r.

Order of Court for P sychiatric E xamination 
Before the Trial of the  Case

IN THE SUPERIOR COURT
OF CHATHAM COUNTY, GEORGIA

The defendant in the above case, LUCIOUS JACK- 
SON, JR., having been confined in the County Jail on 
a charge of rape and burglary, and

There having been raised the question of the mental 
capacity of said defendant, and it being felt that an 
examination is necessary so that a proper trial of the 
case can be had,

NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS ORDERED that a mental 
or psychiatric examination be made by Dr. Henry A. 
Brandt, a properly qualified psychiatrist, and that said 
doctor submit a complete comprehensive report, in writ­
ing, for the use of the Court, with a copy thereof to the 
Solicitor General of this Circuit and to counsel for the 
defendant.

ORDERED FURTHER that the expense of such an 
examination be paid out of the County Treasury of Chat­
ham County without further order from this Court.

This November 26, 1968.

,/s/ Dunbar Harrison 
Judge
Superior Court, E.J.C. of 

Ga.



IN THE SUPERIOR COURT 
FOR THE COUNTY OF CHATHAM 

STATE OF GEORGIA

Criminal Action No. 17914

State of Georgia

10

vs.
Lucious J ackson, J r.

Motion for Change of Venue

Comes Now, LUCIOUS JACKSON, JR. and shows the 
following:

1.
That he is charged by indictment, with the crimes of 

Rape, Escape, Larceny, and Assault.

2 .

That he is scheduled to be tried for said offenses dur­
ing the December term of the Chatham County Superior 
Court.

3.
That he pleads not guilty to said crimes.

4.
That Defendant is a citizen of the United States and 

the State of Georgia and is of the race most commonly 
referred to as Negro.

5.
That the Savannah Morning News and Evening Press, 

which is generally circulated in Chatham County, did 
publish and distribute on at least fifteen (15) occasions 
for conspicious and public consumption in Chatham 
County information and statements which would lead its 
readership to believe that said Defendant had committed 
the offenses as charged against the peace and dignity of 
the State and against the laws of the State of Georgia.



11

That the circumstances surrounding Defendants escape 
from the custody of County officials and subsequent ar­
rest became a “political football” and engendered much 
discussion, pro and con, among local political aspirants 
who were then pending general elections—seeking office. 
All of which was constantly before the public via News­
papers, radio, and television.

7.
That as a result thereof, an impartial jury cannot be 

obtained within Chatham County to try the cause.

8.

That this Motion is made in good faith and not for 
delay.

WHEREFORE said Defendant moves this Court on 
cause shown to change and transfer Defendant’s trial to 
any county that may be agreed upon by the Solicitor 
General and the Defendant or his Counsel, to be tried 
in the county agreed upon alternatively; to any county 
aside from Chatham County, which this Honorable Court 
selects, which will afford said Defendant an impartial 
jury.

Respectfully submitted,

,/s/ Bobby L. Hill 
Bobby L. H ill 
Attorney for Defendant 
458% West Broad Street 
Savannah, Georgia

This is to certify that I have this day mailed a copy 
of the foregoing Motion to Sol. Andrew J. Ryan, Attor­
ney for Defendant, by depositing the same in the United 
States mails properly addressed, with adequate postage 
thereon.

This 4th day of December, 1968.

6.



12

Order

The foregoing Motion having been read and consid­
ered, it is hereby denied.

This 10th day of Dec. 1968.

,/s/ Dunbar Harrison
Judge Superior Court

IN THE SUPERIOR COURT 
OF CHATHAM COUNTY, GEORGIA

Criminal Action No. 17914

State of Georgia

vs.
Lucious J ackson, J r.

Special P lea of Insanity

COMES NOW the defendant named in this Bill of In­
dictment, and he alleges and says that at this time of 
trial he is insane; that he has not sufficient mind and 
mental capacity to understand the nature and object of 
the proceeding against him, and does not rightly compre­
hend his own condition in reference to such proceedings; 
and that he is incapable of making his defense or of 
rendering to his counsel such assistance as a proper 
defense to the Indictment demands.

WHEREFORE, defendant prays that this his special 
plea of insanity be inquired into by the Court; that the 
same be sustained; and that such further proceedings 
be had as are in conformity with law.

,/s/ Bobby L. Hill 
Bobby L. H ill 
458% West Broad Street 
Savannah, Georgia 31401 
Attorney for Defendant



13

We the Jury Find against the Plea of the defendant.

,/s/ [Illegible]
Foreman
December 10, 1968

[Filed in Office, Dec. 10, 1968, ,/s/ Ben P. Axson, 
Clerk, S.C.C.C., Ga.]

Minute Book 42 Folio 499

IN THE SUPERIOR COURT 
OF CHATHAM COUNTY, GEORGIA 

EASTERN JUDICIAL CIRCUIT
December 1968 Term

Indictment No. 17914

Charge: Rape
Plea: Not Guilty
Verdict: Guilty

State of Georgia 
vs

Lucious J ackson, J r.

Sentence of the Court

The above defendant, Lucious Jackson, Jr. having on 
December 10, 1968 at the present Term of Court, been 
convicted in the Superior Court of Chatham County, 
Georgia, of the offense of rape, a capital crime, without 
recommendation,

IT IS THEREFORE CONSIDERED, ORDERED 
AND ADJUDGED that the said Lucious Jackson, Jr. be 
delivered to the Director of Corrections for electrocution



14

at such penal institution as may be designated by said 
Director, and the said defendant shall, on January 10, 
1969, be put to death by electrocution in the manner 
provided by law.

IN OPEN COURT, this December 10, 1968.

,/s/ Dunbar Harrison 
Judge
Superior Court Eastern Ju­

dicial Circuit of Georgia
Andrew J. Ryan, J r.
Solicitor General

CLERK’S OFFICE, SUPERIOR COURT

State of Georgia 
Chatham County

I, BEN P. AXSON, Clerk of the Superior Court of 
Chatham County, Georgia do hereby certify: That the 
foregoing pages, hereto attached, contain the Original 
Notice of Appeal together with a true and complete copy 
of those portions of the record required by the Notice 
of Appeal to be transmitted to the Supreme Court of 
Georgia, in the case of THE STATE appellee versus 
LUCIOUS JACKSON, JUNIOR, Appellant.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my 
official signature and affixed the Seal of the Superior 
Court, at the City of Savannah, County and State afore­
said upon the 12th day of August in the year of our 
Lord One Thousand Nine Hundred and Sixty Nine.

,/s/ Ben P. Axson 
Clerk
Superior Court, Chatham 

County, Georgia
[SEAL]



15
[fol. 1]

IN THE SUPERIOR COURT 
OF CHATHAM COUNTY, GEORGIA

Indictment No. 17,914

Rape

State op Georgia 
vs

Lucious J ackson, J unior

Transcript of the Trial Proceedings in the above-styled 
case, heard before the Honorable DUNBAR HARRISON, 
Judge of the Superior Court of Chatham County, Geor­
gia, and a Jury, on the 10th day of December, 1968.

Appearances

For the Prosecution:
Andrew J. Ryan, J r., District Attorney, E.J.C. 

of Ga., Chatham County Courthouse, Savannah, 
Georgia

Andrew J. Ryan, III, Assistant District Attor­
ney, E.J.C. of Ga., Chatham County Courthouse, 
Savannah, Georgia

For the Defendant:
Bobby L. H ill, Attorney at Law, 458% West 

Broad Street, Savannah, Georgia

Filed in office this 23 day of June 1969.

,/s/ Ben P. Axson 
Clerk
Superior Court, Chatham 

County, Georgia



16

[fol. 3] NOTE: (Subsequent to roll call of the jurors,
the following transpired.)

* * *
THE COURT: All right, Mr. Ryan.
MR. RYAN: We have one case, sir. The State versus 

Lucious Jackson, Junior. He’s charged with rape, sir. 
The state’s ready, sir.

THE COURT: How about defense counsel?
MR. HILL: We’re not ready, Your Honor. We’d like

to at this time move the Court to continue the case on the 
ground that counsel stands in his place and says that he 
needs additional time to prepare for a case of this magni­
tude. More than that, that counsel has heretofore re­
quested from the Court a psychiatric examination for the 
defendant, and we take the position that that motion was 
effectively denied.

THE COURT: In what way?
MR. HILL: In that counsel also sought sixty days

continuance—
THE COURT: I’m talking about the psychiatric ex­

amination.
MR. HILL: —that counsel sought sixty days in ad­

dition to the psychiatric examination, and that would 
have been necessary for counsel to name the psychiatrists 
[fol. 4] —a panel of them—himself rather than have the 
Court name them.

THE COURT: What psychiatrists do you have in
mind?

MR. HILL: Well, I have not selected them at this
point. I am interested in making an inquiry and naming 
them. Of course, inasmuch as the Court named one, one 
could not move forward on that point.

THE COURT: Anything else?
MR. HILL: I think it’s—the so-called psychiatric ex­

amination that the defendant has had lacks the requisite 
of a psychiatric examination in that it would have called 
for some observation. I have a letter from Doctor Brandt 
which indicates that he examined the defendant on the 
2nd and the report was made on the 3rd, which is some 
indication that it is mere fanciful and that it does not 
carry out the intent either of the Court or of the statute



17

which permits psychiatric examinations in the event that 
—and counsel is of the mind that the defendant is of 
diminishing responsibility. And it’s for that- reason that 
I think the examination that is had is insufficient and a 
mere form and has no substance. From my reading of 
this letter, it indicates nothing in depth about this defend­
ant, that he had been examined and observed by the 
[fol. 5] psychiatrist. And we would think that it would 
deny him due process of law to have him go before this 
Court without further examination and observation.

THE COURT: Anything else?
MR. HILL: On that motion, yes, that’s all, Your

Honor.
THE COURT: Denied.
MR. HILL: We’d like to move at this time for a

change of venue in this case in that it has been before 
the public media numerous times, both TV, radio, the 
newspapers; and it is our feeling that this defendant 
could not receive a fair trial under the circumstances 
and could not—we could not draw a fair and impartial 
jury.

THE COURT: Do you have that in writing—the mo­
tion in writing?

MR. HILL: Yes, we’ll submit that in writing, Your
Honor, but we do want to orally submit that. To deny it 
would deny him due process of law under the Constitu­
tion of the United States pursuant to the Fourteenth and 
the Fifth Amendments to the Constitution. We’d just 
like to add that to this motion in that it’s not:—

THE COURT: Anything else?
* * * *

[fol. 8] MR. HILL: All right. I’d like to at this time
enter a special plea of insanity.
NOTE: (A document was presented to the Clerk by

Mr. Hill.)
THE COURT: Are you ready on the special plea of

insanity?
MR. RYAN: As soon as I can have a chance to get the

doctor, sir. I’ve got to have that privilege. I think I can



18

be maybe within the next hour. We can strike a jury for 
it. I’m sure we can get him within the next hour.

THE COURT: Get him on the telephone and see if
you can get him up here.
NOTE: (Brief pause)

CAPTAIN HALLMAN: Your Honor, the doctor is
not immediately available. I expect to talk with him in the 
next ten minutes.

THE COURT: It’s a pity that this special plea wasn’t
filed at least by yesterday to give the solicitor an oppor­
tunity to get the witnesses in here.

MR. HILL: That’s just further evidence that counsel
is not prepared to try this case.
[fol. 9] THE COURT: It’s further evidence that coun­
sel should have done something about it.

* * * *
[fol. 11] THE COURT: Do you want the defendant in
here while you’re making all these motions?

MR. HILL: I don’t think it’s absolutely necessary. I
take the position that he’s not going to understand any­
thing that I’m doing throughout the proceeding.

THE COURT: Of course, we’ll just consider that off­
hand opinion from you as to whether or not he’d under­
stand it or not.

MR. HILL: Your Honor, we have—counsel has clipped
from the newspaper all of the various clippings of the 
[fol. 12] newspapers related to this case, and we would 
likt to have some manner to enter them into the record 
if it is permissible or either if it is agreeable with Mr. 
Ryan. We think it’s pertinent on the question of the 
change of venue only, of course. The due process question 
which relates to the change of venue, we think, requires'—

THE COURT: Any objection?
MR. RYAN: Yes, sir, objection. I don’t want them

introduced before this jury, sir. . . . motion would be good.
THE COURT: What was that?
MR. RYAN: If this jury should have these things

read before them, this jury would be disqualified I think. 
According to what the—



19

THE COURT: I assume that he’s not going to read
all those things.

MR. HILL: We have no desire to read them. We just
want them in the record.

THE COURT: Put them in.
MR. RYAN: Put them in the record as far as I’m

concerned. I just don’t want them read.
NOTE: (At this time newspaper clippings were marked

Defendant’s Exhibit Nos. 1 through 9 respectively 
for identification in connection with the motion for 

[fol. 13] change of venue and admitted in evidence with­
out objection.)

MR. HILL: Those are all the motions we have at
this time, Your Honor.

THE COURT: Well, I haven’t acted on your motion
for a change of venue. Mr. Ryan, do you have anything 
to say as to that?

MR. RYAN: I think he’s got to prove more than news­
paper articles, sir, because this—this jury is going to 
answer certain questions on the voir dire, sir, and if they 
can answer them I submit that the jury is qualified to try 
this defendant or any other defendant.

THE COURT: Well, I’ll hold up his motion here for—
MR. HILL: Your Honor, I just want to say one thing

on that. The case of Sheppard versus Ohio is perhaps the 
most patent and clear case on the question of whether or 
not the Court is obligated to grant a change of venue when 
there has been undue publicity. Of course, the Court de­
termines what’s undue publicity and that leaves it to this 
Court. But the case of Sheppard versus Ohio is a very 
clear one, that—that the trial court has the duty and the 
responsibility to grant a change of venue when, in fact, 
there has been undue publicity. And I take the position 
[fol. 14] that there has. Our motion does set out pretty 
clearly that it’s been on TV, radio, and in numerous 
clippings, fifteen or twenty there, during the political 
season—at the—the worst season for this—

THE COURT: It’s entirely possible that no member of
this jury read the newspaper, looked at television, listened 
to the radio, and they know absolutely nothing about the



20

case. The fact that there’s been some publicity given to 
it—unless you can show that the jury has been prejudiced 
as a result of that undue publicity, I don’t think the Shep­
pard case would apply.

MR. HILL: Well, the Sheppard case—
THE COURT: The point wasn’t even raised in the

Sheppard case until some ten or fifteen years later-—after 
the fellow had served fifteen years—

MR. HILL: Well, except that that decision held that
one did not have to show in fact that each and every juror 
was prejudiced by—by the publicity. The Sheppard case 
held that if there was a reasonable possibility. We could 
not inquire into the minds of these jurors as to whether 
or not each—each of them were prejudiced by it.
[fob 15] THE COURT: Why not? You’re going to be 
given an opportunity to ask each individual juror any­
thing you want to ask him. That didn’t happen in the 
Sheppard case.

MR. HILL: Well, as you know, it was argued in that
case that some people like to be jurors.

THE COURT: I’m not—I have no quarrel with the 
Supreme Court of the United States. I just accept what 
they rule. I’m not accepting it in this particular case 
until you can show something further than you—than 
those newspaper clippings. A lot of people don’t believe 
anything they read in the newspaper. Other people take 
it with a grain of salt if you’ll excuse the expression. 
Sometimes I’m amazed by the difference between the 
facts that are reported in the newspaper concerning a 
particular crime and the evidence that comes from the wit­
ness stand. It’s entirely different.

MR. HILL: Well, that’s no high tribute to our pubilc
media, but I—

THE COURT: I’m not paying tribute to anything.
I’m just stating a fact as I see it.
[fol. 16] MR. HILL: Well, Sheppard does hold that if 
there’s a reasonable possibility—

THE COURT: I’m thoroughly familiar with Shep­
pard. I see his wife is divorcing him now. That shows 
you how I keep up with these things. Are we through 
with the motions?



21

MR. HILL: Yes, we are for this time.
THE COURT: Let’s see. What’s next? The special

plea of insanity.
MR. RYAN: We’ve got to try to get Doctor Brandt,

sir. That’s all.
NOTE: (Collequy concerning the availability of Doctor

Brandt.)
THE COURT: Well, let’s see. Is there any reason

why we can’t select a jury to try the special plea of in­
sanity?

MR. RYAN: I don’t see why we can’t, sir, and excuse
the rest of them until a certain time, sir.

THE COURT: Any objection to that?
MR. HILL: None whatsoever, Your Honor.

NOTE: (Bench/Bar Conference)
NGTE: (The defendant was brought into the courtroom.)
NOTE: (Two panels of jurors were called and qualified

by the Clerk as to relationship to the defendant.)
THE COURT: Now any questions you gentlemen

want to ask the panel of twenty-four jurors? Any ques­
tions?
[fol. 17] MR. HILL: If you would just indulge us one
minute, Your Honor.
NOTE: (During voir dire by defense counsel, the follow­

ing transpired.)
MR. HILL: Mr. Cochran, do you believe that from

time to time people have a diminished responsibility?
MR. RYAN: Now, if Your Honor please, that’s not

a proper question. That’s not the test under the Georgia 
law.

THE COURT: Well, of course, I’ll give the jury the
law on the subject. But if he wants to ask the question 
for his own information, let him ask him.

JUROR: I would need a little further qualification
of your question to give you a good answer . . .



22

MR. HILL: Do you believe that there are degrees of
insanity?

JUROR: Yes, I do.
NOTE: (Further void dire of individual jurors by de­

fense counsel.)
* * -X- *

NOTE: (Following selection of the jury to try the special
plea of insanity, the remaining jurors were excused 
until twelve o’clock noon and instructed by the Court 
to remain outside of the courtroom until the trial of 

[fob 18] the special plea of insanity had been completed.)
* # * *

NOTE: (Following a five-minute recess, Court recon­
vened and proceeded as follows.)

*  *  *  *

MR. RYAN: If Your Honor please, Doctor Brandt is
here. The defense has the burden in this case as you 
know, sir.

THE COURT: All right.
* * # *

DOCTOR HENRY A. BRANDT, having been duly 
sworn as a witness, took the stand and testified as follows:

DIRECT EXAMINATION

BY MR. HILL:
Q Doctor Brandt, I’m Attorney Bobby L. Hill for the 

defendant. Would you state your name for the jury?
A Doctor Henry A. Brandt.
Q Doctor, where—you—are you a Savannahian?
A No, Charlestonian.
Q Where did you take your high school training?
A At Charleston High.
Q And where did you take your undergraduate degree? 
A It was at the University of South Carolina.
Q And when did—where did you take your medical 

degree?



2 3

A At the Medical College of South Carolina.
Q Have you had any additional training?
A Yes. Following that, I interned at the Jefferson- 

[fol. 19] Hillman Hospital at the Medical College of Ala­
bama and then after that the University of Minnesota, 
the Mayo Clinic, for five years in neurology and psychi­
atry? Following that, I was in the Air Force for two years 
and served as chief of psychiatry at the VA Hospital, in 
Augusta-fOFffrWiryeaP^UPifivaJe^practice here since 1956.

^"  'H-mr iong have you worked here in Savannah?
A Since 1956.
Q 1956. You’ve—
MR. HILL: You don’t object to the doctor’s qualifica­

tions I take it.
MR. RYAN: No.
Q What—you had the occasion to examine Lucious 

Jackson, Junior?
A Yes, I examined Lucious Jackson on the 2nd of De­

cember of this year.
Q And at whose direction did you examine him?
A At the court order, Judge Harrison.
Q When did you receive notice of the Court’s desire 

for you to examine him?
A I got a letter on November the 26th, 1968.
Q Let me ask you again . . . What day did you examine 

him? On the 2nd of—December 2nd?
A December 2nd.
Q About what time did you examine him?
A It was in the morning, I think, at approximately 

[fol. 20] ten-thirty or eleven o’clock, something like that.
Q How long did your interview last?
A Oh, I’d say about an hour.
Q About an hour?
A Yes, sir.
Q That’s about the normal time it takes?
A Normal.
Q Did you find that he was an imbecile?
A No, sir.
Q What—did you give him any tests of any sort, any 

written tests of any sort?



24

A No written tests. I didn’t feel any written tests 
were necessary.

Q You just—was there some special reason why you— 
how you made that determination?

A Yes, sir. He responded quite clear and quite co­
herent in his entire conversation. His recollection of past 
events and dates was quite adequate. You could tell clearly 
from his past recollection of dates that he could do quite 
well the usual arithmetic task. There was no question 
about that. His use of language was good, showing he 
had a—at least an average education or average intelli­
gence.

Q Of course, you can be over-average in intelligence— 
over-average in intelligence and be insane, couldn’t you?

A Could be over-average in intelligence and be the 
[fol. 21] same?

Q And yet be insane, couldn’t you?
A Oh, yes, sir.
Q You didn’t find him to be an imbecile. Did you find 

him to be schizophrenic in any fashion?
A No, sir.
Q None at all?
A None at all.
Q You did find him to be sociopathic, didn’t you?
A Yes, sir, the—
Q Tell the jury what’s a sociopathic?
A A sociopathic personality comes under the broad 

group of personality-pattern disturbances in contrast with 
what we term personality-trait disturbances. Personality- 
trait disturbances are average personality traits which 
may cause some interference with the person’s functioning 
but" are not as severe. A sociopathic is one in which we 
feel there are certain traits which are pretty well fixed 
in the individual. These traits are usually traits which 
bring them in conflict with society and other people. This 
is not looked upon as being a neurotic or psychotic type of 
illness, if it indeed is an illness, but traits which exist 
in the individual through long years of being molded into 
the individual through their particular environment and 
upbringing.

Q Is it hereditary?



25

[fol. 22] A No, sir.
Q It‘s environmental?
A Yes, sir.
Q And you say it has none of the tendencies of a 

neurosis?
A That’s correct.
Q It may be depressive, mightn’t it?
A Depressive?
Q Yes. . . ,  .
A Depression may occur in a sociopathic individual, 

but depression is not a usual feature of the individual un­
less they get into some difficulty.

Q What—would you give the jury some explanations 
of what would provoke or cause a manifestation of that 
depression in a sociopathic.

Q Usually in a sociopathic individual, they don’t be­
come depressed unless they get into some difficulty or be­
come apprehended—in dire straits through their acts. 
Then they become depressed more or less like anyone else 
would become depressed under these _ conditions. Depres­
sion as a usual feature of a sociopathic individual is quite 
lacking.

Q Yeah. But when—when it does come about, it could 
accentuate the illness that you speak of—you spoke of 
earlier? Isn’t that fair to say?

A Of course, depression would accentuate any illness, 
ffol. 23] yes.

Q Did you find that his personality-pattern disturb­
ance made him anti-social toward any group or any sex 
of person or persons?

A No, his pattern seemed to be quite generalized. It 
didn’t seem to make any difference whether it 'was towards 
relatives, people he didn’t know—people he had known 
for years or people he didn’t know. Particular reference 
towards his sister and this other lady who raised him 
these seemed to be the two individuals who had taken 
him in—that even with them he had been prone to take 
things from them. But in general it didn’t seem to make 
any difference who was involved.

Q So he—so he’s not—would not have been a person 
in your estimation who would form any alliances to people



26

notwithstanding whether they were favorable to him or 
cordial to him or not?

A I think that’d be a correct statement,
Q And you found, as I understand it, that he expressed 

some inability to—for example, to refrain from taking 
things?

A Yes, sir.
Q What term do you in your field denominate that?
A Well—
Q The inability particularly?
A Inability to what?

[fol. 24] Q The inability.
A There is a disorder we refer to as kleptomania, but 

this in particular, referring to Mr. Jackson, didn’t seem 
to fit into this category so much as just a part of the— 
one of the traits of the usual sociopathic individual who 
does indulge in this—in these actions,

Q You also report that he has no delusions?
A Yes, sir.
Q Was that at the time that you examined him or did 

you go into his history to find whether he had delusions
of any sort?

A We went into his past history from his own recount 
of any previous emotional difficulty or experiences, his 
interpretation and evaluation of events over the years, 
and direct emphasis to elicit any delusions, and at no time 
was there any indication that any were present or had 
been present.

Q Did you find that his depression was manic?
A Well, I don’t think in my report we even referred 

to any depression other than being quite dissatisfied with 
the circumstances existing before. We put—there was 
significantly absent any depressive features.

Q What did you use to go into his history—were you 
about to say something?

A No, sir.
[fol. 25] Q What did you use to go into his history? 
Merely his own utterances to you?

A Correct, Yes, sir.
Q You made no independent investigation as to his 

history?



27

A No, sir. No.
Q The only thing that you really know about Lucious 

Jackson is what you found during an hour interview. Is 
that fair to say?

A That’s correct. Yes, sir.
Q Did you make any comparative study of the con­

ditions that you found in him, no matter how minor they 
were, with other individuals before you made your re­
port to the court?

A Comparative studies in what way?
Q With him of like individuals, of a like age, of a 

like background, of a like race?
A I don’t exactly see what you’re referring—
Q You referred to a personality pattern and obviously 

you have to align that personality with other personalities 
to come up with a personality pattern, don’t  you?

A As an entity, yes, but this entity exists in all races, 
all creeds, in every one. It’s not any more specific in any 
one group.

Q From your examination is it your finding that at 
those points in time when he becomes depressive that his 
[fol. 26] responsibility diminishes to any real low ebb?

A You keep using the wTord depressive. I don’t re­
member, even reading over my report, that we referred 
to any depression.

Q Do you have it?
A Yes, sir.
Q Do you want to take a look at it?
A (Examining report) I don’t—still don’t—maybe 

you could point that out to me.
Q Well, I—if you don’t find it, I’ll be willing to accept 

that. I—I . . .  I have a copy of the report.
A It says, “There were significantly absent any de­

pressive features.”
Q Yeah, but I’ve asked you since then if you found 

any depression. You mentioned that there was . . . .
A No more than we would expect an individual to have 

being in—in the circumstances.
Q The fact is you haven’t examined him—let me un­

derstand this now—since December 2nd?
A No, sir.



28

Q You can’t make a determination as to, as he sits 
right now, what kind of condition he’s in?

A No, sir.
Q He could have changed significantly, could he not?
A Well, I can only tell you, as you referred to just 

now, knowing the nature of some of these types of situ- 
[fol. 27] ations, a sociopathic personality, being a long­
standing personality trait, does not usually fluctuate over 
the years. They remain pretty much the same. Now under 
bad circumstances, a person may react to the circum­
stances. But this would be pretty much in the nature 
that anyone would react to these same circumstances.

Q In your report—you know we talked earlier about 
his inability to keep his hands off things that—

A Yes, sir.
Q —articles belonging to other people. Couldn’t that 

carry over into some other personality conflict, such as in­
ability to take his hands—keep his hands off of people, 
assault type things?

A Usually there’s not any direct correlation or rela­
tionship between the taking of objects and the touching 
of people or fighting or other aggressive traits. There 
may be, but not necessarily so.

Q Let me turn your attention to something else. When 
you were—you’re in private practice I take it?

A Yes, sir.
Q In your private practice when people pay you money 

for an examination and the like, do you spend more 
than an hour with them?

A No, the usual length of any interview is approxi- 
[fol. 28] mately an hour.

Q You seriously think that you can make a determina­
tion as to one’s sanity in one hour. Is that fair to say?

Q Well, you come to—to sanity and—not all individ­
uals. There are some individuals that I think it may 
take even observation for a period of time. In referring 
to the given situation, I think an hour is sufficient to 
determine this, yes, sir.

Q With no comparison of any history and no inde­
pendent investigation of the person’s background and with-



29

out any written tests, you could make a determination 
and stand firm on it that a person would be sane—

A In some circumstances we would certainly want 
this.

Q —even if you were being paid?
A If there was any question, we would certainly want 

these further tests done. But there certainly existed no 
question whatsoever as far as I could see that any—

Q You found no need to recommend to the court that 
you have an opportunity to do some further observance?

A No, sir.
Q And that is—have you made examinations for the 

court in the past?
A In the past? At irregular intervals, yes.
Q Did you find that the defendant had the ability 

[fol. 291 to perceive the consequences of his various acts?
A Yes. I don’t think there’s any question of his 

perceiving the consequences of these acts. I think there 
was, as we mentioned, this inability at times to refrain 
from doing some of these acts. He—

Q That’s insanity, isn’t it?
A No. Many people here or anywhere don’t have the 

ability to refrain from doing many things. Eating too 
much—

Q You mean involuntarily done?
A Sir?
Q That’s involuntarily done? It’s not by—it’s not a 

voluntary act, is it?
A I wonder how many people here eat too much or 

drink too much on occasion. This is an inability to stop 
on a particular occasion. That’s not insanity. If so, I 
guess that ninety percent of the people are insane.

Q What percent does your latest journal reflect are 
insane in American society?

A What percent actual psychotic. It runs close to ten 
precent.

Q But it is your testimony today that Lucious Jackson 
at the time that you examined him was of a personality 
that would have him in the state that he would be inable 
to—to refrain from, for example, taking things?



30

[fol. 30] A This seemed to be the predominant weak­
ness, that when exposed to the belongings of others that he 
had great difficulty in leaving these objects alone. Yes, 
sir.

MR. HILL: I have no further questions.

CROSS EXAMINATION 

BY MR. RYAN:
Q Doctor, your report, which was made—I mean your 

examination, which was made on the 2nd and a report 
made on the 3rd—would you read the last four sentences 
in the last paragraph please, starting with, “There was 
significantly” ?

A Yes. “There was significantly absent any depres­
sive features, and he frequently smiled during the inter­
view and was quite agreeable. There’s no disturbance in 
his thought content. There are no delusions, hallucina­
tions, or ideas of . . . He handles proverbs, abstractions, 
and similarities well.”

Q Now, sir, at the time you made this report, I think 
you came to the conclusion in your letter, “The patient is 
competent,” is that correct, sir?

A Yes, sir.
Q You meant he was competent to stand trial?
A I meant he was competent in the usual sense of the 

word, that he could determine right from wrong and he 
could adhere to right and refrain from wrong and that 
he had the intelligence to understand the situation and 
what the—
[fol. 31] Q Now the question before us today, Doctor, 
is the allegation in the special plea of insanity that he’s 
incompetent now and not able to assist his counsel in the 
preparation of the case. From your examination of him 
on the 2nd of December, without anything intervening 
insofar as you know, would you say he’s still in the same 
condition today he was on December the 2nd?

A Knowing the nature of this particular condition 
that we have talked about—and the state of this condition 
does not change over any substantial period of time. It’s



31

a slow process. He may be reacting to the situation, but 
that would be the only change I would expect him to take.

Q Do you think he’s competent to assist his counsel 
today in the preparation of this case?

A He was quite competent during the interview. He 
was quite competent in relating events and interpreting 
events, and I saw nothing to indicate that he was other­
wise.

THE COURT: Anything- else of the doctor?
MR. HILL: Nothing.

THE WITNESS WITHDREW FROM THE WITNESS 
STAND * * * *

THE COURT: Anything else?
NOTE: (No audible response)

THE COURT: Anything else?
[fol. 32] MR. RYAN: No, sir.
END OF EVIDENCE

[fol. 33] CHARGE OF THE COURT

JUDGE HARRISON: You members of the jury, the
defendant, Lucious Jackson, Junior, has been indicted by 
the Grand Jury for the offense of rape. He has filed a plea 
which is commonly referred to as a plea of insanity in 
which he alleges that at this time of trial he is insane, that 
he has not sufficient mind and mental capacity to under­
stand the nature and object of the proceeding against him 
and does not rightly comprehend his own condition in ref­
erence to such proceedings, and that he is incapable of 
making his defense or of rendering to his counsel such 
assistance as a proper defense to the indictment demands, 
and he prays that his special plea of insanity be inquired 
into by the Court and that the same be sustained and that 
such further proceedings be had as are in conformity with 
the law.

I charge you that under the law of this state that no 
lunatic or person afflicted with insanity shall be tried 
or put upon his trial for any offense during the time he



32

is afflicted with such lunacy or insanity. The law further 
provides that, whenever the plea of insanity is filed, it 
shall be the duty of the Court to cause the issue on that 
plea to be first tried by a special jury; and, if found to be 
true, the Court shall order the defendant to be delivered 
to the superintendent of the Milledgeville State Hospital, 
there to remain until discharged in the manner prescribed 
by law.
[fol. 34] Now you have been selected to try the issue 
formed by this plea of insanity. You are not concerned 
with the guilt or innocence of the defendant of the offense 
for which he has been indicted. You are merely to deter­
mine if the mental condition of the defendant at this 
time is such that he should or should not be placed on 
trial.

I charge you that the burden is upon the defendant to 
sustain his plea of insanity to the reasonable satisfaction 
of the jury by a preponderance of the evidence. By a 
preponderance of the evidence is meant that superior 
weight of the evidence upon the issues involved which, 
while not enough to wholly free the mind from a reason­
able doubt, is yet sufficient to incline a reasonable and 
impartial mind to one side of the issue rather than to the 
other.

The law presumes every man to be sane until it is 
made to appear to the contrary, that he is insane or of 
unsound mind. I charge you that a person shall be con­
sidered of sound mind who is neither an idiot, a lunatic, 
nor afflicted with insanity and has arrived at the age of 
fourteen years or before that age if the person knows the 
distinction between good and evil.

The issue for you to determine is whether the defendant 
at this time, the time of trial, is mentally capable of un­
derstanding the nature and object of the proceedings go­
ing on against him and rightly comprehends his own con- 
[fol. 35] dition in reference to such proceedings and is 
capable of rendering his attorney such assistance as a 
proper defense to the indictment preferred against him 
demands.

Now if you believe from a preponderance of the evi­
dence in this case that Lucious Jackson, Junior, is insane,



3 3

that his mind is so deranged that he should not be put upon 
trial at this time for the offense of rape, the form of your 
verdict would be, “We, the jury, find in favor of the plea 
of insanity.” If this should be your verdict, it would not 
mean that he is acquitted of the charge of rape; but it 
would mean that he will be sent to the state hospital and 
there held and treated until cured of his insanity. If and 
when his sanity is restored, he can still be tried for the 
offense for which he is charged.

If, however, you do not believe his mind to be so af­
fected, the form of your verdict would be, “We, the jury, 
find against the plea of insanity.” If this should be your 
verdict, the defendant will be tried for rape.

Take this case, take the rules of law I’ve given you and 
apply them to the evidence in the case, and make your 
verdict accordingly.

Now whatever your verdict might be, it must be unani­
mous, in writing, dated, signed by one of you as fore­
man, and returned into court. You will write out your 
verdict on the back of the plea.
[fob 36] You may now retire and consider your verdict.
END OF CHARGE

■ * *  *  *

[fol. 37] THE COURT: I don’t think these twelve jur­
ors should be in the panel that we’re going to select the 
other jury from.

MR. HILL: Very well.
NOTE: (Upon return of the jury trying the special plea

of insanity, the Court excused the twelve jurors in 
accordance with the above remarks.)

*  *  *  *

NOTE: (Court reconvened to proceed with the trial of
the case of the State versus Lucious Jackson, Junior. 
Following roll call, the first twelve jurors were called 
to the jury box. During voir dire questions by the 
Clerk, the following transpired.)

* * * *
CLERK: —Are you conscientiously opposed to capi­

tal punishment?



34

MR. HILL: Objection.
NOTE: (Brief pause for Clerk to obtain the names of

those jurors indicating opposition to capital punish­
ment. )

MR. HILL: Your Honor, we object to the Clerk of
Court qualifying the jurors as to their scruples against 
capital punishment on the grounds that it would violate 
the rule of the Witherspoon case handed downby the Su­
preme Court of the United States and, further, that it 
[fol. 38] would violate the defendant’s right to due process 
of law as well as equal protection.

THE COURT: Overruled. Mrs. Weitz, are your res­
ervations toward capital punishment such that you would 
never vote to impose the death penalty regardless of the 
facts in the case?

Yes.
You would never vote to impose— 
Never.
Regardless of the facts?
That’s right.
I’ll ask that you step out of the box.

MRS. WEITZ: 
THE COURT: 
MRS. WEITZ: 
THE COURT: 
MRS. WEITZ: 
THE COURT:

NOTE: (The juror withrew from the jury box.)
THE COURT: Mrs. Stapen, what would be your

answer to that?
MRS. STAPEN: I would never.
THE COURT: Regardless of the facts of the case, you

would never vote to impose the death penalty?
MRS. STAPEN: That’s right.
THE COURT: I’ll ask that you step out of the box.

NOTE: (The juror withdrew from the jury box.)
THE COURT: Mr. Gerhardt, what is your answer 

to that question?
[fol. 39] MR. GERHARDT: No, sir, I could never im­
pose capital punishment in any case.

THE COURT: In any case.
MR. GERHARDT: In any case whatsoever.
THE COURT: I’ll ask that you step out of the box.

NOTE: (The juror withdrew from the jury box.)



3 5

NOTE: (Three additional jurors were called and quali­
fied to complete the first panel.)

* * * *

THE COURT: Now rather than for you to make the
objection each time the voir dire question is asked, we’ll 
just consider that you’re objecting to it every time it’s 
asked by the Clerk.

MR. HILL: Very well. We just want it clear that
the state is proceeding under Georgia Code Ann. 59-806, 
pursuant to that statute—

THE COURT: Yes, we’re following the Georgia law.
MR. HILL: Yes.

* * * *

NOTE: (Nine more jurors were excused as being con­
scientiously opposed to capital punishment, all hav­
ing stated under questioning by the Court that they 
would never vote to impose the death penalty regard­
less of the facts of the case.)

* * * *

[fob 40] THE COURT: All right, Gentlemen. There
are your forty-eight qualified jurors. You can ask them 
any questions you want to ask them.

MR. RYAN: We have no questions if Your Honor
please.

THE COURT: You can have an individual examina­
tion if you want—

MR. HILL: Yes.
THE COURT: —or examine the whole group . . .

* * * *

NOTE: (During voir dire questions by Mr. Hill, the
following transpired.)

MR. HILL: If you thought that—if you were on this
jury and eleven of the jurors thought that—were of the 
mind that the defendant was not entitled to mercy but 
you and you alone thought that he was, would you hold 
out for that?



36

MR. RYAN: I object to that question.
THE COURT: I’ll sustain your objection.
MR. HILL: If you—eleven of the—eleven of the jurors

found that the defendant was guilty and you were of the 
mind that he was not guilty, would you and you alone 
hold out for a verdict of not guilty?

MR. RYAN: I object to that question.
THE COURT: Sustain your objection.

NOTE: (Further voir dire questions. The following then
transpired.)

[fol. 41] MR. HILL: Do you think the electric chair
is a perfect way to vindicate horrendous crimes?

MR. RYAN: If Your Honor please, I object to that.
THE COURT: I’ll sustain your objection to that. The

voir dire question has been asked each one of these forty- 
eight jurors—were they conscientiously opposed to capi­
tal punishment. The law of this state provides for capi­
tal punishment and how it should be carried out, and the 
individual feelings of a juror on the subject has abso­
lutely nothing to do with his rendering—

MR. HILL: Well, the Supreme Court of Georgia . . . —
THE COURT: I’m not worried about that. I’m not

going to permit you to ask this juror the question. These 
jurors have taken an oath to decide this case on the 
facts that are presented to them and the law that will 
be given to them—given to them by the Court, and I 
assume that each juror will abide by his oath irrespec­
tive of his own personal feelings.

MR. HILL: You’re going to let counsel inform the
jurors so they might . . . assist them in their finding— 
or feeling, aren’t you?

THE COURT: What was that?
[fol. 42] MR. HILL: You’re going to let counsel aid 
them in making up their minds? That’s his purpose here.

THE COURT: I’m going to let you ask any question
which I consider a reasonable question to ask a juror 
which is not embarrassing to the juror and which is 
proper and pertinent, but I am going to sustain objec­
tions made by the Solicitor to questions which in his



37

opinion and in mine are improper and irrelevant. And 
we’ll let it stand at that.

MR. HILL: Have you formed any opinion as to
whether Negroes are more likely to commit rape than 
white persons?

MR. RYAN: I don’t think that’s a proper question.
THE COURT: I’ll sustain your objection to that.

* * * *

MR. HILL: Do you think Negroes are more morally
depraved than white persons?

MR. RYAN: If Your Honor please, I object to that
question.

THE COURT: Sustained.
*  *  *  *

MR. HILL: Do you think the person who brings the
action is more likely to tell the truth than the person 
who is defending?
[fol. 43] MR. RYAN: I object to that question.

THE COURT: I’ll sustain your objection.
* * * *

MR. HILL: Did you read about this matter in the
newspaper?

MR, RHOADS: Yes, I have.
MR. HILL: Heard about it on the public media?
MR. RHOADS: No, sir, I heard it—
MR. HILL: You’ve talked to your friends about it?
MR. RHOADS: Yes.
MR. HILL: You knew the race of the people who

were involved?
MR. RHOADS: Yes, I did.
MR. HILL: Have you formed any opinion as to the

legal consequences of this matter?
THE COURT: What do you mean by that?
MR. RYAN: I don’t understand the question, sir. I

don’t think Mr. Rhoads does either.
MR. HILL: Have you formed any opinion as to the

guilt or innocence of this defendant?



3 8

MR. RHOADS: Sir, I haven’t formed an opinion as
to this person, but . . . what I’ve heard in the neigh­
borhood and everything.

MR. HILL: Mr. Ryan, do you want to agree to
strike . . .

MR. RYAN: No, I’m not going to agree to it. He
[fol. 44] says he has no opinion about this particular de­
fendant. He may have an opinion about the crime but 
not about the particular defendant. He doesn’t know 
whether he did it or whether he didn’t.

MR. HILL: You think—do you think a Negro did it?
MR. RHOADS: Yes, sir, I do.
MR. RYAN: I object to that, sir, . . .  he thinks did

it. It’s a question of whether he believes this man did 
it or not.

THE COURT: I’ll sustain your objection.
MR. HILL: What type opinion have you formed, sir?
MR. RHOADS: What is the question, sir?
MR. HILL: What type of opinion have you formed

as a result of your knowledge of the matter generally?
MR. RHOADS: That there was an escapee from the

work gang that was involved in this incident.
MR. HILL: Strike the defendant—strike the juror

for cause, Your Honor.
THE COURT: Why?
MR. HILL: . . . escapee—I think that . . . formed

an opinion based on newspaper accounts . . .—
THE COURT: Ask him from having seen the crime

committed-—did you see the crime committed—
MR. RHOADS: No, sir.

[fol. 45] THE COURT: —or having heard any of the
evidence delivered on oath—have you heard any evidence 
delivered on oath?

MR. RHOADS: No, sir.
THE COURT: Therefore, what opinion you have

formed about it is just what you’ve heard in the neigh­
borhood, is that right?



39

MR. RHOADS: That is right, sir.
THE COURT: You’ve heard none of the evidence in

the case under oath?
MR. RHOADS: That is right, sir.
THE COURT: Is your mind open as to the guilt or

innocence of the particular defendant who—
MR. RHOADS: Yes, sir, my mind would be open as

to the defendant.
THE COURT: The juror is qualified.
MR. HILL: What did you hear in the neighborhood?
MR. RYAN: Now, if Your Honor please, I’m going

to object to that in the presence of this jury.
THE COURT: I—I sustain—
MR. HILL: Well, I think we ought to take the jury

out and find out what he heard in the neighborhood. I 
think . . . heard in the neighborhood could very well be 
prejudiced.

MR. RYAN: He’s not going to testify—I mean say
what he—what he’s been told . . .
[fol. 46] MR. HILL: We can have an in camera hear­
ing and find out what he heard.

THE COURT: Are you objecting to the question . . .
what he heard in the neighborhood?

MR. RYAN: Yes, sir. I don’t want to have any mis­
trial in this case, sir.

THE COURT: Well, that comes from the defendant’s
lawyer. Well, I’m not going to get this whole jury out. 
of this room to find out what this gentleman has heard 
in the neighborhood. Now you proceed on.

MR. HILL: I’m requesting at this time an in camera
hearing to determine what this juror heard.

MR. RYAN: I’m going to withdraw my objection
then, sir.

THE COURT: All right. Go right ahead. Answer
his question.

MR. RHOADS: The question was what I had heard
in the neighborhood?

MR. HILL: Yes.
MR, RHOADS: There was an escapee on a Monday

morning from the work gang, that he remained in the



40

neighborhood a week or so—several days, an automobile 
was stolen, and that later a person was raped.
[fol.47] MR. HILL: That’s all you heard?

MR. RHOADS: Well, I heard details about the cap­
ture of the person. I knew, of course, that the work gang 
was all colored . . . work gang.

MR. HILL: Judge, do you still think the juror is
qualified to serve on this jury?

THE COURT: Are you through? Are you through?
MR. HILL: I think that’s enough to disqualify him.
THE COURT: I’m not going to disqualify him.
MR. HILL: No further questions. Thank you.

* * * *

MR. HILL: Do you think police officers are more
likely to tell the truth than an ordinary citizen?

MR. RYAN: I object to that.
THE COURT: I’ll sustain the objection.

* * * *

MR. HILL: Do you think a Negro is less likely to
tell the truth than a white person?

MR. RYAN: I object to that, sir.
THE COURT: I’ll sustain your objection.

* * * *

NOTE: (The following questions were propounded to
Juror Albert Myers.)

MR. HILL: Do you harbor any prejudice against
that race commonly referred to as Negro?

MR. MYERS: Well, not as a race. A few little iso­
lated incidents, I do.
[fol. 48] MR, HILL: Strike the juror for cause.

THE COURT: F o r . . . ?
MR. HILL: Yes.
THE COURT: Denied.
MR. HILL: What kind of isolated incidents?
MR. MYERS: Well, just a few instances of trying

to help people and do good for people, and they return 
kindness with evil. Nothing real—nothing real serious



41

or overpowering. I guess it’s probably not prejudice as 
much against the race as it is individuals of the race.. . .

NOTE: (Selection of a jury, including two alternates.)

THE COURT: Now you fourteen jurors will be the
guests of the county for lunch. You will take these four­
teen jurors to lunch, Mr. Sheriff. Now I believe we told 
the witnesses to come back at three o’clock. There’s no 
reason why we can’t get started at two-thirty. By the 
time you make your opening statements to the . . . per­
haps maybe some witnesses will be back by two-thirty. 
So let’s plan on starting up again at two-thirty. Now 
I caution you fourteen jurors not to discuss this case 
with anyone. Don’t permit anyone to discuss it with you 
[fol. 49] or with anyone in your presence. And if you 
will kindly remember that every time we take a little 
recess so I won’t have to repeat myself and give you 
those same precautionary instructions. Now, with that, 
you will be taken to lunch by the sheriff.
NOTE: (Recess for lunch)

* * * *

NOTE: (Court reconvened and proceeded as follows out
of the presence of the jury.)

THE COURT: Before we start with the jury, is all
the evidence in on the motion for change of venue? Any 
evidence to be heard on that?

MR. RYAN: I haven’t heard of any, sir.
MR. HILL: None except the exhibits, Your Honor.
THE COURT: Is that all?
MR. HILL: That’s all.
THE COURT: Any evidence you want—
MR. RYAN: No, sir. I just want to say that on

November the 12th—November 22nd rather1—we notified 
counsel the case would be definitely assigned for trial on 
December the 10th, 1968.



42

MR. HILL: Your Honor, we want to have made
clear that we requested in the preliminary hearing that 
the court which had jurisdiction at that time should 
place certain restrictions on the press. We want it made 
[fol. 50] clear that we sought that and were denied by 
that court at that time. The preliminary hearing was 
held on the 16th day of October, at which time we re­
quested Judge Brennan to place reasonable restrictions 
on the press, which he denied us.

THE COURT: Of course, I’m not responsible for
what Judge Brennan did. You’ve made certain allega­
tions in this motion for change of venue that I’ve heard 
no evidence on whatsoever. For instance, his arrest be­
came a political football and engendered much discussion 
pro and con among local political aspirants—

MR. HILL: Well—yes—we won’t—all we have on
that, Your Honor, are the exhibits, and they reflect that 
there were several discussions by people who were aspir­
ing for political office at that time to make an issue out 
of_ the escape with respect to prison camps and that cer­
tain actions and measures should be taken with respect 
to protecting against further escape. While I think that 
was perfectly legitimate discussion, it all surrounded and 
centered—-focused upon the defendant. And in light of 
that, I think that that’s the only evidence which is re­
quired and necessary and the only one we have is in 
those clippings there.

THE COURT: I’ll deny your motion. All right.
Bring the jury in.
[fol. 51] NOTE: (The jury returned to the jury box.)

MRS. MARY ROSE, having been duly sworn as a 
witness, took the stand and testified as follows:

DIRECT EXAMINATION 

BY MR. RYAN, III:
Q Would you state your name to the court, Mrs. Rose, 

your full name?
A Mary George Coleman Rose.



4 '6

Q You’re the wife of Doctor Dan Rose, is that right?
A That’s correct.
Q Mrs. Rose, where do you reside?
A 12 McIntosh Drive.
Q Is that located here in Chatham County, Georgia?
A Yes, it is.
Q In what—excuse me.
A Yes, it is.
Q In what part of Chatham County, Georgia, Mrs. 

Rose?
A On the Isle of Hope.
Q On the Isle of Hope. Did you reside there back 

in—back on October the 3rd of 1968?
A Yes, I did.
Q On the morning of October 3rd, 1968, did you have 

an occasion to see your husband before he went to work?
A Yes. He got up about six-thirty that morning. 

And usually I get up and fix his breakfast, but he had 
to be—he had to leave by seven. He didn’t have time 
[fol. 52] for breakfast. So I was awake and chatted 
with him until he left at seven o’clock that morning.

Q All right. Now did you get out of bed that morn­
ing when your husband left?

A No, I didn’t.
G Did you go back to sleep?
A Yes, I did.
Q All right. And about what—approximately what 

time did you awake that morning?
A It was about seven forty-five.
Q Be about quarter to eight?
A That’s right.
Q And what was your reason for waking up, Mrs. 

Rose?
A Our daughter was four months old then, and she 

was crying. She wanted her—her bottle. She woke me 
up.

Q All right. And when you woke up, Mrs. Rose, 
what did you do please, ma’am?

A I got up. I changed her diapers and put her i n -  
in the play pen and then went into the kitchen and fixed



44

coffee and toast and her bottle. And I gave—I came 
back into the living room, and I gave her the bottle and 
let her play for a while while I had my coffee and toast 
in the living room. The TV set was on and the Today 
Show was on.

Q All right. And do you usually watch the Today 
Show?

A I usually keep it on because it entertains her. It’s 
[fol. 53] usually on.

Q What time does it come on please, ma’am?
A It comes on at seven and it goes off at nine.
Q It goes off at nine. All right. Now after you had 

your coffee and toast, what did you do with the baby, 
if anything, please, ma’am?

A I took the baby into the nursery about eight-thirty 
after I had fed her and after I had had coffee, and I 
gave her a bath in the nursery. She has—I put a little 
tub in the nursery and bathed her in there.

Q All right. Now, Mrs. Rose, what I’m going to ask 
you to do please, ma’am, is to relate to the Court and 
to the members of this jury what happened after you 
went back into the baby’s room with your four-month- 
old child.

A I got the water ready for her bath and brought 
the tub into the room and put her into the water, and 
I heard a noise after I had begun her bath. But we have 
two cats, and they occasionally will jump from one thing 
to another and—and create a noise or a disturbance. It 
sounded like the boards on the floor creaking. And one 
of the cats is heavy enough so that when he walks the 
boards in certain areas of the house—the dining room 
and the hall'—do creak when he steps on them. And I 
thought it was the cat. The baby could not sit up by 
herself in the tub well enough to leave her alone. And 
[fol. 54] her room has two doors, one of which opens 
into the hall, and her tub was—was right there. And 
I stepped out into the hall with my hand—

Q May I please stop you at this particular point. 
(Drawing diagram on blackboard) I’m not the best art­
ist in the world, but I’d like for the jury to get some



45

idea about this—about the baby’s room when you—Mrs. 
Rose, this is, like I say, a—no artistic picture by any 
means, but assuming this to be the front door of your 
house, when you walk in this way, if you go to the right 
where will you go?

A If you go to the right, you—from the entrance 
hall—you go into the nursery.

Q All right. And this is where the baby—this— 
when you speak of the nursery, you’re talking about the 
baby’s room? One and the same, is that correct?

A Yes.
Q All right. So if you walk in the front door and 

take a right, you will go into the baby’s room?
A Yes.
Q All right. You talk—you speak of two doors. 

Would you point out the two doors please?
MR. HILL: Your Honor, I don’t quite understand

what all the discussion is about the baby. I think it’s 
designed to prejudice this jury. The charge is rape here, 
[fob 55] and I don’t know that there’s any charge of 
anything else. How all this getting into the door relates 
to this case I just don’t know. I object to it.

THE COURT: Overruled.
Q You were speaking about going out of the baby’s 

room door when you heard this noise. Would this be 
the door that is closest to your front door?

A No, it’s the hall door.
Q This over here would represent the hall door (re­

ferring to diagram) ?
A Yes.
Q This would represent a hallway (refering to dia­

gram ) ?
A Yes.
Q Now as you walk out this door of the baby’s room, 

if you turn to the left, where do you go?
A Into the dining room area, living room.
Q All right. Now what door did you walk out of 

when you heard this noise?
A I stepped out of the hall door.
Q That would enter into the hallway, right?



46

A I enter—I was in the hall with one hand on the 
baby because I was bathing her right by the door . . .

Q All right, ma’am. Now, if you will, go ahead—I 
wanted to clarify the point that there are two entrance- 
ways into the baby’s room. All right. Now go ahead 
from that point. And where’d you go after you looked 
[fol. 56] out of the other door into the hallway which 
leads into the dining room area?

A Now I never let go of the baby, so I was only in 
the hall. And I looked down the hall towards the dining 
room, which is where the noise was coming from, and I 
couldn’t see the larger cat. The smaller cat was in the 
bedroom, and I did see her. And it’s not unusual that 
they would make a noise, so I just went back into the 
baby’s room and continued her bath. I finished her bath 
and put her into the crib and was putting her clothes 
on when I heard a louder and a more unusual noise 
from, the dining room area. At this time she was in the 
bed and safe. I could leave her. So I walked out the 
hall door.

Q Now that would be the door at the top of that 
blackboard—top of that drawing?

A Yes.
Q All right.
A I walked out the hall door. I looked towards the 

back bedroom, and I couldn’t  see anything in there. So 
I walked into the dining room far enough to see both 
into the living room and partially into the kitchen.

Q (At the blackboard) Walking out of this door, 
you would have to turn what way to1 go to the dining 
room area?

A Left.
Q To the left. So you would have to turn this way, 

[fol. 57] and the dining room area would be down here?
A That’s right.
Q What would be in this area?
A The living room.
Q The living room would be in this area. All right. 

So you came out of this door and came in this direction?
A That’s right.



47

Q How far toward the dining room area did you 
proceed?

A Well, I—I stepped into the dining room well 
enough so that I could see into the living room. There’s 
not a hallway—it’s two separate rooms, but there’s not 
a . . . that really divides it. You can see safely—I mean 
the whole living room area from the dining room.

Q All right. Did you see anything in the dining 
room or the living room area?

A No. And I couldn’t see the larger cat.
Q All right. At that point, after you saw nothing, 

where did you go?
A I went back down the hall and back into the baby’s 

room and right to her crib.
Q All right. Now in the baby’s room— (at the black­

board) as you walk in this door that comes in from the 
hallway, on what side of the room would the crib be?

A On this side. Against this wall.
[fol. 58] Q The crib would be over here (indicating
on diagram) ?

A Right there.
Q All right. And as you went back to the crib, did

anything startle you?
A Yes. I—I don’t know why, but I turned to the 

closet.
Q All right. Now where is the closet located?
A In the upper—
Q Be over here (indicating on diagram)?
A Yes, right there.

_ Q All right. And as you turned to the closet what 
did you see, if anything?

A The door was open, and there was a young colored 
male standing in the baby’s closet holding—it was a 
pair—half of a pair of scissors in his hand. I couldn’t 
really tell what it was at that point. The handle was 
wrapped up with a cloth.

Q All right. Keep your voice up a little bit please, 
ma’am.

A I screamed but didn’t have time to do anything 
because the room is very small—it’s no larger than ten- 
by-ten—and it’s just two big steps from the closet to the



48

side of the baby’s bed. And he took those steps, and in 
no time he had my arm and had the half of the pair of 
scissors pressing against the right side of my neck, right 
at my carotid artery.
[fol. 59] Q All right. And you say that one of his 
arms—or one of his hands grabbed one of your arms?

A That’s right.
Q Do you remember which one please, ma’am?
A I think it was my right arm—it was my right 

arm, and he had the scissors against my neck.
Q All right. And what happened after that?
A I was screaming and trying to get away, and I 

was pushing him with my free arm. And he told me if 
I didn’t be quiet he was going to have to hurt me, and 
the scissors were really pressing into my neck. And I 
stopped screaming at that point because he told me if 
I didn’t he would really hurt me.

Q Do you remember what side of the neck the scis­
sors were pressing against?

A They were on the right side of my neck.
Q On the right side of your neck. All right. After 

he told you this, what did he tell you to do, if anything?
A Well, my only thought was just to get him out of 

the baby’s room as quickly as I could. And as soon as 
I stopped screaming, he told me that all he wanted was 
money, if I just would give him money that he would 
go away and he would not hurt me.

Q All right. And what happened after that?
A Well, we—he had the scissors right at my neck, 

and he was pushing me along. And we went out the 
[fol. 60] living—the—the door from the baby’s room that 
goes into the living room—from the little foyer into the 
liivng room.

Q This would be past the front door?
A That’s right.
Q All right,
A And he kept the scissors at my neck and was push­

ing me along. And in the living room there was no pock- 
etbook and no money whatsoever. And he pushed me 
into the dining room area with the scissors against my



49

neck, and there was no pocketbook or no money in there. 
And he asked me where the money was. I really didn’t 
know where my pocketbook was. If it’s not in those 
rooms, it has to be in the back. But he pushed me right 
down the hall. And just before the door to the baby’s 
room there’s a door to a compartmental bath which turns 
off to the left. And he pushed me into there, and my 
pocketbook was on the floor in the bathroom.

Q This compartmental bath that you speak of would 
be in this direction from the baby’s room door that leads 
into the hallway (referring to diagram) ?

A It’s before the baby’s room door.
Q It’s before the baby’s room door—
A (Nods head affirmatively)
Q —so it would be back this way (indicating on dia­

gram) ?
[fol. 61] A To the left.

Q All right. Did you all enter that departmental 
bath, Mrs. Rose?

A Yes, he had the scissors at my neck, and he pushed 
me in there. And he saw the pocketbook on the floor. 
My billfold was in the pocketbook, but there was no 
money in the billfold.

Q All right. And did you all go anywhere from that 
point?

A He pushed me through the rest of the—the bath. 
It’s a three part bath. Through the room where the tub 
is and then we had to turn to the right and through the 
other bathroom and that door led into the bedroom.

Q All right. Now when you entered the bedroom, 
what did you see, if anything?

A There was money on the dresser which I think he 
saw first. There was a five-dollar bill and a penny I be­
lieve, and he pushed me straight over there. He didn’t 
release the scissors to my neck at that time, but when 
he saw the money on the dresser, he was holding my 
arm with one of his arms and had the scissors in the 
other. And he released his grip on the scissors or put 
them down somehow. He picked up the money, and at 
that point I grabbed the scissors with my right hand.



5 0

Q All right. And what did yon attempt to do with 
[fol. 62] these scissors, if anything?

A I tried very hard to stab him anywhere, but he 
had been pushing me, holding my left arm behind me 
when he was pushing me down the hall and around. And 
he was behind me and he had my left arm, and I had 
the scissors in my right hand. So I had to jab back­
wards. And the bed is no more than a couple of feet 
or less from the dresser. And when I was trying to stab 
him, we fell backwards onto the bed. And he was un­
derneath me, holding my arm, but I still had the scis­
sors on top.

Q All right. And what did you do at that point with 
the scissors?

A Well, I continued to struggle for a while to try 
to stab him anywhere, but I couldn’t because—I kept the 
scissors out of his reach, but he was holding onto my 
arm so that I couldn’t do anything with my arm. So at 
that point I tossed the scissors—from the bed they fell 
at—near the bathroom door.

Q Let me stop you right there please.
NOTE: (Two photographs were marked State’s Exhibit

Nos. 1 and 2 respectively for identification.)
Q I show you a picture that’s been marked State’s 

Exhibit 1 and ask you if you can identify that?
A That’s my bedroom.
Q That’s your bedroom. There is a door right here 

by a chest of drawers. What does that door lead to? 
[fol. 63] A To the bathroom.

Q Now when you speak of throwing the scissors, you 
said the scissors went near what?

A They went just—just a little bit beyond the dresser 
in front of the bathroom door.

Q That would be in this area (indicating on photo­
graph) ?

A Yes.
Q What is this?
A That’s the bed.
Q That’s the bed in the bedroom?
A Yes.



51

Q How many beds are there in that bedroom?
A Only one.
Q Just one.
MR. RYAN, III: I’d like to offer this picture into

evidence.
MR. HILL: I object to it being introduced on the

grounds it has not been properly authenticated.
THE COURT: Overruled.

NOTE: (State’s Exhibit No. 1 was admitted in evi­
dence over objection.)

Q Mrs. Rose, after you—
MR. HILL: I take exception to that . . .
THE COURT: You don’t have to take exception to

any adverse ruling that I make against you. It’s auto- 
[fol. 64] matically noted by the court reporter, so you 
don’t formally have to except to any ruling that I make.

MR. HILL: Very well.
THE COURT: All right.
Q Mrs. Rose, after you threw the scissors toward 

the bathroom door, would you continue explaining to the 
Court and jury what happened after that please, ma’am?

A We both struggled—fell somehow over there to the 
scissors. And since I happened to be on top on the bed, 
then I got to the scissors again first and grabbed them 
with my right hand. But he knocked me backwards on 
the floor, and I was on my back at that point. And he 
was on top trying to get the scissors from my hand.

Q Excuse me just a second right there. What hand 
did you have these scissors in?

A In my right hand.
Q In your right hand. And you say he was on top 

of you at that point. All right. Would you continue 
please, ma’am.

A We struggled around. I was still trying to get the 
scissors into him anywhere I possibly could. And we— 
we struggled backwards. I had already been knocked 
backwards on the floor. I had a—a grip on the scissors. 
He didn’t get them away, but he managed to get my arm 
[fol. 65] behind me like this (demonstrating). I still



5 2

had the scissors. And we were close to the bed at that 
point and—and to the post of the bed. And I had just 
had my wrist injected with cortisone for a tendon about 
a week before. It was still sore from the injection, and 
he was beating it very hard against the bed post—the 
foot of the bed—

Q This is your right—your right wrist?
A The right wrist, the one I was holding the scissors 

with.
Q I show you a picture marked State Exhibit 2 and 

ask you if you can identify that please, ma’am?
A That is my bedroom.
Q Were you present when this picture was taken?
A Yes, I was.
Q What is this right here please, ma’am (indicating 

on photograph) ?
A That is the bed post that he beat my arm against.
MR. RYAN, III: I’d like to introduce into evidence

State’s Exhibit 2.
MR. HILL: We object on the ground that it has not

been properly authenticated.
THE COURT: Overruled.

NOTE: (State’s Exhibit No. 2 was admitted in evidence
over objection.)

NOTE: (The photographs were submitted to the jurors
for their examination.)

[fol. 66] THE COURT: It’s rather difficult for a juror
to look at a picture and to listen to testimony at the 
same time.

MR. RYAN, I I I : All right. We’ll wait.
THE COURT: I think I’d wait a little while on the 

pictures.
Q All right. If you will, Mrs. Rose, now after he 

beat your hand—or your right wrist against the bed 
post, what did you do with the scissors then, if anything 
please, ma’am?

A I just couldn’t hold them any longer. My hand 
was too—too sore. I didn’t have any strength in it after 
he was beating it. I didn’t have much motion—motion



5 3

in my wrist because he was holding my—my wrist and 
my arm too, and I tossed them back like this (demon­
strating), just backwards as best I could.

Q And do you remember in what direction the scis­
sors traveled?

A They went backwards and went towards the wall.
Q All right. That would be also toward the head of 

the bed?
A Towards the head of the bed, yes.
Q All right. At this point, Mrs. Rose, what hap­

pened?
A Well, again we both struggled for the scissors, but 

—but this time he got the scissors. And he got them in 
[fol. 67] his left hand and was holding the scissors 
against this side of my neck. And then—I was on the 
floor, and he was on top of me. And the same arm that- 
had the scissors had this arm pinned to the floor, and 
he was holding my left arm with his other arm. And 
he had my legs pinned to the floor with his knees.

Q All right. Now at that point was he on top of you?
A Yes, he was.
Q All right. And at that point, Mrs. Rose, how were 

you dressed please, ma’am?
A I had on a robe—a gown robe that buttoned down 

the front.
Q All right. At the time that he was on top of you 

with the scissors against the right side of your neck—I 
believe you testified, is that correct—

A (Nods head affirmatively)
Q —with his left hand—holding your left arm with 

his hand?
A (Nods head affirmatively)
Q What did he do at that point please, ma’am?
A Well, I tried to get the scissors—or I was strug­

gling, and he told me if I moved anymore he was going 
to hurt me or kill me.

Q At that point did he release the grip off of—of 
your left hand?

A Yes, he did.
[fol. 68] Q And what did he do with the hand that 
he released the grip with?



54

A He reached up to the neck to the right side of my 
—my gown and he tore it and unbuttoned or un—or 
just tore it off all the way down. The button holes were 
big. They weren’t hard to undo. And he just pulled it 
all the way down.

Q All right. And then what did he do with his loose 
hand?

A I was trying to push him away with my left hand. 
And the more I pushed, the deeper those scissors went 
into my neck, just right against the—right against the 
carotid artery. And after the gown was completely open, 
then he unzipped his pants and he raped me.

Q He had sexual intercourse with you?
A Yes, he did.
Q Now after he unzipped his pants, what did he do 

with the hand—with the free—his free hand?
A He grabbed my hand w7hen I was trying to push 

him away, and the scissors were just digging into the 
side of my neck. And he kept telling me if I continued 
to struggle that he would have to hurt me or kill me and 
just to be still. And it was just—the scissors just were 
pressing very deeply into my neck.

Q Did he insert his privates, Mrs. Rose, into your 
[fol. 69] privates?

A Yes, he did.
Q All right. During the time you did have a free 

hand, did you attempt to fight him off of you?
A Yes, I certainly did.
Q At any time did you consent please, ma’am?
A Not at all.
Q Now during the time that he was on you and dur­

ing the time he was having sexual relations with you, 
did you hear a knock at your door?

A Yes, I did. I knew that it was time for the maid 
to arrive, and she comes to the back door which is in 
the other part of the house. I was just praying that she 
would arrive, and I did hear her knocking at the door. 
And I had been telling him that the maid was coming, 
hoping that this would get him to leave. And I did hear 
her knocking during this time, and I told him. He didn’t 
believe me at first. He didn’t hear her, and he didn’t



55

stop. But she walked around to the front door, which 
is closer to the bedroom, and at this time—I’m sure she 
realized something was wrong because she could see the 
baby screaming and the side rail down on the crib 
through her window—she could—she could hear the baby. 
And then she was screaming my name. And he heard 
her at that point.

Q All right. Now when you say walked around to 
[fol. 70] the front, this is from the side to the front, is 
that right, of the house . . .?

A Yes.
Q There’s not very much distance between the two 

doors?
A No.

NOTE: (A plastic bag containing a gown was marked
State’s Exhibit No. 3 for identification. One half 
of a pair of scissors was marked State’s Exhibit No. 
4 for identification.)

Q All right. Now I show you State Exhibit 3 in a 
plastic bag and ask you please, ma’am, if you can iden­
tify it?

A That’s the robe I was wearing.
Q What is that right there?
A That is wdiere he tore the robe.
Q Was the robe torn at all before this day and be­

fore this time?
A No, it was not.
MR. RYAN, III: I’d like to offer into evidence the

robe please, sir.
THE COURT: Any objection?
MR. HILL: No objection.

NOTE: (State’s Exhibit No. 3 was admitted in evi­
dence without objection.)

Q When you heard the knock at the door—at the 
front door, the loud knock, wdiat did the person assault- 
[fol. 71] ing you do, if anything?

A He heard the knock at that time, and I had just 
been yelling to him that it was the maid, it was the 
maid, to please get up, to please leave. And he got up



5 6

to his knees. He still had the scissors pressing into my 
neck, and he had this arm. And he pulled me up with 
this arm and got to our feet.

Q And did he tell you anything at that time?
A No, he didn’t tell me anything at this time. We 

were up and we were—we were very near the window. 
Well, he did tell me to go let the maid in, and I—and 
I knew if I let the maid in that he—the baby was still 
there. She would be there. He still had the scissors. We 
were right beside the window, and I knew that the win­
dow was open. The shade was down. And I—we were- 
right beside it, and I reached over with my right hand 
—he had my left hand, but he didn’t have my right 
hand. The scissors were at this side of my neck. And 
I flipped the shade up very quickly. And this startled 
him, and it frightened him I think. And then he looked 
out and I—and he saw that the shade was open and 
that the window was up. And the screen is very easy 
to unlock, and he—the screen was unlocked, and he went 
out the screen.

Q I show you again State’s Exhibit 1 which is a 
picture and ask you if you can identify that (indicating 
on photograph) ?
[fol. 72] A That is the window which he went out.

Q And that window is the one closest to the bath­
room door?

A Yes, it is.
Q I show you State’s Exhibit 4 and ask you if you 

can identify that?
A Those are the scissors that he held against my 

neck the whole time.
Q Had you ever seen these scissors before?
A They’re my scissors.
Q They’re your scissors. Were they broken before?
A They were put together with a screw and a nut 

or a bolt or whatever, but they were not apart.
MR. RYAN, III: I’d like to introduce State’s Exhibit

4 into evidence.
MR. HILL: No objection.

NOTE: (State’s Exhibit No. 4 was admitted in evi­
dence without objection.)



57

Q Mrs. Rose, after he left and after he went out the 
window, what did you do then please?

A I locked the screen behind him, and I ran through 
the baby’s room to the front door. And I let the maid 
in. I told her that I had been raped but that he was 
gone and to please get the baby and bring her out of 
the house, which she did. And we went to my next-door 
neighbor’s house.

Q And who is your next-door neighbor?
[fob 73] A Mrs. L. A. Lanier.

Q And approximately how much distance is there be­
tween your house and her house?

A Half the length of my—I’m not very good on dis­
tance. It’s not far at all. There’s just a driveway in 
between.

Q And did you at that time enter Mrs. Lanier’s 
house and make a complaint that you had been raped?

A She—she came to the door. I told her that I had 
been raped and to please call the police immediately 
because he got away on foot.

Q All right. At a suggestion did you at that time 
take—or shortly thereafter—take a shower?

A After the police had been called and after we 
called my husband, then I took a shower.

Q And did you leave this gown at Mrs. Lanier’s 
house?

A Yes, I did.
Q Mrs. Rose, prior to the—prior to this morning 

when you woke up, did you have any bruises on you?
A None at all.
Q At the time your husband left that morning, 

around seven o’clock you said, did you admit anyone 
into your house?

A No one at all.
Q Do you know how this person gained entry into 

your house?
A There could be only one way. We have a back 

[fol. 74] room which is—is a den, but it is not furnished. 
We had a jalousie door there. And we had two cats. 
And there was a heavy cardboard in place of the jalousie



58

which had been placed up there with a small opening 
so that the cats could go in and out without our having 
to let them in and out. And the only way he could have 
come in is to have removed this from the door.

Q Later on that day when you did come back to your 
house, did you, accompanied by police officers—you were 
with them—-inspect the house for any break-in?

A Yes, we did.
NOTE: (A photograph was marked State’s Exhibit No.

5 for identification.)
Q Did you find any?
A No, we didn’t.
Q This door that you speak of, has it now been re­

moved?
A Yes, it has.
Q (At the blackboard) To give the jury some idea 

of where this area is located, this is the hallway, this 
being the living room and this being the dining room, 
where would this room be located, this being the front 
of the house?

A It’s behind the dining room.
Q Be right back here (indicating on diagram). And 

[fol. 75] those would be the doorways going into it, 
right?

A Right there.
Q The door would be located on what side?
A On, as you’re facing it, the left side.
Q This side right over here (indicating on diagram)?
A (Nods head affirmatively)
Q If you enter this doorway here, being the jalousie 

door, how could you gain entry into the living room or 
the dining room?

A There’re French doors from the den area—-that 
back room—into the dining room.

Q Where would they be located?
A Right there—
Q Right there (indicating on diagram)?
A —where you have your finger. It’s a large door­

way. There’re two French doors.



59

Q And there’s nothing to block the entrance straight 
on down?

A No.
Q I show you State’s Exhibit 5 and ask you if you 

were present when that picture was taken?
A Yes, I was.
Q And what does that picture depict please, ma’am? 
A It depicts the door as it was without the card 

heavy cardboard in place for the cats.
Q This is the jalousie door of which you speak?
A Yes, that’s—

[fob 76] MR. RYAN, I I I : I’d like to offer into evi­
dence, if it please the Court, State’s Exhibit 5.

MR, HILL: We object on the ground that it has not
been properly authenticated.

THE COURT: Overruled.
NOTE: (State’s Exhibit No. 5 was admitted in evi­

dence over objection.)
Q Mrs. Rose, when the police officers arrived did you 

give them a description of this person?
A I gave the man on the telephone a description of 

him. And when they arrived, I again gave it to the 
police officer.

Q Mrs. Rose, I’m going to ask you, if you will, to 
look around this courtroom and see if you see the person 
that assaulted and raped you on the 3rd day of October 
of this year?

A Yes, I do.
Q Would you point him out to the jury and to the 

Court?
A In the beige shirt.
Q Right here?
A Yes.
MR. RYAN, III: Let the record indicate she points

out the defendant.
Q Is there any doubt in your mind?
A None whatsoever.

[fob 77] Q This took place here in Catharn County, 
Georgia?

A Yes, it did.



60

MR. RYAN, III: Would you ask Dora Southward to
step in.

MR. HILL: Your Honor, we object to the calling of
that witness on the ground that counsel made a demand 
at the preliminary hearing for a list of the witnesses, 
at which time we were given what appeared to be a 
list, but we were only notified that Mrs. Southward was 
going to testify in this case at nine-fifty this morning. 
And we think the very purpose of providing a list of 
witnesses to the defense is for the defense to make some 
inquiry as to what that witness is going to testify to. 
That witness was never mentioned heretofore. It’s a 
surprise to the—to the defense counsel, and I think it 
would be inequitable for that witness to be allowed to 
testify in this case.

MR. RYAN: Your Honor, if it please the Court, you
know the Code Section requires that he make a demand 
upon the Solicitor General’s office for a list of the wit­
nesses. No demand was made upon us, sir. As a matter 
of courtesy, we had to notify him on two occasions of 
ffol. 78] two witnesses. The last one was this morning, 
sir, before arraignment. That’s what the statute says.

THE COURT: I’ll overrule your objection. I’ll let
her testify.

*  *  *  *

DORA SOUTHWARD, having been duly sworn as a 
witness, took the stand and testified as follows:

DIRECT EXAMINATION 

BY MR. RYAN, III:
Q Would you state your name to the Court please?
A Dora Southward.
Q And where is your—what is your address please?
A My address—2034 Eppinger Street.

MR. RYAN, III: Witness is upon you.
MR. HILL: We have no questions.

*  *  *  *



61

Q I’m going to ask you if you will to speak up a 
little bit louder so the last gentleman in the jury box 
can hear you.

A 2034 Eppinger Street.
Q Back on the 3rd day of October of 1968, where 

were you employed please?
A At Doctor Dan Rose home.
Q And what time did you go to work on that morn­

ing?
A Well, I usually arrive there around nine—I mean 

around a quarter to nine or ten minutes to nine.
Q Do you remember what time you arrived that 

morning, approximately what time?
A Well, I don’t know what time it was because I 

didn’t get into the house, you know, when I got there.
Q Was your bus on time that morning?

[fol. 79] A Yes, sir.
Q Okay. And when you got to the house what door 

did you attempt to get into?
A In the kitchen door.
Q And could you gain entry at that time?
A No, I couldn’t.
Q Did you knock on that door?
A Yes, I did.
Q Upon not being admitted, where did you go then?
A Well, after I didn’t get an answTer there, I went 

to the front door.
Q And did you knock on that door?
A I did.
Q And about how long after you knocked was it be­

fore someone opened the door?
A Well, to—to my best knowledge it was about—I 

reckon between eight or ten minutes.
Q All right. And did they open this door?
A Yes, they finally opened it.
Q Who opened the door?
A Mrs. Rose.

_ Q All right. Now when Mrs. Rose opened the door, 
did she say anything to you?

A Yes, she did.
Q What’d she say to you?



62

A Well, she say she had been assaulted and would I 
go get her baby.
[fol. 80] Q All right. And where did you all go at 
this time?

A We went to Mrs. Lanier’s next door.
Q All right. Did you work the day before this?
A Yes, sir.
Q Do you—are you familiar with the jalousie door 

in the den, the room that’s unfurnished?
A Yes, sir.
Q When you left that day was that door in good 

repair?
A Yes, sir.
Q Was there anything on that door that ordinarily 

would not be there?
A When I left?
Q Uh-huh, when you left?
A Well, when I left there, the door was just like it 

was when I first went there.
Q All right. Is the door fixed a certain way?
A Yes, sir.
Q How is it fixed?
A It had a pasteboard in it for the cats to go in and 

out.
Q And when you left that night before was the paste­

board pasted up there?
A It was.
Q Did you accompany Mrs. Rose, carrying the baby, 

to a neighbor’s house?
A Yes, I did.
Q This was Mrs. Lanier’s house?

[fol. 81] A Yes, sir.
Q When Mrs. Rose answered the door, what was her 

condition?
A Well, she was very upset and hysterical.
MR. RYAN, III: Witness is upon you.
MR. HILL: We have no questions. Your Honor, we

move to strike all of that testimony on the ground that 
it’s cumulative, designed—most of the testimony has al­
ready been made. Mrs. Southward has not added any­



63

thing to the—this fact-finding venture. And we motion 
to strike it—in addition to that, we motion to strike her 
testimony on the grounds that it was pure surprise.

THE COURT: I’ll deny your motion.

THE WITNESS WITHDREW FROM THE WITNESS 
STAND

* * * *

MELBA LANIER, having been duly sworn as a wit­
ness, took the stand and testified as follows:

DIRECT EXAMINATION 

BY MR. RYAN, III:
Q Would you state your name to the Court please, 

ma’am?
A Melba Lanier.
Q Mrs. Lanier, I’m going to ask you, if you will, to 

speak up loud enough and clear enough so this last gen­
tleman in the jury box can hear and understand you. 
What is your address please?

A 20 McIntosh Drive.
Q In what relation, Mrs. Lanier, is that to Doctor 

[fol. 82] and Mrs. Rose’s house?
A It’s next door.
Q And were you living there on the 3rd day of Octo­

ber of 1968?
A Yes, I was.

_Q In the morning hours of this day, approximately 
nine o’clock, was there a knock at your door?

A Well, they just came in. There wasn’t a knock.
Q They just came in. There was no knock. Who 

came into your house?
A Mrs. Rose, the maid, and the baby.
Q And what was Mrs. Rose’s condition when she 

came in?
A Well, she was real upset and terrified, and she was 

calling me. I was in the back bedroom. And she just 
came on in, and she was calling me. And her hair was 
all messed up. She had on her gown and it was torn,



64

and she had blood all on the bottom of her gown. And 
she kept saying that she’d been raped. She said, “I’ve 
been raped.” And she said, “He tried to kill me,” said, 
“He had a knife—or scissors to my throat,” said, “I 
just know he would have killed me,” said, “I was wor­
ried about the baby.”

Q All right. Did you see what she had on?
A Yes, she had on a yellow short nightgown.
Q I show you a nightgown in a plastic bag marked 

State Exhibit 3 and ask you if you can identify that? 
[fol. 83] Take it out and look at it.

A Yes, that’s the gown.
Q You mentioned blood. Where was the blood?
A It was on—well, both sides, I believe, and in the 

back.
Q In the back on both sides?
A Uh-huh.
Q All right. Now at that time did you suggest to— 

or shortly thereafter—for Mrs. Rose to take a bath or 
a shower?

A Yes, I did.
Q And did she do so?
A Yes.
Q All right. Now subsequent to that did you pick up 

this robe that you just identified?
A Yes, I did.
Q And what did you do with it please, ma’am?
A I washed it.
Q You washed it. And did that robe remain in your 

possession until you were requested by me to turn it 
over to the Chatham County Police?

A Yes, it did.
MR. RYAN, III: Witness is upon you.
MR. HILL: We have no questions.

THE WITNESS WITHDREW FROM THE WITNESS 
STAND

*  *  *  *



65

[fol. 84] DETECTIVE BILLY W. FIELDS, having 
been duly sworn as a witness, took the stand and testi­
fied as follows:

DIRECT EXAMINATION 

BY MR. RYAN, III:
Q Detective Fields, would you state your name and 

occupation to the Court please?
A Detective Billy W. Fields, Chatham County Police 

Department.
Q Detective Fields, were you so employed on the 3rd 

day of October of 1968?
A Yes, sir, I was.
Q On that day, sir, did you have occasion to answer 

a call to No. 12 McIntosh Drive located here in Chatham 
County, Georgia?

A Yes, sir, I did.
Q Upon your arrival, sir, not at that address but at 

a neighbor’s address, did you have an occasion to talk 
to Mrs. Rose?

A Yes, sir, I did.
Q Did you have an occasion, Mr. Fields, to observe 

Mrs. Rose?
A Yes, sir.
Q What did you observe when you made your obser­

vation of Mrs. Rose?
A The woman was very upset. She had tears in her 

eyes. She was very emotional. And she related to me 
what had happened to her.

Q All right, sir. Acting on this information, did you 
[fol. 85] have an occasion to go to the premises known 
as No. 12 McIntosh Drive?

A Yes, sir.
Q Did you have an occasion to go to the bedroom in 

that premises?
A Yes, sir, I did.

_ Q Would you describe the condition of that bedroom, 
sir, when you arived?



66

A. The bed was disarranged. There was dirt on the 
sheet, also the white spread that was on the bed. The 
pillows were pushed off to the side at the head of the 
bed over against the wall. There was a large spot of 
blood to the foot of the bed near the window on the 
floor approximately eight inches square. And the bed 
was very disarranged and a lot of dirt. I found some 
pine straw and other debris that was—apparently had 
come from outside.

Q All right. As a result of your physical inspection 
of this house, did you have an occasion to notify one 
James Stevens also of the County Police to arrive on 
the scene?

A Yes, sir.
Q Subsequent to your arrival at No. 12 McIntosh 

Drive and talking to the Roses, did you have an occa­
sion, along with other officers, to arrest this defendant?

A Yes, sir, approximately five hours later.
[fol. 86] Q Five hours later. Now, Officer Fields, if 
you will, I’d like for you to explain to the Court and 
the jury at what location he was arrested?

A The actual arrest took place approximately sev­
enty-five yards from the Rose residence, which is at 12 
McIntosh Drive.

Q Nowt when you say seventy-five yards west—using 
the Rose house, the front, sides, and back, in what— 
from what direction would this be?

A The subject was arrested—it would be north. It 
would be behind the Roses’ home. Their home faces 
McIntosh Drive. It was on the street directly behind 
McIntosh.

Q All right. And about seventy-five yards from their 
house?

A Approximately, yes, sir.
Q Detective Fields, in your presence did Mrs. Rose 

ever identify the person you arrested?
A Yes, sir—in my presence?
Q Yes, sir.
A Yes, sir, she did.
MR. RYAN, III: Witness is upon you.



67

CROSS EXAMINATION 

BY MR. HILL:
Q The identification that you just mentioned, was 

that made to you via telephone or in person?
A It was made to me shortly after the subject had 

run from this garage and had been placed under arrest, 
[fol. 87] . . . Mrs. Rose saw him leaving the garage 
and identified him as the same subject that had been in 
her house that morning between eight and nine o’clock.

Q She gave you an identification which related to, 
for example, color and height and that sort of thing?

A She had given that approximately nine a.m.—
Q No, I mean did she give that to you?
A When she saw this subject run from the garage?
Q When she was talking to you, did she give you an 

identification with respect to height?
A We had been given this earlier in the morning, 

around nine o’clock a.m.
Q My question to you is when—when—at the time 

in which she was having a colloquy with you whether 
or not she identified the defendant and gave a descrip­
tion to you at that time?

A She identified the subject that ran from the ga­
rage as the same subject that had been in her bedroom 
that morning at nine a.m. This was at two o’clock in 
the afternoon, shortly after two.

Q Did she tell you his height and his skin color and 
that sort of thing? That’s what I’m asking you.

A Not at that particular time in the afternoon. But 
she did tell me it was the same clothing and it was the 
same subject that had been in her home that morning, 
[fol. 88] Q Did she1—she didn’t give you a descrip­
tion?

A I already had a description five hours earlier of 
the clothing—

Q I don’t mind if you had one. Did she give you 
one?

THE COURT: Just conduct it in a gentlemanly man­
ner, please, if you will.



MR. HILL: I’m sorry.
THE COURT: Go right ahead.
Q Did she give you a description?
A She gave me a perfect description of the clothing 

—not at two—two o’clock in the afternoon when he was 
arrested—that morning. The afternoon at two p.m. when 
he was coming out of the garage by Mrs. Rose, it was 
the same subject, wearing the same clothes that she had 
given me earlier in the day. And it was the same sub­
ject.

Q Did she—the first time that she saw you—give 
you a description of the person whom she had said as­
saulted her?

A She gave me a description, yes, the first time she 
saw me.

Q Did you commit that to writing?
A To writing?
Q Yes.
A It was written down and given to every police 

car on the Chatham County frequency, every motorcycle 
[fol. 89] man, every available mobile unit we had at nine 
a.m. when this search started for this subject. It was 
not given out at two o’clock in the afternoon when he 
was arrested. It was given out at nine o’clock in the 
morning when this incident took place. Pants—color of 
the pants, shirt—a complete description was given at 
nine o’clock. The subject was wearing the same clothing 
when he was arrested shortly around two.

Q I’m talking about the description.
A I don’t understand your question, Mr. Hill, then.
Q My question to you is when she first you that 

day—
A Nine o’clock in the morning, yes.
Q —nine o’clock that morning—if she described the 

individual whom she thought assaulted her at that time. 
Did she tell you the height of the individual, the width 
of his shoulders, his skin color, and things of that sort?

A She gave me a physical description as to height, 
weight, age, pants, shirt, and she remembered distinctly 
that he had exceptionally large lips. This was told to 
me at nine a.m. that morning when she saw me.



69

Q Did you commit that to writing?
A I don’t know whether—I don’t remember whether 

I wrote it down or not, but it was given to our office 
[fol. 90] and it was broadcast. So I assume that—over 
the telephone it was given to our office, a complete de­
scription of the subject.

MR. HILL: No further questions.

THE WITNESS WITHDREW FROM THE WITNESS 
STAND * * *

NOTE: (Ten-minute recess)
NOTE: (Court reconvened and proceeded as follows.)

* * * *
DOCTOR JOSEPH DOOLAN, having been duly sworn 

as a witness, took the stand and testified as follows:

DIRECT EXAMINATION

BY MR. RYAN, III:
Q You’re Doctor Joseph Doolan?
A Yes.
Q And what type of doctor please, sir?
A Obstetrician and gynecologist,
MR. RYAN, III: The doctor’s qualifications are ad­

mitted.
Q Doctor Doolan, back on the 3rd day of October of 

1968 in your office located in Savannah, Georgia, did you 
have an occasion to examine one Mrs. Mary George Rose? 

A Yes.
Q And what did your examination reveal, Doctor?
A On examination, the soft tissue—soft tissues in 

the anterior of the throat were very tender on palpation. 
There was an abrasion over the right clavicle or the 
[fol. 91] right collar bone, and there were superficial 
lacerations of the right forearm and the right—palm of 
the right hand. There was also an abrasion on the an­
terior surface of the right tibia or the right lower leg. 
On pelvic examination, there was a small amount of



70

blood in the vagina and the coccyx or tail bone so to speak 
was very tender to palpation.

Q Did you have an occasion at that time to make a 
vaginal swab?

A Yes.
Q And what were your results for sperm?
A The vaginal smear was negative for sperm.
Q All right. Now when you talk about the—correct 

me if I pronounce it wrong-—coccyx, that would be the— 
A The tip of the vertebral column or the tail bone. 
Q That would be in this area (gesturing)?
A Lower. Lower than that. Right down at the very 

tip.
Q Right down here (gesturing). About what time 

did you examine Mrs. Rose?
A Approximately ten-thirty to eleven.
Q Ten-thirty to eleven on the 3rd of October?
A On the 3rd of October.
MR. RYAN, III: Witness is upon you.
MR. HILL: We have no questions, Doctor.

THE WITNESS WITHDREW FROM THE WITNESS 
STAND

[fol. 92] LEMAN ALAN LANIER, having been duly 
sworn as a witness, took the stand and testified as fol­
lows :

DIRECT EXAMINATION 

BY MR. RYAN, III:
Q Would you give me—or would you state your full 

name to the Court and the jury please?
A Leman Alan Lanier.
Q Mr. Lanier, where do you reside?
A 20 McIntosh Drive, Isle of Hope.
Q And were you residing at that residence on the 

3rd day of October of 1968?
A That is correct.
Q Where are you employed, sir?
A Savannah Electric and Power Company.



71

Q On the 3rd day of October of 1968, as a result of 
a call you received, did you go to your residence?

A I went straight to my house.
Q About what time did you arrive home, sir?
A I got the call around—I guess about ten after 

twelve, and I must’ve got there at quarter to one, some­
thing like that.

Q All right, sir. And as a result did you—were you 
given the complaint by Mrs. Rose?

A Was I given the complaint by—
Q By Mrs. Rose. Were you told about what had 

happened?
A Correct.
Q Acting on this information, Mr. Lanier, did you 

[fob 93] conduct a search of the immediate area around 
your house?

A I sure did.
Q And, if you will, in your own words just explain 

to the Court and jury what you found?
A Well, after I—when I got home, I went inside and 

I—I looked all in my attic and all inside of my house 
and all to make sure there was nobody there. And I 
walked in—I asked them had—had the garage been 
checked, and they said yes. So I poked my head in there, 
and I didn’t see nothing so I came out. Then I went in 
—in my house, and I—I’d say two or three minutes 
later I heard a noise—a lot—you know7, noise . . . And 
I jumped up and went outside and run into the garage.

Q When you speak of the garage, what garage do 
you speak of?

A My garage right behind my—
Q Your garage. All right.
A I went inside my house where I saw Jackson and 

Doctor Rose( pointing).
Q All right. You’re pointing in this direction. Are 

you talking about this person (indicating the defend­
ant) ?

A This fellow right here, yes, sir.
Q And he was in your garage?
A Yes, sir.



72

[fol. 94] Q Approximately what time of the day was 
this?

A It’s—its hard to say.
Q Just roughly.
A One-thirty maybe, something like that.
Q All right. And where is your house located in 

reference to the residence of Doctor and Mrs. Rose?
A Right next door.
Q Right next door. Approximately how far away 

from the'—from Doctor and Mrs. Rose’s residence is your 
garage located?

A I’d say it was maybe fifteen or twenty feet, some­
thing like that.

Q All right, sir. After you saw the defendant in the 
garage, what did you do then, if anything?

A When I saw him in the garage?
Q Yes, sir.
A Well, I had a gun on him, and I told Doctor Rose 

—I said, “Stand back.” And as I stood back, he come 
running—as I moved over, he come running out the— 
out of the thing. And I took the butt of the gun and 
tried to stop him and busted out a couple of windows. 
He went out of my yard around the front area. I chased 
him hollering, and I got somebody’s attention on the 
next street. And he was stopped right there.

Q All right. Now at that time had the police ar­
rived?

A Yes, sir.
[fol. 95] Q And he was arrested and, of course, taken 
on to the county jail?

A Yes sir
MR. RYAN, III: Witness is upon you.
MR. HILL: We have no questions.

THE WITNESS WITHDREW PROM THE WITNESS 
STAND

* * * *



78

SERGEANT JAMES STEVENS, having been duly 
sworn as a witness, took the stand and testified as fol­
lows :

DIRECT EXAMINATION 

BY MR, RYAN, III:
Q Would you state your name to the Court and the 

jury please?
A Sergeant James Stevens, identification officer, 

Chatham County Police Department.
Q Sergeant Stevens, were you so employed on the 

3rd day of October of 1968?
A Yes.
Q Sergeant Stevens, back on the 4th day of October 

of 1968 did you have an occasion to take fingerprints of 
one Lucious Jackson, Junior?

A Yes, I did.
Q And where were these taken please?
A They were taken down at the Chatham County 

Police Department.
NOTE: (An item was marked State’s Exhibit No. 6

for identification. An item was marked State’s Ex­
hibit No. 7 for identification. An item was marked 

[fob 96] State’s Exhibit No. 8 for _ identification. _ An 
envelope w~as marked State’s Exhibit No. 9 for iden­
tification.)

Q Sergeant Stevens, I show you State’s Exhibit 6 
and ask you, sir, if you can identify that?

A Yes, sir.
Q What is it?
A They’re the prints—the palm impressions of the 

defendant.
Q Those are the ones that you lifted?
A That I lifted—that I took down at the jail.
Q And what do you normally call those prints, sir?
A These are palm impressions.
Q Known prints?
A Known prints, yes.
Q And you actually took these prints?



74

A Known palm prints.
Q You took them yourself?
A Yes.
Q On what day did you take them, sir?
A On October the 4th, 1968.
Q All right, sir. And what did you do with the prints 

after taking them?
A I sent them off to the Bureau in Washington, D.C. 
Q When you say the Bureau, what bureau do you

speak—
A Federal Bureau of Investigation.
Q And they are the—do you see the person in the 

[fol. 97] court that you took these prints from?
A Yes, sir.
Q Would you point him out to the Court and the 

jury?
A (The witness complies with the request).
Q Right here.
MR. RYAN, III: Let the record indicate he points

out the defendant.
Q For what purpose were these prints sent to the 

Federal Bureau of Investigation, sir?
A  For comparison purposes of any latents that we 

might pick up.
*  *  *  *

[fol. 98] MR. HILL: Okay. Very well. But—all right.
If you’re going to withhold it—

Q All right. Now you sent these off?
THE COURT: Sent these off? What are you talking 

about?
Q Excuse me. You sent off this known print?
A Yes, sir, the—
Q All right. On what day did you send it off?
A On October the 4th, 1968.
Q. All right. Getting out of line a little bit, I show 

you State’s Exhibit 9 and ask you if you can identify 
that please, sir?

A Yes, sir, I can.
Q What is it?



75

A It is the envelope that I used to re-submit nega­
tives of the palm print to the Federal Bureau of Inves­
tigation. , , „

Q All right. All right, Now I show you States. Ex­
hibit 7—or let me ask—before I go to that, let me ask 
[fol. 99] you this. Did you have an occasion to go out 
to the residence at No. 12 McIntosh Drive?

A Yes, I did.
Q And for what purpose please, sir?
A For—checking for prints and photographing.
Q And did you take any prints? Were you able to 

lift any prints out there?
A On the first—the first time you’re speaking of or 

the second now?
Q Well, how—what days did you go out there?
A Well, I—I went out there on the day of the al­

leged incident.
Q On the 3rd of October?
A Yes. And then I went back out there on October 

the 15th, 1968.
Q All right. When you went on October the 15th of 

1968, did you—were you able to obtain any prints? _
A Yes, sir, there was impressions left on the living 

room wall which I photographed.
Q All right. You photgraphed these, is that correct? 
A That’s correct.
Q All right. I show you State’s Exhibit 7 and State’s 

Exhibit 8 and ask if you’ve seen them before. If so, 
identify them.

A Yes, sir, I did. These were the . . . envelopes con­
taining the negatives that I had sent to the Bureau.
[fol. 100] Q  ̂All right, sir. And on what day, sir, did 
you send these to the—you speak of the Bureau. You 
still speak of the Federal Bureau of Investigation, is 
that correct?

A Yes, sir, I do.
Q On what day did you send these, sir?
A I sent them October the 16th, 1968.
Q AT right. Sir, what—what is contained inside 

these glassy envelopes? I’ve just got them marked out 
there. Are those the negatives you took?



76

A These are the negatives, yes, and there should be 
duplicate negatives.

Q All right. And the negatives were put inside of 
these glassy envelopes?

A Correct.
Q All right, sir. All right. Now how did you mail 

the negatives that you just identified, sir?
A I mailed them special delivery, air mail, regis­

tered.
Q Registered. And do you have a registration num­

ber on that?
A Yes, twenty-eight forty-five.
Q All right. And who were they directed to, Ser­

geant?
A The Federal Bureau of Investigation, Attention 

Identification Department,
Q All right. Sergeant Stevens, subsequent to your 

mailing off the negatives, did you receive these nega­
tives back?
[fob 101] A I received them back from the Bureau, 
yes, sir, by registered mail.

Q By registered mail. And subsequent to that time, 
sir, what did you do with them?

A Then I—I put them in my file at the Chatham 
County Police Department, and then I re-submitted them 
upon request on November the 6th, 1968. And I also 
sent those by registered mail, and the registered number 
is thirty-three forty-seven.

Q All right. And what was your registration num­
ber on the re-submission?

A Thirty-three forty-seven.
Q I show you State’s Exhibit 9 and ask you if you 

can identify that envelope?
A Yes, sir.
Q That’s the envelope you re-submitted them in?
A Yes, sir.
MR. RYAN, III: At this point, sir, we would like to 

—we have no further questions of this witness at this 
point, sir. I’d like to have the privilege of recalling him 
though.



77

THE COURT: Any questions you want to ask Mm?
MR. HILL: We’ve been talking about prints—maybe

I ought to inquire—do you intend to introduce any of 
these prints in evidence?

MR. RYAN, III: Yes, sir. At the right time, yes,
sir.

[fol. 102] CROSS EXAMINATION 

BY MR. HILL:
Q Are you trained in the art of dactyloscopy?
A I’m trained in the art of fingerprinting. I don’t 

know what—what you just said now. I’m sorry.
MR. HILL: No further questions.
THE COURT: Let me ask you something, Sergeant.

Maybe I’m a little confused. We’re talking about the 
known prints of Jackson that you said that you took.

THE WITNESS: Yes, sir.
THE COURT: And when was that?
THE WITNESS: I took them on October the 4th.
THE COURT: And then—did I understand you—•

that you then mailed those in to the Federal Bureau of 
Investigation?

THE WITNESS: Yes, sir.
THE COURT: You later then, as I understand your

testimony, photographed what appeared to be a print or 
two prints on the wall out at the Roses’ residence.

THE WITNESS: Yes, sir, I did.
THE COURT: And when was that?
THE WITNESS: That was taken October the 15th,

1968.
THE COURT: And what did you do with those?
THE WITNESS: Well, then I took them down to

headquarters and I developed the negatives. And upon 
developing the negatives, I then sent them off to the 
[fol. 103] Federal Bureau of Investigation.

THE COURT: Did they still have the known prints
at that time.

THE WITNESS: Yes, sir, they did.
THE COURT: All right.



78

T H E  W IT N E S S : T h ey  re ta in e d  them .
T H E  C O U R T : A ll r ig h t.

THE WITNESS WITHDREW FROM THE WITNESS 
STAND

* * * *
ROBERT J. HAZEN, having been duly sworn as a 

witness, took the stand and testified as follows:

DIRECT EXAMINATION

BY MR. RYAN, III:
Q What is your name?
A Robert J. Hazen.
Q By whom are you employed?
A By the Federal Bureau of Investigation.
Q Where are your official headquarters?
A In Washington, D.C.
Q What is your official title, Mr. Hazen?
A Fingerprint examiner.
Q What are your official duties, sir?
A Included among my official duties are the exami­

nation of fragmentary latent prints which may be either 
present or developed upon objects which are associated 
with various types of crimes. I will also examine photo­
graphs, negatives, and . . . to determine if latent prints 
[fol. 104] appear in or on them. I will also make com­
parisons of inked and latent prints. On occasion I will 
examine the hands and the fingers of unknown deceased 
individuals in an attempt to establish their identity. I 
also will lecture to local law enforcement officers through­
out the United States on the various phases of finger­
printing through the FBI’s National Academy training 
program. And at the conclusion of any examination, I 
will report my findings to the contributing agency and, 
if called upon to1 do so, testify to my findings in a court 
of law.

Q How long, sir, have you been employed in fino-er- 
print work?



79

A Seventeen years and eleven months.
MR. HILL: We’ll waive his qualifications if that’s

where he’s going.
MR. RYAN, III: No, sir, I’m not going to his quali­

fications. That’s all right.
Q Mr. Hazen, what is an inked print?
A The skin which is present upon the palmar sur­

faces of the hands as well as the fingers, including the 
second and third joints, as well as the plantar areas of 
your feet is far different from the skin which is present 
upon the rest of the human body. Now in place of being 
smooth, it is rough and corrugated, consisting of raised 
portions, which we could call the summits of the ridges, 
[fol. 105] and recessed areas in between the raised por­
tions, which may be likened to the valleys or the furrows 
in between the summits. Now these ridges do not flow 
from one side of the hands or the fingers to the other 
in one continuous stream, rather they are broken and 
non-continuous. An example might be a single ridge 
which ends abruptly or two ridges which join together 
to form a single ridge. Now these are known as ridge 
characteristics. Now if we were to spread a thin film 
of black printer’s ink over the raised portion of these 
ridge characteristics and then transfer it to a recipient 
surface, which would preferably be white paper or card­
board, a permanent and lasting recording of these ridge 
characteristics can be made. Now this would be an inked 
print.

Q What is a latent print?
A A latent print is the marking which has been left 

upon any object which has been touched by the palmar 
surfaces of the hands or the fingers. This marking may 
have been caused by greasy or oily matter which was 
present upon the hands at the time that the object was 
touched, or it could have possibly been caused by sweat 
which is being constantly exuded through the small, min­
ute sweat pores which are present upon the summits of 
the ridges. Now at times this latent print will be en- 
[fol. 106] tirely invisible to the naked eye, wdiile at other 
times it will be entirely visible. A good example of a 
visible latent print would be one that is left upon a high­



80

ly reflective surface such as a piece of glass or a piece 
of polished metal. If it is invisible, of course, we’re go­
ing to have to develop it either by powders or chemicals 
so that it can be photographed and thereby preserved.

Q What are the basic—excuse me—how are finger­
prints and palm prints compared and identifications ef­
fected?

A Inked fingerprints or palm prints are compared 
by a characteristic examination of the ridge detail it­
self. Some of the factors which would be given consid­
eration would be the uniqueness of the impression, the 
frequency of the points themselves, as well as their basic 
relationship to one another.

Q What are the basic factors in the use of finger­
prints—

ME. HILL: Your Honor, this appear to be a qualifi­
cation of the witness.

THE COURT: Yes, I was just thinking—it seems
like we can shorten this a great deal. I assume that Mr. 
Hazen is the one who compared the prints that Sergeant 
Stevens has testified that he mailed in.

MR. RYAN, III: Yes, sir. Yes, sir, that’s correct, 
[fol. 107] THE COURT: Well, let’s get down to that.

MR. RYAN, I I I : All right.
Q Mr. Hazen, I show you State’s Exhibit No. 6 and 

ask you if you’ve seen that before? If so, can you tell 
me where? Can you identify it?

A I have seen this before at my headquarters in 
Washington, D.C.

Q Mr. Hazen, when you came down to testify at our 
request, did you bring that with you?

A Yes.
Q From the time that was received in the Bureau of 

Investigation has it remained with you all in you all’s 
department?

A Yes, it has.
Q Has it remained in the records usually kept in 

the normal course of the business of the FBI?
A That is correct.
Q And did you retrieve it from those records to bring 

down to us?



81

A I removed it from the official files of the FBI to 
bring it to Savannah, Georgia, with me at the time of 
the trial.

Q Now, sir, I show you State’s Exhibit 7 and State’s 
Exhibit 8 and ask you if you can identify those, sir?

A Yes.
Q Have you seen those before?
A Yes, I have.

[fol. 108] Q Where did you see those?
A, At my headquarters in Washington, D.C.
Q And did—were they turned over to you, sir?
A I received them, yes.
Q All right, sir. And did you make a comparison of 

these—of State’s Exhibits 7 and 8 with State’s Exhibit 
No. 6?

THE COURT: Show him what State Exhibit No. 6
is.

A Upon initially receiving these at the Federal Bu­
reau of Investigation, initially I evaluated them and 
determined that there was one latent palm print of value 
for identification purposes present in these two duplicate 
negatives. After this had been determined, I then made 
a comparison of the latent palm print which is present 
in these two negatives with the inked palm print which 
is present upon this card which has been labeled State’s 
Exhibit No. 6—I believe that it was—which bears the 
name Lucious Jackson, Junior. I found that the latent 
palm print present in these two negatives and the inked 
palm impression appearing on this card on this side, the 
left palmar impression, to have been made by one and 
the same palm print.

* * * *
[fol. 112] Q Mr. Hazen, in your experience with fin- 
[fol. 113] gerprints, have you ever found two individual 
people to have the same fingerprints or palm prints?

A I would answer this question this way. Any area 
of friction skin, whether it be on the first digit of the 
fingerprint, the second or third joint, or the palmar area 
of the hand as well as the plantar areas of the feet, any 
area of friction skin which would contain sufficient ridge



82

detail—now by ridge detail I mean ending ridges and 
joining ridges—that would contain sufficient ridge de­
tail to effect an identification could not be duplicated on 
any other area of friction skin of any other person.

Q These did contain sufficient ridges for identifica­
tion?

A Absolutely.
Q Mr. Hazen, as stated before, you received Exhibit 

6. How did you receive the inked print or known print 
marked as Exhibit 6?

A I removed those inked palm prints from the offi­
cial files of the Federal Bureau of Investigation.

Q How were they received by the Federal Bureau of 
Investigation?

A They would have been received by the FBI during 
the normal course of business.

Q What type of mail would they have been received 
—were they received in, do you know?

A No, I have no personal knowledge as to that.
Q Now as applies to the latent prints or the nega- 

[fol. 114] tives, how were they received by you, sir?
A They w7ere received by registered mail.

* * * *

[fol. 118] SERGEANT JAMES STEVENS was re­
called as a witness, took the stand, and testified as fol­
lows :

DIRECT EXAMINATION 

BY MR. RYAN, III:
Q I show you State’s Exhibits No. 1, 2, and 5 and 

ask you if you can identify them please, sir?
THE COURT: Didn’t Mrs. Rose identify them?
MR. RYAN, III: Yes, sir.
THE COURT: And didn’t you offer them in evi­

dence?
MR. RYAN, III: Yes, sir, I—
THE COURT: Didn’t I admit them in evidence?
MR. RYAN, III: Yes, sir.



83

THE COURT: Well, what are you trying to do now?
MR. RYAN, III: He’s the one that took them, I want

the date they were taken on.
A Yes, sir, I took them on October the 15th, 1968.
Q All right, sir. I show you State’s Exhibit 5—a 

jalousie door (referring to photograph)—did you have 
an occasion to examine this door, sir?
[fol. 119] A Yes, sir, I did.

Q Did you have an occasion also to make a measure­
ment of the number of jalousies out of the door?

A Yes, sir.
Q What were the measurements, sir, in width and 

length?
A Twelve-by-eighteen.
Q Eighteen across? What—
A Eighteen in width and twelve in height,
Q All right. Excuse me just a minute.
A Or whichever way you want it. Width or height.
MR. RYAN, III: Witness is upon you.

CROSS EXAMINATION 

BY MR. HILL:
Q Did you develop the photographs?
A Did I develop—what photographs—
Q You say you took them. Did you develop them?
A I printed them, yes. I went through a developing 

process to get my print, yes.
MR. HILL: No further questions.

THE WITNESS WITHDREW FROM THE WITNESS 
STAND

* * * *
MR. RYAN, III: We rest, sir.
THE COURT: All right. All right, Mr. Hill.
MR, HILL: Ladies and Gentlemen of the jury—
THE COURT: Just a moment.
MR. HILL: We’re not going to—as I understand it,

we have the opening and closing and I—



84

[fol. 120] THE COURT: Well, let’s get the evidence
closed first.

MR. HILL: I assumed the state closed.
THE COURT: They rested.
MR. RYAN, III: That’s all we’ve done is rested.
THE COURT: Now do you have any evidence?
MR. HILL: No, we have none.
THE COURT: You’re not going to put up any evi­

dence?
MR. HILL: No, we’re not.
MR. RYAN, III: We’re waiting for Mr. Hill to rest.

Then we’ll close.
THE COURT: Do both sides close?
MR. HILL: Yes.
MR. RYAN, III: Yes, sir.
THE COURT: There’s no more evidence to be heard?
MR. RYAN, III: No, sir.

END OF EVIDENCE



85

[fol. 121] EXHIBITS

SPECIAL PLEA OF INSANITY



86

[fol. 122]
D e p e n d a n t ’s  E x h ib it  N o . 1

Isle ol Hope residents com­
plained angrily today that 
they had no w arning an es­
caped convict w as prowling 
their neighborhood until he al­
legedly raped a housewife

yesterday—on the third day 
after he fled from a work 
gang.

They charged that, police 
and/or prison officials were 
negligent in not publicizing

his escape so island residents 
could take precautions.

Lucius Jackson, 21,1 who 
was serving a three-year 
term for auto theft, Was iden­
tified by police as the escap­
ee. He was recaptured yester­
day about 100 yards from the 
house where the woman was 
raped.

County Commissioner John 
P. Rousakis said today he 
would ask police and prison 
officials for a full report , on 
events surrounding the case. 
He said he would insist on a 
complete explanation of the 
alleged lack of warning.

Rousakis said he received 
12 to 15 calls yesterday and 
this morning from disturbed, 
angry Isle of Hope residents 
about the matter. The Eve­
ning Press also received com­
plaints.

“We had no idea this con­
vict was on the loose out 
there,” one resident said. 
“ For three days we left our 
wives at home unprotected 
and let our children play in 
the yards and streets. We 
certainly wouldn’t have done 
this if we had known this es­
caped prisoner was roaming 
around on the island.”

Rousakis said the com­
plaints he received centered

Continued on Page 18



LFfori Local Page

largely around the lack of 
warning. He said police told 

| him they did not spread the 
! word because they did not 

want to cause “undue fear or 
panic."

“Personally, I would rather, 
by far, have fear and panic 
than what happened," Rou- 
sakis said.

He said several callers told 
* him dogs had been barking 

extensively in the area for 
the last few days. “If the peo­
ple had known of the escape, 
they might have put two and 
two together and called the 
police,” Rousakis said.

Rousakis emphasized that 
he was not criticizing police 
procedures in searching for 
the convict or in the capture, 
but added, “ I am critical of 
the fact that no notice was 
given of the escape.” 

“Something is going to have 
to be done about this proce­
dure,” Rousakis said. “Per­
haps it takes a deep shock 
like this to correct such 
things,” he said.

Chief Love said the' county 
police did . not publicize the 
escape because Jackson was . 

, a county prison camp prison- 
t er and it was up to the camp 
\ Warden William Fawcett to 
! publicize the escape.

“I don’t think it would be 
the policy to broadcast it the 
moment s o m e t h i n g  hap­
pened,” Fawcett said. “You • 
might create more problems 
.than you’ve got,” Fawcett 
said.

As far as notifying people is 
j concerned, other than by 
! word of mouth you don’t have 

to,” Fawcett said. “A thing 
like that spreads like wild­
fire.”

Fawcett said citizens usual­
ly provide tips or leads on 
escapees which enable author­
ities to capture escapees with­
in a few hours.

“This case did not run true 
to form. We found no uni­
forms, r.o clothing that had 
been stolen. Nothing. He just 
vanished," Fawcett said.

The first indication that the 
escapee may have remained 
on the island was a report of 
someone breaking into a 
house on Isle of Hope Tues­
day morning, Fawcett, said. 
People who lived in the house 
saw the form of a man and.

thought it might have been a 
Negro but could not identify 
the person, he added.

He said men from the pris­
on camp and county police 
checked on the breakin, but 
could not definitely tie it to 
Jackson.

“Then this thing (the attack 
on the woman) happened,”

Fawcett said Jackson es­
caped from a work detail 
about 12:30 p.m. Monday and 
county police were notified 
immediately. “As normal pro­
cedure, we send as many 
cars as we got (from the 
prison camp at Travis Field) 
and Chief Love sends varied 
amounts,” when an escape' 
is reported, Fawcett said. 
This procedure was followed 
Monday and deputies from 
the camp had patrolled the 
island at various times since 
Monday, he added.

oo-]

[fol. 122a]



[fol. 123]
Defendant’s E xhibit No. 2

/  s7 ✓ j  y

Against Convict ^  ^

I f *[ i l l j|^ IT! *ĝ&
L il

mre iviaae
Lucius Jackson, 21, a recap- 

:ured convict accused of raping 
a young Isle of Hope housewife 
last week, has been charged 
with other offenses said to have 
been committed during his four 
clays at large, county police re­
ported Tuesday..

Detective Billy Fields, who 
tracked down the evidence, said 
Jackson was charged Tuesday 
with assault and battery on an 
Isle of Hope girl, theft of a sta­
tion wagon and the burglary of a 
home on the island.

The incidents were reported 
between the time Jackson es­
caped Monday afternoon from a 
county prison work detail on 
Isle of Hope and his recapture 
Thursday several hours after 
the housewife was raped.

Jackson is accused of enter­
ing the home of Mrs. Jean 
Caphton at 49 Cornus Drive 
Monday afternoon and being 
chased from the residence by 
Mrs. Caphton’s brother, James

McGregor. Reportedly stolen 
from the house were a set of 
car keys, a pair of men’s slices, 
a pocket knife, a radio and $4.

The following morning police 
were notified that a station wa­
gon had .been stolen from Mrs. 
Martha L. Summerell o f 17 Is­
land Drive.

Fields said the automobile 
was found near the home of a 
17-year-old girl who was terror­
ized about 3 a.m. Wednesday 
when a man broke into her 
home and stood over her bed.

The detective said the girl 
woke up, screamed and was 
“slapped on the arm” by the 
intruder' who then fled after 
dropping a pocket knife in her 
room.

The knife was later indent! 
fied by McGregor as his, Fields 
said. After Jackson was recap­
tured, McGregor also identified 
the pair of shoes the convict 
was wearing a t . that tin®, the 
detective reported.

When McGregor’s s i s t e r"s 
home was burglarized a pair of 
county prison work boots were 
left at the residence, Fields 
also disclosed.

Reportedly, all items have 
been recovered except the radio 
and $4.

Jackson is scheduled for a 
Police Court hearing the morn­
ing of Oct. 16.

The Negro convict was serv­
ing a three-year sentence for 
auto theft when he escaped.



89

[fol. 124]
Dependant’s E xhibit No. 3

By KATHY.HAEBERLE 
Evening Press Staff Writer 
County Commissioner John 

P. Rousakis today recom­
mended that a central police 
telephone number be listed 
for emergencies and that an 
“ immediate public alert be 
given” if a convict escapes, 
particularly in a highly popu­
lated area.

Rousakis: made his recom­
mendations at a meeting of 
the county commission in a 
report on the “tragic inci­
dents at Isle of Hope Oct. 3.”

The i n c i d e n t s  centered 
around the escape of a Negro 
prisoner from a work gang 
near Isle of Hope on Sept. 30, ; 
and Ms arrest on Oct. 3 in ‘ 
connection with the alleged 
rape of an Isle of Hope house­
wife.

Rousakis said he feels the 
central police number is an , 
“immediate” need.

He said if this is not feasi­
ble, - then he would recom­
mend that in the event of an | 
emergency call to either po­
lice department that the call 
be handled and relayed by 
the police “without regard to 
the location.”

Rousakis said he learned 
that when the neighbor of the 
assault victim called police, 
she called the first number on 
the inside of the telephone 
book, which was the Savan­
nah Police Dept.

He said
i- Continued on



Centra
Number
Proposed

From Local Page
lS3H «S3K 8!K 3® S3SS0B B 8K S3H r

“told in essence” that she 
lived in the county and would 
have to call county police and 
was given the number to call.

Rousakis said he feels there 
was a “misjudgment” on the 
part of police and prison offi­
cials in not issuing a public 
warning when the convict es­
caped, particularly in view of 
“various incidents” in the 
area.

Rousakis said that included 
in the full report on the Isle 
of Hope matter was the fact 
that a car was stolen in the 

| Isle of Hope area on Sept. 30 
and on Oct. 2 a call was re- 

t ceived by police on an at- 
1 tempted assault of a woman 
’ in the Isle of Hope area. He 
! said the stolen car later was 
' found in a wooded area near 

the home where the attempt­
ed assault was made.

Rousakis said there were 
complaints concerning t h e 
“slowness” of the police in 
responding to the call report­
ing the assault. However, 
Rousakis said the call was re­
ceived at 9:09 a.m. and the 
detectives arrived at 9:20 
a.m. In the meantime, Rou­
sakis said, other police were 

; immediately sent into the 
t wooded area where the sus­

pect was reported to have 
!■ fled.

Rousakis said as far as the 
“over-all action” of the police, 
his investigations showed they 

. “acted capably and to the 
best of their ability.”

After hearing the report and 
recommendations by Rousakis,

' Commissioner William H. Mc- 
| Neal called for a conference 
} between county officials and 

officials of the Savannah Po­
lice Dept., the Chatham Coun­
ty Police Dept, and the Fed­
eral Bureau of Investigation 
to"'hear the recommendations 
of law enforcement officers in 
the matter of issuing a public 
alert in the case of escaped 
prisoners.

McNeal said it is “easy to 
say we were wrong in this par­
ticular matter.” However, he 
continued, there is the possi­
bility of “people becoming hys­
terical and running dround 
with loaded guns.” “Someone 
could be hurt or injured,” he 
said.

>- The police report said the 
j “usual pattern was followed 
| in the matter” and they “had 
| hoped to apprehend the man 
: within a few hours.” They 
j said r.o broadcast or warning 
) was made because “they did 
! not want to alarm or “panic 
■ residents,” Rousakis said.

coo

[fol. 124a]



, Jackson’s 
^  ^Hearing j 
xft Postponed

' X  ~
X , k  A Police Court hearing for 
X X  Lucius Jackson Jr., 21, the ; 
X  convict charged with raping 

an Isle of Hope housewife, on 
Oct. 3, was p o s t p o n e d  
Wednesday at the request of 
his attorney.

Judge Henry Brennan re­
scheduled the hearing for Oct.
28 when Jackson is to be j 
tried on the rape charge and 
a charge of burglary by | 
breaking. and entering the 
woman’s home.

A hearing on other charges 
surrounding his four days at 
large after escaping Sept. 30 
from a county prison work 
detail on Isle of Hope will be 
scheduled at a later date, 
Judge Brennan said.

The judge granted the post­
ponements after Jackson’s at­
torney, Bobby L. Hill, said he 
had not had a chance to con-: 
fer with his client on the 
other charges and felt this 
wmuld put Jackson’s defense 
at a disadvantage if the case 
had been outlined Wednesday.

Judge Brennan made his I 
decision over the objections of 
Andrew J . Ryan III, an as­
sistant solicitor general, who 
said he was willing to post­
pone a hearing on the other 
charges, but hot the rape and 
burglary charges in connec­
tion with the victim.

Ryan said the rape case 
was “separate from the oth­
ers” (charges) and “we be­
lieve it is an independent 
case which can stand on its 
own footing.”  He also noted 
that w i t n e s s e s  had been 
called to testify in this case..

Hill contended that all the 
charges were “integral” from 
the defense’s point of view.

The additional charges are:
—Burglary of another Isle 

of Hope home at 49 Comus

See Court, Page 6D

. . .  Court
Continued From Page 10D

Drive Sept. 30. by' breaking 
and entering.

-—Larceny of an automobile 
on the island either Sept. 30 
or Oct. 1.

—Burglary of a third Isle of 
Hope residence Oct. 2 and as­
sault and battery on a 17- 
year-old girl in the house.

O

l>3Co

D
e

f
e

n
d

a
n

t’s 
E

x
h

ib
it 

N
o

.



92

[fol. 126]
Defendant’s E xhibit No. 5

<■/> /.It A

Grand Jury
V >■o o

I f

<

Rape Case
A 21-year-old prison camp 

escapee, charged with the 
rape of a  suburban housewife, 
was bound over to Superior 
Court Monday afternoon fol­
l o w i n g  a Recorder’s Court 
hearing.

Lucius Jackson, Negro, Is 
acccused of the Oct. 3 rape of 
a white housewife on Isle of 
Hope. In addition to the rape 
charge, Jackson was bound
over on two counts of burgla­
ry and one each of larceny of 
an auto, breaking and enter­
ing, and assault and battery.

Jackson allegedly escaped ■- 
from a work 'gang in the Isle 
of Hope area on Monday, 
Sept. 30. He was serving a 
three year term at the county 
public works camp at Travis 
Field on an auto theft convic­
tion.

The escapee reportedly bur­
glarized a  home on Sept 30, 
and is accused of stealing an 
automobile later recovered a 
short distance from where it 
was stolen, on either Sept. 30 
or Oct. 1; He is also acccused 
of burglarizing an Isle of 
Hope residence on Oct. 2 and 
assaulting a 17-year-old girl in 
the home, police said.



93
[fol. 127]

D e f e n d a n t ’s  E x h i b i t  No. 6

7 v ¥ -
. y o j i .

f&ibannalj\ JEtffmng
Established In 1850 

CHARLES H. MORRIS
JAMES L. WHYTE THOMAS F. 'COFFEY JR.

Vice President and General Manager Managing Editor

W E D N E S D A Y .' OCT. 9, 1968

Escaping
T H E R E  A R E  T IM E S  w hen  a  c o m ­

m u n ity  c a n  le a rn  a  v a lu a b le  lesso n  
fro m  an  u n fo r tu n a te  tu rn  o f c ir c u m ­
s ta n c e s .  I t  is  o u r  hope  th a t  th e  e sc a p e  
o f  a  p r iso n e r  fro m  a  w o rk  g an g  in th e  
I s le  o f H ope a r e a  l a s t  w eek  w ill r e s u lt  
in  o u r 'r e g a r d in g  a ll  fu tu re  e sc a p e s  a s  
h igh ly  s e r io u s  m a t te r s ,  w ith  su ff ic ie n t 
a la r m  b e in g  g iven  in  th e  a r e a s  w h e re  
th e  e sc a p e s  o c c u r .

T he  p r iso n e r  w ho e sc a p e d  la s t  
w eek  h a s  b een  a c c u se d  o f ra p in g  a  
h o u sew ife  in  h e r  h o m e .

R e s id e n ts  o f  th e  a r e a  w h e re  th e  
e sc a p e  o c c u r re d  h a v e  c o m p la in e d  to 
th e  a u th o r it ie s  th a t  an  a la r m  w as  n o t 
so u n d ed  and. few , if  an y , o f  th e  n e ig h ­
b o rs  w e re  a w a re  o f  th e  h u n t fo r  th e  
p r iso n e r .

C o u n ty  p o lic e  d id  f i le  a  ro u tin e  r e ­
p o r t  o f th e  e s c a p e , b u t no pub lic  
w a rn in g  a p p a re n tly  w as g iven . I t  h a s  
b een  ex p la in e d  by  th e  a u th o r it ie s  th a t  

.e s c a p e s  a r e  f re q u e n t and  th a t  p r iso n ­
e r s  g e n e ra l ly  a r e  r e c a p tu re d  w ith in  a  
s h o r t  p e rio d  o f  t im e .

T h is  c a s e ,  h o w e v e r, w a s  an  e x c e p ­
tio n . A nd w h ile  w e  c a n  u n d e rs ta n d  on 
th e  one h an d  th e  a u th o r it ie s ’ d e s i re  
n o t to  th ro w  a  neig h b o rh o o d  in to  p a n ­
ic ,  w e  m u s t .p o in t  o u t on  th e  o th e r

Prisoners
Ijand th a t  su ch  ex cep tio n s  a s  th is  c a se  
shou ld  d ic ta te  th a t  e x tre m e  cau tion  
be p ra c t ic e d  a t  a ll t im e s .

W e n o te  {hat th e  co u n ty  c o m m is ­
sion  h a s  in itia te d  s te p s  to  c lo se  the 
c a m p  a t  T ra v is  F ie ld  w h e re  s t a te  p r is ­
o n e rs  a r e  k e p t and  possib ly  to  u se  th e  
fa c ili ty  a s  th e  co u n ty  ja i l .

C ounty  C o m m iss io n e r P .  E . C lif­
to n  re p o r te d  th a t  th e  la c k  of p riso n ­
e r s  a t  th e  w o rk  c a m p  h as  m a d e  the 
p la c e  eco n o m ica lly  u n fea s ib le  and 
th a t  c iv ilia n  la b o r  c a n  be h ire d  for 
ju s t  $1.50 a  day  p e r  m a n  m o re  th an  it 
c o s ts  fo r  co n v ic t la b o r .

We hope th a t  th e  p riso n  c a m p  can 
be  c lo sed , fo r  re a so n s  of eco n o m y  aS 
w ell a s  s e c u r ity  o f  th e  c itiz e n s . The 
e n v iro n m e n t o f  an  u rb a n  co u n ty  pos­
s ib ly  h a s  th e  e ffe c t, o f te m p tin g  w ork 
g an g  p riso n e rs  to  e sc a p e  m o re  read ily  
th a n  if  th e  p r iso n e rs  w e re  w ork ing  in 
a  ru r a l ,  le s s  d e n se ly  p o p u la ted  a re a .

W e r e g r e t  th a t  i t  took su ch  an  un­
fo r tu n a te  o c c u r re n c e  to  b r in g  to  the 
a tte n tio n  o f th e  a u th o r it ie s  th e  m a tte r  
o f p r is o n e r  cu s to d y  a s  w e ll a s  th e  fu­
tu r e  u se  of th e  p riso n  fa c ili ty . H ope­
fu lly , th o u g h , a  le s so n  h a s  been 
le a rn e d .



/Uj) f / ts j I  * ■f’d —'
f l  I i n n1 I 1 i l l

I C H  A ffejĵ £'?&* '̂ 25# 'i
Charges were expected to 

be filed today against a pris­
oner who escaped from a 
county work gang and alleg­
edly raped a housewife before 
he was captured by the vic­
tim’s husband and neighbors.

County Detective Supervisor 
AI St, Lawrence said Lucius 
Jackson, 21, probably would 
be charged with forcible rape 
and robbery by intimidation.

Police said Jackson is being 
represented by court-appoint­
ed attorney Bobby L. Hill.

Jackson, a Negro who was 
serving a three-year sentence 
for auto theft, slipped away 
from the work gang Monday. 
He is accused of raping a 
young, white mother in a 
fashionable Isle of Hope sec­
tion yesterday morning.

Jackson was the object of 
an intensive, five-hour man­
hunt before the woman’s hus­
band found him hiding in the 
garage of a next-door neigh­
bor shortly before 2 p.m.

Witnesses said the suspect 
was concealed behind plywood j 
in the garage when the hus- i 
band found him. He ran and j 
the husband and a neighbor j 
pursued him. About 100 yards j 
from the garage a third 
neighbor, armed with a shot­
gun, stepped from behind a 
tree and intercepted Jackson.

The neighbor ordered Jack-

son to lie on his stomach on 
the ground. Jackson quickly 
complied, saying, “I give up,
I give up . . .”

S e v e r a l  other neighbors 
gathered at the scene and the 
group, including the husband, 
held the suspect until police 
arrived and hurriedly re­
moved him.

There were reports that 
Jackson was struck several 
times—at least once with the 
butt of a gun—by some of his 
captors and by police. Coun­
ty Police Chief 0. F. Love, 
questioned about this, said he 
had no . knowledge of any at­
tacks on Jackson. He said 
Jackson did not require medi- > 
cal attention after his capture.

“He had one scratch on his , 
face,” Love said. “I under-

Continued on Page 18

Chat
Pend

7fges 6 
ing

j  F r o m  Local Page

stand he got that when he 
raped the woman.”

“We had to get him (Jack- 
son) out of that neighborhood 
in a hurry,” the chief added, i 
“Those people were pretty 
mad out there and there’s no 
teiling what they might have 
done.”

Portions of Isie_of_ Hope be­
came armed” camps after the 
rape was reported. Husbands 
returned home from work and 
patroiled their neighborhoods ! 
with guns. Police were aided j 
by a helicopter and mounted j 
volunteers as they searched ; 
the island for the suspect.

Chief Love said the hunt for 
Jackson had been under way 
since his escape, and that 
roadblocks had been set up j 
on the island before yester- i 
day.

The search was intensified 
about 8 a.m. yesterday When 
area r e s i d e n t s  reportedly 
spotted Jackson, police said.
A few -minutes after 9 a.m., 
police were informed of the 
rape, they said. I

Police said they searched j 
every vacant house in the : 
area and entered a number of 
homes to check them out be­
fore permitting housewives, j 
who had been away during j 
the m o r n i n g ,  to re-enter J 
them.

HjO

CnS
00

-<1

IDIf*.

D
e

f
e

n
d

a
n

t’s 
E

x
h

ib
it 

N
o

.



[fol. 129]
95

Defendant’s E xhibit No. 8

TTfi 1  © i r i

a o i  . c e  K e c

^ 1 /  A  Sir J
s-

1C

e a Prisoner
By FRED SEDAHL 

Staff Writer
A five-hour search for a Ne- 

i gro prison escapee accused of 
j raping a suburban housewife 
I ended with his capture about 
| 2 p.m. Thursday only 100 
j yards from th e  v i c t i m ’s 

house, county police said.
■ Lucius Jackson, 21, whose 

former address was listed as 
318 W„ Duffy St,, and who was 
serving a three-year prison 

[ term for car theft, was seized 
as he ran from a garage at 
suburban Isie of Hope, county 
detective Billy Fields said.

Patrolman J. R. Karley ar­
rived on the scene moments 
after Jackson was spotted, po­
lice said. Harley handcuffed 
the escapee just as Fields 
and Detective Billy Freeman 
arrived, according to police, 

i Jackson was put in the rear 
' seat of the detective’s car 
sad "w Is I s k e d from t h e 
* 8 * ,”  Fields said. Police 
Ȥ# th e  erawd that quickly 

I fathered w »  “angry.”

Police said the woman iden­
tified Jackson from a picture 
as being the man who as­
saulted her shortly before 9 
a.m. Thursday in her Isle of 
Hope home.

Jackson had walked away 
from a work crew that was in 
the Isle of Hope area on Mon­
day, police said. He was serv­
ing the auto theft term at 
Travis Field.

Jackson apparently burglar­
ized homes in the area, man­
aging to steal both "fresh clo­
thing and some money, police 
said. When apprehended, he 
was wearing the blue plaid 
shirt and navy blue pants the 
rape victim had described, 
according to police.

Police said Jackson had 
m a d e  a statement in which 
he admitted assaulting the

woman.
Jackson apparently gained 

entry to the woman’s house 
through a rear door, police 
said. They said the door had 
several broken panes of glass 
and Jackson apparently was 
able to reach through and 
open the lock.

The woman told police she 
recalled hearing noise on a

See Arrest, Page 7B



• * «
Continued from Page 14B

hardwood floor but thought it 
was just her cat, police said.

A few moments later she 
spotted a Negro man in her 
child’s bedroom, police said 
the woman told them. The as­
sailant grabbed the woman 
and held a blade from a pair 
of' pinking scissors to her 
throat, demanding cash.

Police said Jackson had en­
tered the woman’s home 
while her husband was still 
there. Jackson apparently hid 
in the den waiting for the 
man to leave, police said.

After confronting the vic­

tim, Jackson forced the wom­
an into the bedroom and at­
tacked her, police said. The 
woman reportedly told Jack- 
son on several occasions that 
she was expecting her maid 
to arrive and that he'd better 
leave.

The scissors blade reported­
ly held to the victim’s neck, 
according to police, didn’t 
come from the victim’s house.

Police s a i d  the w o m a n  
struggled with Jackson and at 
one point almost overpowered 
him. Jackson had told the 
woman not to scream and ask­
ed her to drive him off the is­
land, police said.

During her struggle with 
Jackson, police said the wom­
an was bruised but not cut.

The maid finally arrived 
about 9 a.m. and was knock­
ing at the door when Jackson 
reportedly snatched five dol­
lars from a dresser top and 
fled through an open rear 
window.

Police said they received 
their first call at 9:09 a.m. A 
police log shows that one de- ; 
tective unit was dispatched at : 
that time on an attempted j 
rape report.

Within minutes after the 1 
detective learned the details, j 
“every available man was j 
called to the area,” Freeman 1 
said.

Road blocks were thrown
I up and every car leaving the 
I island was checked for the 

suspect. The Chatham Mount­
ed Patrol was called out and • 
a civilian helicopter was 
brought into search the area, 
Chief 0. F. Love said.

The break came when .Tack- 
son ran from the garage and 
was spotted, police said.

A search of Jackson’s hid­
ing place turned up a blue 
shirt and a discarded scissor 
blade, police said. They said 
a five-dollar bill was found 
stuffed in one of Jackson’s 
socks.

Jackson was being held at 
the Chatham County Jail 
Thursday night, charged with | 
rape, escape, burglary and 
robbery by force, police said.

Police said they were also 
investigating several other 
charges. They said a station 

’ wagon which had been stolen 
. on the island within the last 
| few days was found parked 
j near a house which the con- 
| v’ct is believed to have en- 
f tered early Wednesday morn- 
i mg.
j~ Police said they z’-j nad a 
I report of a 17-year-old g i r l  
| waking to find a Negro man 
! leaning over her bed early 

TWsda.y morning. The m an  
r was apparently warded off bv 
! 'ner scream a n a  a k i c k ,  police' 

said.

Cl

[fol. 129a]



97
[fol. 130]

Dependant’s E xhibit No. 9

\

\ ) \

By JAMES 0. MIZELL
Evening Press Staff Writer
Lucius Jackson Jr., 21, of 

316 W. Duffy St., a recaptured 
convict accused of raping a 
housewife- on Oct. 3, was 
bound over from Police Court 
to Superior Court yesterday.

Jackson was bound over on 
a charge of forcible rape, two 
charges of burglary, a charge 
of assault and battery and a 
charge of larceny of an auto­
mobile.

His attorney, Bobby L. Hill, 
sought to have newsmen ex­
cluded from the courtroom 
d u r i n g  the. hour-and-a-half 
hearing, but was overruled by 
Recorder Henry Brennan.

Assistant Solicitor General 
Andrew J. Ryan III and at­
torneys Bart E. Shea and 
John W. Hendrix, attorneys 
for the assault victim and a 
teen-age girl Jackson is ac­
cused of attempting to attack, 
told Brennan they had no 
objections to newsmen being 
in the courtroom during the 
hearing.

Hill had moved that news­

men 
hearing

be excluded from the 
on the grounds that 

f u r t h e r  public dissemina­
tion” about Jackson’s case 
would-be detrimental to a fair 
trial.

In overruling Hill’s motion 
to exclude the press, Brennan

Continued on Page 16



tS— Savannah Evaning Press, Tuesday, Get, 29, 188B

suspect - 7 
Sound Over

I  From Local Page

noted that hearings and trials 
are open to the public.

“If we can’t have the press 
excluded, then will the court 
review what is going to be 
printed?” Hill asked Brennan.

Brennan replied that he be­
lieved the news media would 
use discretion in what parts 
of the testimony were dissem­
inated publicly and that the 
news media did not intend to 
do 'anything that would be 
harmful to the defendant’s 
position,

“The Court has greater con­
fidence in the press than 
counsel (Hill) has,” Hill told 
Brennan.

Circumstances surrounding 
Jackson’s Sept. 30 escape 
from a county prison work 
Crew and his Oct. 3 recapture 
have been used “as a politi­
cal football,” Hill told Bren­
nan.

Ryan told Brennan that the 
prosecution takes the position 
that the First Amendment to 
the U.S. Constitution provides 
for freedom of the press.

“ If the report (of the hear­
ing) is not factual, then the 
d e f e n d a n t  has recourse - 
against the press,” Ryan add­
ed.

In talking to Brennen, Hill 
said he believed some pre­
vious newspaper stories about' 
Jackson may have been detri­
mental to a fair trial for Jack- | 
son.

During the hearing, the al­
leged rape victim testified 
that Jackson was the person . 
who assaulted her in her bed­
room about 9 a.m. Oct. 3. i

She testified that she first j 
saw Jackson standing in a 
Closet in her baby’s bedroom.

“He had part of a pair of 
Scissors . . .  he put them to 
my neck . . he told me he 
wanted money,” the woman 
testified i

“My first thought was to 
get him out of the baby’s 
room,” she said.

She said she and her assail­
ant went into another room 
where some money was on a 
table and that he reached for 
the money.

When his attention was di­
verted toward the money, “he j 
loosened his grip on the scis­
sors and I grabbed at them,” 
she testified.

She threw the s c i s s o r s  
across the room, a struggle 
followed and her assailant re­
gained possession of the scis­
sors, which he placed against 
her neck again, the woman 
testified. She said he then 
raped her.

The woman testified t h a t  
while she was being assault­
ed, her maid arrived. Her at­
tacker left through a bedroom 
window, the woman testified, 
She said she let the maid into 
the house and then went to a 
neighbor’s house and asked 
the neighbor to call police.

Jackson was captured about 
five hours later when he was 
flushed from a hiding place in 
the neighbor’s garage, police 
testified,

When Brennan asked if 
Johnson had any statement to 
make, Hill replied that the 
defendant would make no 
statement.

Jackson, attired in a long- 
sleeve white sweat shirt and ; 
blue trousers, stood silently , 
throughout the hearing.

He also is accused of break­
ing into an Isle of Hope resi- I 
denes about 3:30 a.m. Oct. 2 j 
and attempting to assault a i 
teen-age girl, breaking into ; 
another house on the island 
and taking several articles 
from the residence and steal­
ing a station wagon from an­
other Isle of Hope resident.'

oo

[fol. 130a]



99

[fo l. 131] EXHIBITS



[fol. 132]
1 0 0

State’s E xhibit No. 1



[fol. 133]
101

State’s E xhibit No. 2



1 0 2

State’s E xhibit No. 3 

[fol. 134] (Plastic bag containing gown)

State’s E xhibit No. 4

[fol. 135] (O n e-h a lf p a i r  o f  sc isso rs)



[fol. 136]
103

State’s E xhibit No. 5



State’s E xhibit No. 6

[fol. 137]

[fol. 138]

[fol. 139]

Known fingerprints of 
Lucious Jackson, Junior

State’s E xhibit No. 7

(Negative of latent print found 
in Rose home)

State’s E xhibit No. 8

(Negative of latent print found 
in Rose home)



105

Chatham. County relics 
239 Habersham-Street 
Savannah, Georgia 31401

. , , . v  i - r r o r ;  n
u .4V *.v*

-v A

f 'Jh?
\w sf*

A 0, /  fy* ,c2

/ v A v -  rf-#* r " ';’
8 \

■ 'D o  5 A ' r ....

[fol. 140]

■hvA
AA

hA'
A 

a’•"
-*■ **

‘vkM
MA

-



State’s Exhibit No. 10

[fol. 141] (Enlargements of known and latent 
prints for jury illustration— 

see transcript)



107

JUDGE HARRISON: You members of the jury, the
defendant, Lucious Jackson, Junior, is on trial for the 
offense of rape. The indictment charges the defendant 
with having, on October 3rd, 1968, with force and arms 
in and upon one Mrs. Mary Rose, a female, in the peace 
of God and said State, then and there being, did feloni­
ously make an assault, and her, the said Mrs. Mary 
Rose, did then and there unlawfully beat and did then 
and there forcibly and against her will did ravish and 
carnally know, contrary to the laws of the State of Geor­
gia, the good order, peace, and dignity thereof. To this 
charge the defendant has entered a plea of not guilty, 
and that forms the issue that you are to try.

I charge you that the defendant entered upon the trial 
of this case with the presumption of innocence in his 
favor, and that presumption remains with him through­
out the trial of the case until it is shown by competent 
evidence that he is guilty to a moral and reasonable cer­
tainty and beyond a reasonable doubt. Now a reasonable 
doubt is a doubt for which you can give a reason. It 
just—it means just what it says. It is a doubt of a fair- 
minded impartial juror honestly seeking the truth, not 
an arbitrary or a capricious doubt, but a doubt arising 
from the consideration of the evidence, or from a con­
flict in the evidence, or from the lack of evidence.
[fol. 144] As I stated, this defendant is on trial for 
the offense of rape. Rape is the carnal knowledge of a 
female forcibly and against her will. In other words, 
the defendant is charged with having sexual intercourse 
with the female in this case forcibly and against her 
will. The State must prove beyond a reasonable doubt 
that there was a penetration of the female organ of gen­
eration or private parts of the female by the male organ 
of generation or the private part of the male. It is suffi­
cient to constitute the act of intercourse whether this 
penetration be slight or great, but there must be penetra­
tion.

I charge you further that the State must likewise

[fol. 143] CHARGE OF THE COURT



108

prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the act of sexual 
intercourse, if any, was established by force and against 
the will and without the consent of the female alleged 
to have been raped. Ordinarily, if the female alleged to 
have been raped consents to the act of sexual intercourse, 
it is not rape; but if her consent is obtained by fear or 
she did not resist owing to the fact of threats of violence 
or bodily harm made by the defendant and she was in 
fear of her life or in fear of great bodily harm and 
her power to resist was broken down and in these cir­
cumstances the defendant obtained and had sexual inter­
course with the female, then you may consider whether 
or not sexual intercourse under these circumstances 
would be rape.
[fob 145] I charge you that force is a necessary element 
of the crime of rape, but it may be exerted not only by 
physical violence but also by threats of serious bodily 
harm which overpower the female and cause her to yield 
against her will.

The crime of rape shall be punished with death unless 
the jury-—unless the defendant is recommended to mercy 
by the jury, in which case the punishment shall be im­
prisonment in the penitentiary for life. Provided, how­
ever, the jury in all cases may fix the punishment for 
not less than one year nor more than twenty years in 
the penitentiary.

I charge you that the testimony of a single witness is 
generally sufficient to establish a fact, but there are cer­
tain exceptions to this rule and this case presents one 
of such exceptions. It is the law that the jury cannot 
convict the defendant of the offense of which he is on 
trial upon the unsupported testimony of the female al­
leged to have been raped. Before you would be author­
ized to convict the defendant, there must be other evi­
dence independent of hers sufficient to connect the ac­
cused with the offense charged; and all of the evidence 
taken together must convince your minds beyond a rea­
sonable doubt of the guilt of the accused. It is for the 
jury to determine whether the female alleged to have 
been raped has been so corroborated or not. It is not



109

[fol. 146] necessary that the corroborating evidence, if 
any, should of itself be sufficient to show the defendant’s 
guilt beyond a reasonable doubt, The jury would be 
authorized to convict the defendant if they are satisfied 
of his guilt beyond a reasonable doubt from all of the 
evidence, that of the female alleged to have been raped 
and the corroborating evidence, if any, taken together 
and considered along with all the other facts and cir­
cumstances of the case. On the question of corrobora­
tion, you may look to all the facts and circumstances of 
the case and see if the female in this case made an out­
cry at the time of the alleged act, if one was committed, 
and whether or not she made a report or complaint soon 
thereafter, and whether or not her clothes were torn or 
disarranged, or her body or person bruised or bleeding, 
or her private parts or her clothes injured or bloody, or 
if there was a struggle, and then determine whether or 
not her testimony has been corroborated sufficiently to 
convince your minds beyond a reasonable doubt of the 
guilt of the accused.

If you believe beyond a reasonable doubt that this de­
fendant did have carnal knowledge of or sexual inter­
course with the female as charged in the indictment and 
that it was accomplished by force and against her will 
and without her consent, you would be authorized and 
it would be your duty to convict the defendant of rape, 
[fol. 147] If, in consideration of the evidence in this 
ease and the Charge of the Court, you should determine 
that the defendant is guilty, if you believe that beyond 
a reasonable doubt, it would be your duty to convict 
him. And in that event, the form of your verdict would 
be, “We, the jury, find the defendant guilty.” Now that, 
without more, would mean that the Court would, of ne­
cessity, sentence the defendant to the extreme penalty of 
the law, which would be death by electrocution.

If you find the defendant guilty and in the exercise of 
the discretion which is left with you by law you should 
recommend mercy, then the form of your verdict would 
be, “We, the jury, find the defendant guilty and recom­
mend mercy.” Now that form of verdict would carry as



110

the punishment imprisonment in the penitentiary for 
life.

Now in the event you find the defendant guilty, you 
are permitted by law to go further, should you so de­
sire, and fix the punishment to be imposed, which, as I 
have already stated, shall be within the limits of not 
less than one year nor more than twenty years. If this 
should be your finding, the form of your verdict would 
be, “We, the jury, find the defendant guilty and fix his 
punishment at”—so many years, that is, you would fix 
his punishment at a specific number of years between 
one and twenty years.

Now if you do not believe the defendant guilty or if 
you have a reasonable doubt in your minds as to his 
[fol. 148] guilt, then it would be your duty to acquit 
him. And in—if that should be your finding, the form 
of your verdict would be, “We, the jury, find the de­
fendant not guilty.”

Now whatever your verdict might be, it must be unani­
mous, in writing, dated, signed by one of you as fore­
man, and returned into court. You will write out your 
verdict on the back of the indictment.

Now, Mr. Eason and Mr. Quante, you do not go out 
with the twelve jurors during their deliberation, but I’m 
going to ask that you remain in the custody of the sher­
iff until a verdict has been rendered in this case. So if 
you will see that Mr. Eason and Mr. Quante are accom­
modated in your office, and you can take the twelve 
jurors to the jury room.

You may now retire and consider your verdict.

END OF CHARGE



I l l

[fol. 149] CERTIFICATE

I certify that the foregoing one hundred forty-eight 
pages of typewritten material were taken down and then 
transcribed by me, and I certify that the same contain 
a true and correct transcript of the trial proceedings.

I further certify that I am a disinterested party to 
this action and that I am not of kin nor counsel to any 
of the parties hereto.

This 21st day of June, 1969.

/s /  Patricia C. Brown 
P atricia C. Brown 
Court Commissioner 
E.J.C. of Georgia



1 1 2

SUPREME COURT OF GEORGIA

25435

J ackson

v.
The State

Decided: Dec. 4, 1969

1. There was no error in denying the motion to change 
the venue for the trial of this case.

2. There was no error in refusing to allow the de­
fendant or his counsel to appear before the grand jury 
to present evidence and cross-examine witnesses.

3. Prospective jurors, whose reservations toward capi­
tal punishment were such that they said they would 
never vote to impose the death penalty regardless of the 
facts in the case, were properly excluded from the jury.

4. Code Ann. § 26-1302 (Ga. L. 1960, p. 266) is not 
subject to the constitutional attacks made on it.

5. The sanity examination of the defendant by a court- 
appointed, competent psychiatrist did not deny the de­
fendant due process or equal protection of the laws.

6. Grounds of a motion for a new trial which are not 
argued in this court are deemed to have been abandoned, 
whether enumerated as error or not.

7. The evidence authorized the verdict.
Argued September 10, 1969—Decided December 4, 

1969.
Rape. Chatham Superior Court. Before Judge Harri­

son.
Bobby L. Hill, for appellant.
Andrew J. Ryan, Jr., District Attorney, Arthur K. 

Bolton, Attorney General, Harold N. Hill, Jr., Executive 
Assistant Attorney General, Marion O. Gordon, William 
R. Child-res, Jr., Assistant Attorneys General, for appel­
lee.



113

F elton, Justice. The defendant was convicted of rape 
with no recommendation of mercy, thereby receiving a 
death sentence by law. He appeals from the judgment 
denying his motion for new7 trial, containing 22 special 
grounds, and enumerates as error: (1) the overruling of 
his motion for new trial as amended, (2) The denial of 
his moiton for a change in venue, (3) The court’s re­
fusal to allow defendant or his counsel to appear before 
the grand jury to present evidence and to cross-examine 
witnesses w7ho appeared before it, (4) The exclusion of 
veniremen wrho stated their opposition to the death pen­
alty, (5) The simultaneous submission to the jury of 
the issues of guilt and punishment, the statute permit­
ting same being unconstitutional, (6) The court’s per­
mitting the death penalty to be imposed upon defendant 
in violation of the Eighth Amendment to the United 
States Constitution, (7) The court’s permitting the death 
penalty to be unequally applied to defendant because of 
his race (Negro), (8) The court’s failure to grant a 
thorough psychiatric examination of defendant.

1. In support of his motion for a change in venue, 
the defendant introduced in evidence nine local news­
paper articles published during the month of October, 
1968, prior to the December 10, 1968, trial of the case. 
A reading of the articles reveals that all are merely fac­
tual accounts of the events in which the defendant al­
legedly participated and that the defendant was consist­
ently reported to have been “accused” or “allegedly” 
guilty of various crimes, rather than actually to have 
committed the crimes. The report of the angry reaction 
of the local residents to the failure of the prison and 
police officials to warn them of the presence of an es­
caped convict in their area was likewise factual and not 
of itself inflammatory. The one editorial introduced was 
likewise factual and not wild or accusatory, urging mere­
ly a constructive and cautious approach to the local prob­
lems relating to escaping prisoners generally. It appears 
that most of whatever prejudice existed in the commu­
nity was directed at the public officials, rather than the 
defendant, and that there was no “pervasive prejudice



114

in the community which denied the defendant a fair and 
impartial hearing” or due process of law. See Lingo v. 
State, 224 Ga. 333, 336 (2) (162 SE2d 1) and cases 
cited. The trial judge did not abuse his discretion in 
overruling the motion for a change in venue, as contend­
ed in enumerated error 2.

2. The court did not err in refusing to allow defend­
ant or his counsel to appear before the grand jury to 
present evidence and to cross examine witnesses. The 
defendant was not on trial at this stage of the proceed­
ings and therefore this refusal denied him neither the 
right of confrontation (Harper v. State, 131 Ga. 771, 
773 (63 SE 339); Duke v. United States, 90 F2d 840, 
841, cert, denied, 302 U. S. 685, rehearing denied, 302 
U. S. 649), nor equal protection of the laws. Buchanan 
v. State, 215 Ga. 791, 792 (1) (113 SE2d 609). Enu­
merated error 3 is without merit.

3. Under Witherspoon v. Illinois, 391 U. S. 510 (88 
SC 1770, 20 LE2d 776) the trial court did not err in 
excluding for cause those prospective jurors who unmis­
takably answered that their reservations toward capital 
punishment were such that they would never vote to 
impose the death penalty regardless of the facts in the 
case. Whisman v. State, 224 Ga. 793 (164 SE2d 719); 
Hakala v. State, 225 Ga. 629 (1) (170 SE2d 406) Cf. 
Miller v. State, 224 Ga. 627, 636 (163 SE2d 730). Enu­
merated error 4 is without merit.

4. Code Ann. § 26-1302 (Ga. L. 1960, p. 266) is not 
subject to the constitutional attacks presented that it 
violates the Eighth and the Fourteenh Amendmens to 
the Federal Constitution by simultaneously submitting 
the issues of guilt and punishment to the same jury and 
imposing the death penalty on one convicted for rape. 
Miller v. State, 224 Ga. 627, 630, supra; Massey v. 
Smith, 224 Ga. 721, 723 (164 SE2d 786) and cit.; 
Sims v. Balkcom, 220 Ga. 7(2) (136 SE2d 766). As 
in Miller v. State, supra, at p. 631, there was no evi­
dence to support the contention that “there exists a dis­
criminatory pattern whereby the death penalty is con­
sistently imposed upon Negro defendants convicted of 
raping white women.” Enumerated errors 5, 6 and 7 
are without merit.



115

5. It is contended in enumerated error 8 that the de­
fendant was denied due process and equal protection of 
the laws by the court’s ordering of a psychiatric exam­
ination of the defendant, in connection with his special 
plea of insanity, by a court-appointed psychiatrist, rather 
than one selected by the defendant or his counsel. An 
expert witness appointed by the court for a sanity exam­
ination of a defendant may not be regarded as a prose­
cution witness, but is instead a witness for the court, 
and the denial of a defendant’s request to furnish a 
psychiatrist at public expense to assist the defense, when 
the court-appointed doctor has reported the defendant is 
sane, has been held not to constitute a denial of due 
process. McGarty v. O’Brien, 188 F2d 151 (1 Cir. 1951), 
affirming 96 FSupp. 704, cert, denied, 341 U. S. 928 (71 
SC 794, 95 LE 1359), rehearing denied, 341 U. S. 957 
(71 SC 1005, 95 LE 1378); United States v. Baldi, 192 
F2d 540 (3rd Cir. 1951), affirmed, 344 U. S. 561 (73 
SC 391, 97 LE 549). The professional qualifications of 
the court-appointed psychiatrist are stated in the record 
and are unchallenged. The basing of the psychiatrist’s 
opinion of sanity merely upon an oral interview of about 
one hour does not show an inadequate examination, since 
the witness testified that this is the normal time such 
an examination takes, that he had obtained the past his­
tory from the defendant during the interview and that, in 
his opinion, in this particular defendant’s case, no writ­
ten or other tests were necessary. This enumerated error 
is without merit.

6. Appellant appealed from the judgment overruling 
his motion for a new trial, enumerated as error gen­
erally the overruling of said motion as amended, and 
enumerated as error specifically some, but not all, of the 
special grounds of said motion. His failure to argue in 
this court, either orally or by brief, the general grounds 
and those special grounds not specifically enumerated as 
error, constitutes an abandonment of such grounds not 
argued. Steadham v. State of Ga., 224 Ga. 78(6) (159 
SE2d 397) ; Smith v. State, 224 Ga. 750 (5) (164 SE2d 
784) ; Beeks v. State, 225 Ga. 200 (4) (167 SE2d 156).



116

7. While the general grounds of the motion for a new 
trial were technically waived for the foregoing reason, 
nevertheless, in a capital felony case such as this one, 
we feel constrained to rule on them, even though they 
have not been properly argued. See Dixon v. State, 224 
Ga. 636, 637 (163 SE2d 737). An examination of the 
record reveals that the verdict was amply authorized by 
the evidence, which shows that the defendant was appre­
hended just one block away from the scene of the crime 
only a few hours after its perpetration and was posi­
tively identified by the victim and by his fingerprints 
inside the victim’s home.

The court did not err in its judgment overruling the 
motion for a new trial for any of the reasons assigned.

Judgment affnned. All the Justices concur.

SUPREME COURT OF GEORGIA 

25435

Atlanta, December 4, 1969

The Honorable Supreme Court met pursuant to ad­
journment. The following judgment was rendered:

Lucious J ackson, J r.
v.

The  State

This case came before this court upon an appeal from 
the Superior Court of Chatham County; and, after argu­
ment had, it is considered and adjudged that the judg­
ment of the court below be affirmed. All the Justices 
concur.



117

SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES 
No. 5133, October Term, 1970

Lucious J ackson, petitioner

v.
Georgia

On petition for writ of Certiorari to the Supreme 
Court of the State of Georgia.

On consideration of the motion for leave to proceed 
herein in forma pauperis and of the petition for writ of 
certiorari, it is ordered 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 limited to the following 
question:

“Does the imposition and carrying out of the death 
penalty in this case constitute cruel and unusual punish­
ment in violation of the Eighth and Fourteenth Amend­
ments?”

June 28, 1971

☆  U.  S .  GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE; 1 9 7 1 4 4 1 6 3 5 120