Shepherd v FL Transcript of Record

415 pages

Document text

The following text has been generated automatically during the document scanning process. It may contain errors, omissions, or incorrect formatting. Please refer to the PDF document if this text is not usable.

Download

By downloading, publishing, or reusing the Materials outside of the Website, you hereby confirm and attest that you have read and agree to the LDF Archival Collection Terms of Use linked below. We draw your attention to the following:

For those Materials owned by LDF, your use of the Material outside the Site is solely for one or more of the following (the “Permitted Purposes”):

Non-commercial research and private study;
Teaching, scholarship and instruction (including distance learning);
Non-commercial print and non-commercial online use;
Criticism, comment or news reporting; or
For people with visual disabilities (See Section 121 of the Copyright Act).
For those Materials not owned by LDF you understand that:
- It is your responsibility to determine whether the way you plan to use the materials falls within the copyright exception of Fair Use.
- For any use outside of Fair Use, it is your responsibility to seek and obtain all required permissions from any existing rights holders.

LDF hereby grants you the right to use LDF owned Materials for the Permitted Purposes without seeking further permission from LDF.

If you publish or redistribute any Materials (including excerpts and quotes), you must include a credit line and/or proper citation to the source of the Material. However, you may not use the name of LDF in any manner which creates any false association between you and LDF or that incorrectly implies any sponsorship or endorsement of you by LDF.

NOTICE: Uses that do not comply with these Terms or that do not fall under Fair Use (or another exception) may make you liable for copyright infringement.

Read the full LDF Archival Collection Terms of Use Here.

I agree to the terms and conditions for use of this content.

If you would like to use this content in other ways, contact us at

Impact area
- Criminal Justice
Topic
- Criminal Justice
Collection
- Brief Collection
Taxonomy
Identifier
- 8f67e129-c49a-ee11-be37-00224827e97b

Cite this item

Brief Collection, LDF Court Filings. Shepherd v FL Transcript of Record, 1950. 8f67e129-c49a-ee11-be37-00224827e97b. LDF Archives, Thurgood Marshall Institute. https://ldfrecollection.org/archives/archives-search/archives-item/fb4f9efc-0234-4e8a-a03c-afbe77f84969/shepherd-v-fl-transcript-of-record. Accessed April 28, 2025.

Copied!

TRANSCRIPT OF RECORD

S u p r e m e C o u r t o f th e U n it e d S ta te s

OCTOBER TERM, 1950

No. 420

SAMUEL SHEPHERD AND W ALTER IRVIN,
PETITIONERS,

vs.

STATE OF FLORIDA

ON WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE
OF FLORIDA

PETITION FOR CERTIORARI FILED OCTOBER 2, 1950.

CERTIORARI GRANTED NOVEMBER 27, 1950.

SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES

SAMUEL SHEPHERD AND W ALTER IRVIN,

OCTOBER TERM, 1950

No. 420

SAMUEL SHEPHERD AND W ALTER IRVIN,
PETITIONERS,

vs.

STATE OF FLORIDA

OK WRIT OR CERTIORARI TO THE SUPREME COURT OE THE STATE
OF FLORIDA

INDEX
Original Print

Proceedings in Supreme Court of Florida.......................... 1 1
Caption .......................................... (omitted in printing) . . 1 1
Record from Circuit Court, Fifth Judicial Circuit, Lake

County, Florida .................................................................. 5 1
Minute entries:

Order to make service of jury summons for Spe
cial Venire ........... 5 1

Arraignment and pleas .......................................... 9 1
Order appointing physicians to make physical

examinations ........................................................ 10 2
Drawing of names of 150 persons to serve as

jurors .................................................................... 11 3
Commencement of proceedings; motion for with

drawal of pleas, etc.............................................. 14 3
Drawing of names of 50 additional persons to

serve as jurors...................................................... 21 4
Indictment ........................................................................ 29 5
Capias and return thereon. . . (omitted in printing) . . 31
Order to move prisoners to another ja il...................... 32 6

J udd & Dbtweilee ( I nc*.), P rinters, W ashington, D. C., F eb. 21, 1951.

— 3081

11 INDEX

Record from Circuit Court, Fifth Judicial Circuit, Lake
County, Florida— Continued Original Print

Order to release James Sheppard (omitted in print
ing) ................................................................................. 34

Order for physical examination of defendants
(omitted in printing) .................................................. 35

Order to select additional jury list (omitted in print
ing) ................................................................................. 37

Transcript of proceedings at arraignment.................. 38 7
Special rules of court ................ : .................................... 44 10
Motion for continuance .................................................. 46 12
Motion to quash...................... (omitted in printing) . . 54
Motion to withdraw pleas of not guilty and set aside

arraignment .................................................................. 57 18
Capias (Ernest R. Thomas) and return thereon........ 62 21
Motion to withdraw pleas, set aside arraignment and

file motion to quash the indictment (omitted in
printing) ....................................................................... 63

Affidavit of L. E. Thomas .............................................. 68 22
Motions to quash the indictment (omitted in print

ing) ................................................................................. 70
Application for removal of cau se.................................. 78 24
Amendment to the motion for continuance.................. 91 34
Reply of State of Florida to motion for continuance . 94 36
Reply to motion to withdraw pleas of not guilty and

set aside arraignment .............................................. 95 36
Answer to motion to quash indictment (omitted in

printing) ....................................................................... 99
Answer to application for removal of cause................ 100 39
Answer to motion to withdraw pleas, set aside ar

raignment and file motion to quash (omitted in
printing) ...................................................................... 101

Answer to amendment to motion for continuance. . . . 103 40
Motion for bill of particulars (omitted in printing) . . 104
Bill o f Particulars..........(omitted in printing) , . 106

—'—Amendment to application for removal of cause........ 109 40
Answer o f the State to the amendment to application

for removal of cause.................................................... 115 42
Challenge to the Panel .................................................... 116 43
Charges of the Court at trial (omitted in printing) . . 122
Petition o f Harry E. Gaylord, Atty., Re: compensa

tion (omitted in printing) .......................................... 133
Order fixing compensation. . . (omitted in printing) . .
Motion for new trial ...................................................... 134 45
Judgment and sentence of Walter L. Irvin................ 138 47
Judgment and sentence of Samuel Sheppard.............. 140 48
Commitment to State Prison (omitted in printing) . . 142
Affidavit of insolvency of Walter L. Irvin (omitted in

printing) ....................................................................... 543
Affidavit of insolvency o f Samuel Sheppard (omitted

in printing) .................................................................. 444
Order denying motion for new trial .......................... 145 49

INDEX 111

Record from Circuit Court, Fifth Judicial Circuit, Lake
County, Florida— Continued Original Print

Order adjudicating defendants insolvent (omitted
in printing) .................................................................... 147

Order for witness, Delia Irvin (omitted in print
ing) .................................................................................. 148

Order for witness, Tom Greenlee (omitted in print
ing) ................................................................................ 150

Order to notify Tom Greenlee (omitted in print
ing .......................................................... 152

Verdict .................................................................................... 155 50
Notice of appeal .................................................................. 154 50
Grounds of appeal................................................................ 157 50
Order extending t im e ............ (omitted in printing) . . 161
Order for Clerk to deliver exhibits to Clerk of Su

preme Court, in person (omitted in printing)........ 162
Order directing Clerk to prepare record (omitted in

printing) ............................................................................ 164
List of exhibits ......................(omitted in printing) . . 165
Clerk’s certificate .................. (omitted in printing) . . 167
Reporter’s transcript of testimony and proceedings . 169 54

Caption and appearances............................................ 169 54
Colloquy re motions for change of venue and con

tinuance, etc................................................................ 173 54
Testimony on motions:

Charles Medlin ...................................................... 187 62
Harry E. Gaylord.................................................. 214 80
Dr. Nelson W. V . Spaulding............................. 222 87
Ormond Powers .................................................. 224 88
Alex Akerman, Jr................................................. 240 100
Mabel Norris Reese ............................................ 241 101
James Herlong ...................................................... 250 108
W. V. Morrow ...................................................... 257 113
Willie Padgette .................................................... 264 119
Richard T. M ullins................................................ 268 121
Jack Grant ............................................................ 276 127
Walter Irvin ........................................................ 290 136
Samuel Shepherd ................................................ 291 138
G. G. Ware .......................................................... 301 142
Carlyle Rogers ...................................................... 308 147
Luther Miller ........................................................ 319 155
Mr. White .............................................................. 326 160
Irving Burley ........................................................ 334 162
F. L. Hampton...................................................... 341 167
Mr. Prevatt .......................................................... 345 171
W. L. Story............................................................ 351 175
Frank E. Owens.................................................... 352 176
George J. Dykes.................................................... 357 179
G. E. Fortland ...................................................... 362 182
W. V. McCall ........................................................ 365 185
R. G. Cassidy ........................................... 372 189

IV INDEX

Record from Circuit Court, Fifth Judicial Circuit, Lake
County, Florida— Continued

Reporter’s transcript o f testimony and proceedings—
Continued

Testimony on motions— Continued Original Print
R. E. Norris ........................................... 375 191
R. G. Cassidy (recalled) ......................... 378 193
W. Y. McCall (recalled) .................................... 382 196
Emmett B. Peter .................................... 392 202

Ruling on application for removal of cause. 394 203
Ruling on motion for continuance............................... 395 203
Renewal of motion for continuance and denial

thereof ........................................................................ 400 206
Qualification of jurors .............................................. 402 207
Testimony and proceedings after acceptance of

trial jury (omitted in printing).......................... 644
Reporter’s transcript of testimony and proceedings

on motion to withdraw pleas of not guilty and set
aside arraignment ............................................................ 841 377

Testimony of Alex Akerman, J r ................................ 844 378
Franklin IT. Williams......................... 846 380
J. W. Hunter ...................................... 858 389
Mrs. Florence Robertson ................... 866 396
George J. Dykes .................................. 867 397
Lawrence E. Dugger............................ 867 397

Ruling of the Court .................................................... 870 399
Reporter’s certificate. . . . (omitted in printing) . . 872

Opinion, Chapman, J .................................................................... 880 400
Judgment ...................................................................................... 891 408
Petition for rehearing......................(omitted in printing) . . 893
Order denying petition for rehearing ...................................... 897 409
Application for stay of execution (omitted in print

ing) .............................................................................................. 899
Order staying execution................(omitted in printing) . . 902
Stipulation re exhibits.................. (omitted in printing).. 904
Motion for, and order making petition for rehearing and

order denying same a. part of the record (omitted in
printing) .................................................................................... 906

Directions for making transcript of record on appeal
(omitted in printing) .............................................................. 910

Additional directions for making transcript of record on
appeal (omitted in printing).................................................. 913

Clerk’s certificate.............................. (omitted in printing) . . 914
Order granting motion for leave to proceed in forma

pauperis; granting petition for writ of certiorari and
transferring ease to appellate docket.................................... 915 409

[fols. 1-2] [Caption omitted]

[fols. 3-8]
IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE FIFTH JUDICIAL

CIRCUIT OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA, IN AND
FOR LAKE COUNTY

T he S tate oe F lorida

vs.
S am uel S heppard , W alter L. I rvin , C harlie G reenlee and

E rnest R . T homas

O rder to M ake S ervice op J u ry S u m m on s— -July 19, 1949
Circuit Court convened in Special Session in the Court

Room at 3:30 o ’clock P. M. Tuesday, July 19, with Judge
Futch presiding, and Jeff Wood, Court Reporter, State
Attorney Hunter, Sheriff McCall, Deputy Sheriff Hatcher
and Clerk Dykes present.

The Judge drew the names of 36 persons from the jury
box to serve as jurors, the Special Venire being returnable
at 5:00 o ’clock P. M. Wednesday, July 20, 1949.

The Judge also issued the following Order, to-wit:
It Is Ordered that the Sheriff of Lake County, Florida

make service of jury summons for the Special Venire re
turnable July 20th at 5:00 o ’clock P. M. in person and not
by registered mail.

Court then adjourned to 5:C0 o ’clock P. M. Wednesday,
July 20, 1949.

T. G. Futch, Judge.

[fo l. 9] I n th e C ircuit C ourt oe th e F if t h J udicial C ir
cuit op th e S tate of F lorida, in and for L ake C ounty

[Title omitted]

A rraignm ent and P leas— August 12, 1949
The above defendants, except Ernest R. Thomas who is

now deceased, being arraigned in open Court, the Court
appointed Harry E. Gaylord Attorney to defend them, and
each of the defendants, Samuel Sheppard, Walter L. Irvin

1— 420

and Charlie Greenlee, entered a plea of NOT GUILTY as
charged in the Indictment which was read by State Attor
ney Hunter. Charlie Greenlee not being of age was at
tended by his father Tom Greenlee. Charlie Greenlee was
asked his age by the State Attorney and stated he is 16
years old. Tom Greenlee being sworn by the Court stated
the boy is 16. Samuel Sheppard being asked his age, stated
he is 22 years old. Walter L. Irvin being asked his age,
stated he is 22 years old.

Tom Greenlee being asked by State Attorney Hunter if
he had an attorney to represent his boy, stated he had a
letter from a lawyer named Fordham. State Attorney
Hunter stated Attorney William A. Fordham of Tampa
[fol. 10] had made it known to him that he will not rep
resent Greenlee or any other of the defendants.

State Attorney Hunter asked the Judge to set this case
for trial, whereupon, the Judge announced the ease is set
for trial beginning at 10:00 o ’clock A. M. Monday, August
29, 1949.

Court then recessed from day to day.
T. G. Futch, Judge.

I n th e C ircuit Court of th e F if t h J udicial C ircuit of
t h e S tate of F lorida, in a i d for lak e county

[Title omitted]

O rder AppoinTinG PHYSiciAns— August 12, 1949
Upon motion of the defendants for the appointment of

competent physicians to make physical examination of each
of the defendants, it is ordered that Dr. C. M. Tyre and
Dr. H. G. Holland, reputable physicians of Lake County,
Florida, be and they are hereby appointed to make a physi
cal examination of each of the defendants and to make
report of their findings in writing to this court.

It is further ordered that the said Dr. C. M. Tyre and
Dr. H. G. Holland be paid for their services from appro
priate funds, and that same be entered as cost in this pro
ceeding.

Done and ordered at Tavares, Florida, this thy 12th day
of August, 1949.

T. G. Futch, Judge of Circuit Court.

[File endorsement omitted]

[ fo ls . 11-13] I n th e C iecxtit C ourt or th e F if t h J udicial
Circu it of th e S tate of F lorida, in and for L ake C ou nty

D raw in g of N ames of 150 P ersons to S erve as J urors—
August 19, 1949

And now on this 19th day of August 1949 in open Court,
the Judge of the Court, in the presence of the Clerk of the
Circuit Court and the Sheriff, did with his own hands draw
from the jury box the names of 150! persons to serve as
jurors for the Spring Term of Circuit Court of Lake
County, Florida, 1949.

T. G. Futch, Judge.

[ fo l. 14] In th e C ircu it C ourt of th e F if t h J udicial
C ircuit of th e S tate of F lorida, in and for Lake C ou nty

[Title omitted]

C o m m en cem ent of P roceedings; M otion for W ithdraw al
of P leas, E tc .—August 25, 1949

State Attorney Hunter announced he would like to have
the proceedings in this case taken down by the Court Re
porter, whereupon Court Reporter Wood was called into
the Court room and instructed by the Clerk to take the
proceedings.

State Attorney Hunter requested that W. B. Hunter, At
torney be sworn as an Assistant State Attorney, where
upon W. B. Hunter was sworn in by the Clerk as Assistant
State Attorney.

Attorney Alex Akerman, Jr., appeared as counsel for
the defendants, Samuel Sheppard, Walter L. Irvin and
Charlie Greenlee, who were present. Attorney Akerman
had as his associate Attorney Joseph E. Price. AJJoqiev
Akerman asked permission of the Court for Franklin H.
Williams, a practicing attorney froHT^Ne^..Xo3^Jxu.be
granTeJ permission to sit in as an associateAoJiliiLinAI^S
case, which request was granted by the Judge.

j^torneyWktifhiSirliTedmiotion to withdraw the defend
ants plea of Not Guilty and set aside the arraignment.
Motion read by Attorney Akerman.

State Attorney Hunter filed Reply to motion to withdraw
plea of Not Guilty and set aside arraignment. Reply to
Motion read by Attorney Hunter.

Attorney Akerman was sworn by the Court and testified
for the defendants.

Attorney Williams was sworn by the Court and testified
for the defendants.

Telegram from L. E. Thomas, Attorney of Miami, to
Franklin H. Williams, Attorney of New York, was filed in
evidence by Defendants’ counsel and marked Defendants
Exhibit No. 1.

■State Attorney Hunter was sworn by the Court and
testified for the State.
[fols. 15-20] State Attorney Hunter introduced and read
transcript of record of the arraignment on August 12, 1949.

The following witnesses were sworn and testified for the
State.

Mrs. Florence Robertson, Deputy Clerk, Mr. Geo. J.
Dykes, Clerk Circuit Court, and Mr. Lawrence Dugger,
an employee from State Prison at Raiford.

Motion of Attorney Akerman to Withdraw the defend
ants plea of Not Guilty and set aside the arraignment was
denied.

Attorney Akerman filed motion to Quash.
The Judge announced that Mr. Harry E. Gaylord, At

torney, who had been appointed by the Court to represent
the Defendants, asked permission on August 24th to with
draw as Attorney for the Defendants as other counsel had
been employed by someone to represent the Defendants.
This permission was granted by the Court.

Attorney Akerman filed Motion for Continuance, where
upon the Judge announced he would change the date of
the trial from Monday, August 29th, to Thursday, Septem
ber 1, 1949.

Court then recessed from day to day.
T. G. Futch, Judge.

[fo ls . 21-28] In C ircuit C ourt of L ake C ounty

D raw ing of N ames of 50 A dditional P ersons to S erve as
J urors— September 1, 1949

State Attorney Hunter stated he deemed it advisable
that a Special Venire of 50 additional jurors be drawn,
AYhereupon, the Judge in open court in the presence of the
Sheriff, the Clerk and other Court Officials drew from the

jury box a special venire of 50 additional names of persons
for jury service returnable instanter.

T. G. Futch, Judge.

[ fo l. 29] l x C ircuit C ourt of L ake C ounty

I n d ictm en t— Filed July 20, 1949

In the Name and by the Authority of the State of Florida

In the Circuit Court of the Fifth Judicial Circuit of the
State of Florida, for Lake County, at the Spring Term
thereof, in the year of our Lord, one thousand nine hundred
and forty nine, Lake County to-wit: The Grand Jurors of
the State of Florida, enquiring in and for the body of the
County of Lake, upon their oaths do present that Samuel
Sheppard and Walter L. Irvin and Charlie Greenlee and
Ernest R. Thomas late of the County of Lake, aforesaid, in
the Circuit and State aforesaid, laborers, on the 16th day of
July in the year of our Lord, one thousand nine hundred
and forty Nine, with force and arms at and in the County
of Lake aforesaid, in and upon one, Norma Padgette, a
female of the age of ten years or more, to-wit: Seventeen
years, violently and feloniously and assault did make, and
her the said Norma Padgette, then and there violently and
by force and against her will feloniously did ravish and
carnally know.
—against the form of the statute in such case made and
provided to the evil example of all others in the like case
offending, and against the peace and dignity of the State
of Florida.

J. W. Hunter, State Attorney for the Fifth Judicial
Circuit of the State of Florida Prosecuting for
Said State.

[Endorsed on back:] In Circuit Court, Fifth Judicial Cir
cuit of Florida, Lake County, Spring Term, A. I). 1949.
The State of Florida vs. Samuel Sheppard: Walter L. Ir
vin: Charlie Greenlee and Ernest R. Thomas,

Indictment for Rape
A True Bill, Austin B. Merritt, Foreman of the Grand

Jury. Presented by the Grand Jury in open court, and
filed in open court this 20 day of July, A. D. 1949. George
J. Dykes, Clerk. July 20, 1949. J. W. Hunter, State Attor
ney. (official seal)

[fols. 30-31] State Witnesses
Norma Padgette
Willie Padgette
Curtis Howard
James L. Yates
LeRoy Campbell
Dr. G. H. Binneveld
C. S. Carrol, Patrolman
Sgt. Bill Norris
Harry McDonald
G. T. Bass
Ethel Thomas

Henry Singleton
Howard Crowell
Wesley W. Evans
James Sheppard
Lt. Angel
T. J. Beggs
Ruby Lee Thomas
Luther Thomas
Bill Pennington
Charlie Staats
Henry Sheppard

S tate oe F lorida,
County of Lake.

I, Geo. J. Dykes Clerk of the Circuit Court, in and for
the said County, Do Hereby Certify the above to be a true
and correct copy of the Endorsement and Indictment in the
above stated cause. Witness my Hand and the Seal of said
Court, this the 8th day of September, A. D. 1949.

Geo. J. Dykes, Clerk of the Circuit Court. [Official
Seal]

[fols. 32-37] I n th e C ircuit C ourt of th e F if t h J udicial
C ircuit of th e S tate of F lorida, in and for L ake C ou nty

O rder to M ove P risoners—July 16, 1949

Whereas it has been made to appear that it is necessary
quickly to remove prisoners: Samuel Shepard and Walter
L. Irvin, now in the Custody of the Sheriff of Lake County,
Florida, from the Lake County Jail to another county for
safe keeping, to prevent injury to said prisoners, and it is
deemed inadvisable by reason of the circumstances to first

communicate with the Governor of the State of Florida;
now, therefore, it is

Ordered and Directed that the Sheriff of Lake County,
Florida, remove prisoners Samuel Shepard and Walter L.
Irvin from the Jail in Lake County, Florida, to another
county for safe keeping and to prevent injury to said pris
oners.

Done and Ordered at Tavares, Lake County, Florida, this
the 16th day of July, 1949.

T. G. Futch, Circuit Judge of the Fifth Judicial Cir
cuit of Florida.

[ fo l . 38] I n th e C ircu it C ourt of th e F if t h J udicial
C ir cu it of t h e S tate of F lorida, in and for L ake C o u nty

S tate of F lorida

vs.
W alter L . I rvin , C harles Greenlee, and S am u el S heppard

T ranscript of P roceedings had at A rraign m en t of th e
D efendants—Filed August 15, 1949

At the arraignment of the defendants, Walter L. Irvin,
Charles Greenlee and Samuel Sheppard, before Hon. Tru
man G. Futch, Judge of the above entitled court, in open
court, at Tavares, Lake County, Florida, on the 12th day
of August 1949, the following proceedings were had:

Appearances:
J. W. Hunter, State Attorney, representing the State,

Harry E. Gaylord, Representing the defendants.
Mr. Hunter. We are now ready for the arraignment of

Samuel Sheppard, Walter L. Irvin and Charles Greenlee.
Let the record show that Ernest R. Thomas is now deceased.

The Court. Let the record show that Mr. Harry E. Gay
lord has been appointed by the court to defend these de
fendants.

Mr. Hunter. Will the defendants please stand.
Q. What is your name?
A. Walter L. Irvin,

Q. Are yon represented by Mr. Gaylord as your attorney!
A. Yes, sir.
Q. What is your name!
A. Samuel Sheppard sir.
Q. Are you represented also by Mr. Gaylord!
A. Yes, sir.

[fol. 39] A. Yes, sir.
Q. What is your name!
A. Charles Greenlee.
Q. Are you also represented by Mr. Gaylord!
A. Yes, sir.
Q. What is your age Samuel Sheppard!
A. Twenty two years.
Q. What is your age WTalter L. Irvin!
A. Twenty-two years.
Q. What is your age Charles Greenlee!
A. Sixteen years.
Q. Who is your father!
A. Tom Greenlee.

Mr. Hunter. If he is in the court room I would like to
have him come down front.

Tom Greenlee came down front.
Mr. Hunter. Swear Tom Greenlee please sir.
Tom Greenlee sworn by the court.
Mr. Hunter. What is your name!
A. Tom Greenlee.
Q. Where do you live!
A. Santafe, Florida.
Q. Are you related to Charles Greenlee!
A. Yes, sir. He is my boy.
Q. He is your son!
A. Yes, sir.
Q. How old is he!
A. He was sixteen last June.
Q. Are you here on his behalf as his father!
A. Yes, sir.
Q. The court prior to coming into the court room ap

pointed Harry E. Gaylord, a member of this bar, to rep
resent your son, is that satisfactory to you!
[fol. 40] A. I got a letter from a lawyer saying he was
going to defend the boy.

Q. Who was the lawyer!
A. Fordham.
Mr. Hunter. Let the record show that William A. Ford-

ham of Tampa has made it known to the State Attorney that
he will not represent Charles Greenlee, or any of the de
fendants ; that he is not in the case at present, and then
the court appointed Mr. Gaylord, is that satisfactory to
you? You can hire anybody else later if you want to.

A. I haven’t made any arrangements for a lawyer for
the boy. I didn’t know any.

Q. You can make any arrangement before the trial that
you want to. What I am asking you now is it satisfactory
that Mr. Gaylord represent you- boy simply for this ar
raignment. I will read the indictment and ask them
whether they are guilty or not guilty?

A. Yes, sir, it will be alright.
Mr. Hunter. Mr. Gaylord are you ready for the arraign

ment ?
Mr. Gaylord. Yes, sir, I am ready for the arraignment.
Indictment read to the defendants.
Mr. Hunter. What do you say Walter L. Irvin, guilty or

not guilty?
Walter L. Irvin. Not guilty.
Q. What do you say Charles Greenlee, guilty or not

guilty ?
Charles Greenlee. Not guilty.
Q. What do you say Samuel Sheppard, guilty or not

guilty?
Samuel Sheppard. Not guilty.

[fol. 41] Mr. Hunter. The defendants being arraigned
in open court each enters a plea of not guilty.

Mr. Hunter. I would like to ask that the court set this
case for trial, and I can say in behalf of the State that we
will he ready by the 29th day of August 1949.

The Court. Is that alright with you Mr. Gaylord?
A. Yes, sir.
The Court. The case is set for trial beginning at ten

o ’clock A. M. August 29, 1949.
The Court. Is there anything further at the present

time ?

Mr. Hunter. Nothing further at the present time.
Mr. Hunter. I would like to say that the State will, sum

mon any witnesses that, counsel for the defendants wish
served, by simply giving us the names of the witnesses.

The Court. Give Mr. Gaylord the names of any witnesses
you want and the State will have them summoned and have
them here on the day of the trial. Give the list of witnesses
to Mr. Gaylord so he can present it to the State Attorney.
At the request of the State Attorney I ask those persons
present in the court room to please retire in an orderly
manner before the defendants are taken out by the sheriff
and his deputies.

Mr. Gaylord. The defendants desire to have a physical
examination by doctors to be appointed by the court of each
of the defendants.

Mr. Hunter. The State will not oppose the motion. We
sanction it, and join counsel for defendants in making it.

The Court. The motion is granted and I will appoint
Dr. C. M. Tyre and Dr. S. C. Colley.
[fol. 42-43] Reporter’s Certificate to foregoing transcript
omitted in printing.

[ fo l. 44] In C ircu it C ourt of L a k e C ounty

S pecial R ules of Court—Filed Aug. 23, 1949
I have every confidence that the citizens of Lake County

will lend their aid and assistance to orderly and legal pro
cedure to the end that complete justice may be accomplished
in the trial set for August 29th in Tavares, Therefore the
special rules promulgated for this trial are not to be taken
or considered as any indication of fear or lack of confi
dence. The rules are promulgated as a precaution against
the possiBTIitv' of some agitator or agent being sent in do
purposely start trouble to,The end Hint the..critics of the
south might have something to base criticism upon.

*1 am, therefore^ calling upon all citizens and residents of
Lake County, and of Florida, to lend every assistance to
the officers of this Court in maintaining order and decorum
throughout Lake County during the course of this trial.

For all sessions of the Circuit Court of the Fifth Ju
dicial Circuit of the State of Florida, in and for Lake

County, to be held during the week beginning August 29,
1949, the following rules will be in foree and effect:

1. Only such number of visitors will be allowed to enter
the court room as can be seated by the regular seating ac
commodations of the court room, and no one will be al
lowed to stand while Court is in session, except the officers
of the Court and those engaged in the trial.

2. No one will be allowed to stand or loiter in the hall
ways outside the court room on the third floor of the court
house while Court is in session or during the time thirty
minutes before Court convenes and thirty minutes after
Court recesses or adjourns.

3. No one will be allowed to stand, sit or loiter on the
stair steps of the court house above the second floor.

4. The elevator will be closed to all except officers of the
Court, or individuals to whom the Sheriff may give special
permission because of age or physical infirmity, or who
may be by him permitted to visit the jail quarters on the
fourth floor.

5. Each pgrson desiring to go to the court, room floor
[fob.45] will be required to submit to search by the Sheriff
or his deputiesJ-anweapohs.

6. , No person will be permitted to take any valise, satchel, I j
bag, basket, bottle, jar, jug, bucket, package, bundle, or other ( /
such item to the third floor of the court house.

7. All crutches, canes, walking sticks, and other aids to
locomotion shall be carefully inspected by the Sheriff or
his deputies, and unless necessary for the individual as an
aid to walking shall not be allowed above the second floor
of the court house.

8. No demonstration of any nature, handclapping or
otherwise, will be permitted at any time while Court is in
session.

9. The Sheriff will permit entry to the court room by the
general public by only two doors, at each of which he will
place a deputy or bailiff at all times while Court is in ses
sion.

10. No one, other than officers of the Court, jurors, the
defendants, members of the bar, witnesses and the press,
exclusive of photographers, shall be allowed inside the
railing.

11. No pictures or photographs shall be made, exposed
or taken inside the court room, and no one will be allowed to

take any photographic or picture making devise inside the
court room.

12. The Sheriff of Lake County, Florida, is charged with
the duty of enforcing these rules and to that end he is au
thorized to employ such number of deputies as may be nec
essaryjit the expense of Lake County, Florida, as part of
the costs of the trial to be conducted during the time cov
ered by these rules.

Done and ordered at Tavares, Florida, this the 23rd day
of August 1949.

T. G. Futch, Circuit Judge

[ fo l. 46] In th e C ibcuit C ourt, F if t h J udicial C ircu it ,
IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF LAKE

[Title omitted]

M otion fob Co n tin u an ce—Filed August 25, 1949

Come now the defendants, Charles Greenlee, Samuel
Sheppard and Walter Irvin, by their undersigned counsel
and file, this, their motion for continuance, hereby ex
pressly reserving the right to file such other motions or
pleas as they may lawfully have and for grounds for said
motion state:

I
That the above named defendants, Charles Greenlee,

Samuel Sheppard and Walter Irvin were taken in custody
by the Sheriff of Lake County on the 16tli day of July,
A. D., 1949. That, shortly thereafter, they were removed
from the county jail at Tavares, Lake County, and trans
ported to the State Prison at Baiford, because of the gen
eral state of excitement, prejudice, mob violence and
lawlessness then existing in and throughout the County
of Lake, caused and created by an attitude or prejudice
directed at and towards your defendants and because of
the fear that your defendants would be subject to physical
harm and violence by lawless persons.

II
That, thereafter, on or about the 31st day of July, A. D.,

1949, they did request, Franklin H. Williams, a member

[fol. 47] of the Bar of the State of New York, to obtain
for them, a competent and qualified member of the Bar of
the State of Florida to take every legal step necessary
and proper in their defense to whatever charge upon which
they were then being held in custody.

III
That the said Franklin H. Williams did inform your

defendants that he would immediately make every effort
to obtain such a qualified member of the Bar of the State
of Florida as requested by them to carry out their wishes
in the premises and that he did immediately, thereafter,
make constant and diligent effort to obtain a qualified de
fense counsel for your defendants. That the said Frank
lin H. Williams contacted numerous members of the Bar
of the State of Florida but was unable to retain any one
of them for the purpose of conducting the defense of your
defendants until the night of the 22nd day of August, A. D.,
1949, at which time, Alex Akerman, Jr., agreed to act
in the capacity of defense counsel and was retained by your
defendants.

IV
That in the short time between the employment of de

fense counsel and the date set for the trial of their cases,
their defense counsel will not be able to properly prepare
their defense and will thus be prevented from exercising* his
full competency in such capacity and your defendants
thereby will be deprived of life or liberty without due
process of law and denied the equal protection of the laws
as guaranteed them by the Fourteenth Amendment to the
U. S. Constitution, the Constitution and Laws of the State
of Florida.

[fol. 48] V
That at the time that the grand jury, which found and

returned the indictment against your defendants herein,
was impanelled and summoned, lawless mobs were roam
ing throughout the County of Lake determined to seek and
find your defendants and to then inflict grievous bodily
injury upon them and to deny them, life and liberty with
out due process of law; and that at the time said grand
jury was summoned and impanelled and prior thereto, a
state of hysteria, prejudice and ill-feeling was rampant

throughout the County and among a large body of citizens
thereof, directed against your defendants and other mem
bers of the Negro race; and that homes and property be
longing to members of the Negro race were burned, de
stroyed and damaged by armed, lawless mobs; that local
and county law enforcement officials were unable to cope
with this situation, requiring, therefore, that the State
Militia be called out and stationed at various points
throughout the County of Lake to defend the lives and
property of Negro citizens of Lake County; that at the
time said grand jury was summoned and impanelled the
newspapers which were widely distributed, disseminated
and read throughout said County contained cartoons and
editorials, calling for and demanding that the extreme
penalty of death be levelled against your defendants there
by creating in the minds of the readers of such publica
tions prejudiced, biased and pre-eonceived notions of the
innocence or guilt of your defendants of the crime for
which they were subsequently indicted by the grand jury
which was at that time summoned and impanelled. That
in view of these facts and circumstances, your defendants ’
counsel, in the exercise of his full competency and in order
to fulfill his obligations and duties as an officer of this
Court and as a member of the Bar of the State of Florida,
may desire and conclude, after a careful investigation and
consideration of these facts and circumstances, that a Mo
tion to Quash the indictment herein is necessary and prop
er; and that unless sufficient and reasonable time for such
investigation and consideration is granted to the said de
fense counsel by this Court your defendants will be denied
[fol. 49] rights guaranteed them by the Fourteenth Amend
ment to the IJ. S. Constitution, the Constitution and Laws
of the State of Florida.

VI
That your defendants were indicted by the grand jury

of the County of Lake, Florida, in which County, upon
information and belief, no member of your defendants race,
namely, the Colored or Negro race has ever served upon
a grand jury of such County with the exception of one
Negro, a County employee, who served on the grand jury
which returned the indictment herein; that in said County
a large proportion of the citizens thereof who qualified
for such grand jury service are members of the ^Colored
or Negro race; that your defendants ’ counsel desires and

needs a sufficient and reasonable time to investigate and
ascertain whether there has been a systematic exclusion
of Negroes from grand jury service in such County in
violation of rights guaranteed to your defendants by the
U. 8. Constitution; and that the denial of such opportunity
will violate rights guaranteed them by the Fourteenth
Amendment to the U. S. Constitution, the Constitution and
Laws of the State of Florida.

VII
That your defendants’ counsel has not as yet been fur

nished with a copy of the indictment herein and has not
had the opportunity to investigate the summoning, im
panelling, qualifications or disqualifications of said grand
jurors and thus does not know whether the indictment here
in is valid and unless given a reasonable opportunity to
investigate, your defendants may be deprived of life or
liberty without due process of law and denied the equal
protection of the laws as guaranteed them by the Four
teenth Amendment to the U. S. Constitution, the Constitu
tion and Laws of the State of Florida.

[fob 50] VIII
That your defendants are informed and do believe that

an investigation will reveal that they have legal grounds
for a change of venue in these cases, and that a change of
venue is necessary if they are to receive a fair and impar
tial trial, and they do desire a change of venue in this
case, but their defense counsel has not had sufficient time
to properly investigate the facts and prepare a Motion
for change of venue and obtain the necessary affidavits
therefor and that unless your defendants’ counsel is given
a reasonable time to investigate the facts and prepare said
Motion, your defendants will be deprived of life or liberty
without due process of law and denied the equal protection
of the laws as guaranteed them by the Fourteenth Amend
ment to the Constitution of the United States, the Con
stitution and Laws of the State of Florida.

IN
That your defendants are held in custody in the State

Prison at Eaiford and that their only opportunity to con
tact parties who may be material witnesses for their

defense is through their counsel and that because of the
mob violence hereinabove set out many of these parties
have been driven out of their homes in Groveland in the
County of Lake to distant points in Florida and have been
warned not to return to Groveland which makes it ex
tremely difficult for your defense counsel to confer with
these parties and to ascertain whether they are material
witnesses, and if so, to procure their attendance at the
trial; and that unless given a reasonable and sufficient time
in which to contact and interview said prospective wit
nesses your defendants will thus be denied the right of
proper preparation for their defense and thus be denied
rights guaranteed to them by the Constitution of the United
States, the Constitution and Laws of the State of Florida.

[fol. 51] X
That your defendants are now incarcerated in the State

Prison at Raiford, a distance of more than one hundred
miles from Lake County, Florida, and more than one hun
dred miles from the office of their defense counsel which
makes it extremely inconvenient and impractical for your
defendants to confer with their counsel, thus, denying unto
your defendants the right of proper preparation for their
defense, a fundamental right guaranteed them by the Con
stitution of the United States and the Constitution of the
State of Florida.

XI
That shortly after their arrest, a mob of several hundred

persons gathered around the jail in Tavares where your
defendants had been incarcerated demanding that defend
ants be turned over to them and that upon learning that
defendants were no longer in said jail, said mob did seek
its vengeance by destroying and damaging the residence
of the family of one of your defendants and destroying and
damaging the property of other members of your defend
ants race and generally intimidating and terrorizing all of
the citizens of the Negro race in and around the town of
Groveland and other communities in Lake County; that
it was necessary for the State Militia to be called out and
it was necessary for your defendants to be removed to
the State Prison under heavy guard where they have re
mained since, with the exception of the short period of time

when they were brought back for the arraignment; that
the great public indignation and hostility was aroused not
only against your defendants, but against many members
of their race, which indignation continues up to the date of
this Motion; that widespread newspaper publicity has been
given and your defendants have been warned through the
editorial column of at lesat, one of the newspapers, which
is widely read throughout Lake County, that if their at
torneys attempt to diligently defend them, that mob vio
lence may occur and other inflammatory newspaper articles
and cartoons have been published and disseminated
[fol. 52] throughout Lake County; that because of the above
facts, it was practically impossible for your defendants
to obtain counsel to defend them and counsel was only ob
tained after diligent efforts made over a period of one
month; that, as shown above, a situation now exists in
the County of Lake which makes it practically and psy
chologically impossible to secure a fair and impartial trial
in the County of Lake at the present time and unless the
trial in this case is postponed, your defendants will not
receive a fair and impartial trial and will be denied of
fundamental rights guaranteed them by the Constitution
of the United -States of America and the Constitution of
the State of Florida.

X II
That your defendants are charged with the crime of rape,

a capital offense under the laws of the State of Florida;
that due to the serious and heinous nature of this charge
a proper defense demands unusual diligence and the care
ful exploration of every avenue and byway of the law and
facts; that the failure of this Court to grant a reasonable
and sufficient time for this purpose will deny to your de
fendants rights guaranteed them by the Constitution of the
United States and of the State of Florida.

Wherefore, because of the above stated grounds and
each of them, defendants pray that this Court will postpone
the trial in this cause until such time as is reasonable for
their defense counsel to th-roughly and properly prepare
their defense and until such time as they can receive a fair
and impartial trial.

Alex Akerman, Jr., Attorney for Defendants.

2—420

I, Alex Akerman, Jr., do hereby certify that I am the
counsel for the defendants in the above cause and that
the above and foregoing Motion is made in good faith.

Alex Akerman, Jr.

[fols. 53-56] Duly sworn to by Alex Akerman, Jr. Jurat
omitted in printing.

[fol. 57] l x th e C ircu it C ourt, F if t h J udicial C ircu it ,
IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF LAKE

[Title omitted]

M otion to W ith draw P leas of N ot Gu il t y and S et A side
A rraign m en t—-Filed August 25, 1949

Come now the defendants, Charles Greenlee, Samuel
Shepherd and Walter Irvin, by their attorney undersigned
and respectfully move the Court for permission to withdraw
their Pleas of Not Guilty entered on the 12th day of August,
A. D., 1949, and to set aside the arraignment held at the
time of the entry of said Pleas and as grounds for said
Motion state:

I
That the above named defendants, Charles Greenlee,

Samuel Shepherd and Walter Irvin were taken in custody by
the Sheriff of Lake County on the 16th day of July, A. D.,
1949. That, shortly thereafter, they were removed from the
county jail at Tavares, Lake County, and transported to
the State Prison at Raiford, because of the general state of
excitement, prejudice, mob violence and lawlessness then
existing in and throughout the County of Lake, caused and
created by an attitude of prejudice directed at and towards
your defendants and because of the fear that your defend
ants would be subject to physical harm and violence by
lawless persons.

II
That, thereafter, on or about the 31st day of July, A. D.,

1949, they did request, Franklin H. Williams, a member of
[fol. 58] the Bar of the State of New York, to obtain for
them, a competent and qualified member of the Bar of the
State of Florida to take every legal step necessary and

proper in their defense to whatever charge upon which they
were then being held in custody.

III
That the said Franklin H. Williams did inform your de

fendants that he would immediately make every effort to
obtain such a qualified member of the Bar of the State of
Florida as requested by them to carry out their wishes
in the premises and that he did immediately, thereafter,
make constant and diligent effort to obtain a qualified
defense counsel for your defendants. That the said Frank
lin H. Williams contacted numerous members of the Bar
of the State of Florida but was unable to retain any one of
them for the purpose of conducting the defense of your
defendants until the night of the 22nd day of August, A. D.,
1949, at which time, Alex Akerman, Jr., agreed to act in the
capacity of defense counsel and was retained by your de
fendants.

IV
That prior thereto, and on or about the 11th day of

August, A. D., 1949, the State’s Attorney, J. W. Hunter,
was informed of the efforts then being exerted by the said
Franklin H. Williams to obtain and retain for your defend
ants qualified defense counsel. That the said State’s
Attorney was requested to postpone the arraignment of
your defendants until such time as competent counsel was
retained.

V
That on the 12th day of August, A. D., 1949, your defend

ants were arraigned before the Judge of the Circuit Court
and at such arraignment were represented by one Harry
Gaylord, Esq., a member of the Bar of the State of Florida,
appointed by the said Court to represent the above defend
ants at said arraignment.

[fob 59] VI
That your defendants have been informed, that at such

time, the said Harry Gaylord, Esq., who has now withdrawn
as counsel, was assured by the above mentioned State’s
Attorney and the above mentioned Judge of the said Circuit
Court, that the entering of a plea to the indictment at said
arraignment would not waive any rights of which they

were possessed prior to such arraignment and that upon
obtaining and retaining defense counsel they would then
have the right to withdraw their plea and file and enter
any plea or motion with the same force and effect as if said
motion or plea had been filed prior to said arraignment.

V II
That their defense counsel, Alex Akerman, Jr., has not

had sufficient or reasonable time to investigate the condi
tions and circumstances surrounding the arrest and deten
tion of your defendants, the impanelling of the grand jury
and the return of the indictment herein and the other
steps and proceedings had in this cause to date and was not
present at the arraignment and did not represent your
defendants at the time thereof, and has not been furnished a
copy of the indictment.

VIII
That your defendants have been advised that during all

of the proceedings had in this cause they were guaranteed
equal protection of the laws and due process of law by
the Fourteenth Amendment to the IT. S. Constitution and by
the Constitution of the State of Florida.

IX
That your defendants and their counsel have grave and

serious doubts as to the legality of the indictment and
other proceedings had and taken in this cause from the
time of their original detention to date and they believe that
if their counsel is given a sufficient and reasonable time to
[fol. 60] investigate these matters, that it will appear, that
the rights guaranteed them by the Fourteenth Amendment
to the U. S. Constitution, the Constitution and Laws of the
State of Florida, have been violated.

X
That your defendants have been advised and verily be

lieve that unless a reasonable and sufficient time is given for
their said counsel to thoroughly and properly investigate the
facts and circumstances surrounding the various steps and
proceedings had in this cause that he, the said Alex Aker
man, Jr., by virtue of such denial will be prevented and pre
cluded from exercising his full competency as their defense

counsel and that your defendants will thereby be deprived of
life or liberty without due process of law and denied the
equal protection of the laws as guaranteed them by the
Fourteenth Amendment to the II. S. Constitution and the
Constitution of the State of Florida.

Wherefore, your defendants pray that this Court will
grant them permission to withdraw the Pleas of Not Guilty
entered on the 12th day of August, A. D., 1949 and set
aside the arraignment held at the time of the entry of said
Pleas and will postpone further arraignment in this cause
until such time as is reasonable for the defense counsel
to thoroughly and properly investigate all the proceedings
in this matter and to advise them as to wdiat steps are neces
sary and proper to be taken by them prior to the arraign
ment.

Alex Akerman, Jr., Attorney for Defendants, 401
First National Bank Building, Orlando, Florida.

[fol. 61] Duly sworn to by Alex Akerman, Jr.. Jurat
omitted in 'printing.

[fols. 62-67] In C ircu it C ourt of L ake C ounty

Capias—Filed August 26, 1949

T he S tate of F lorida

To All and Singular the Sheriffs of the State of Florida—
Greeting:
You are Hereby Commanded to take Ernest R. Thomas

if he be found in your County, and him safely keep so that
you have his body before the Judge of our Circuit Court
of the Fifth Judicial Circuit of the State of Florida, at
the Court House in Tavares, to answer unto the State of
Florida on an indictment found against him by the Grand
Jurors for the County of Lake, for Rape And have you then
and there this Writ.

Witness Geo. J. Dykes, Clerk of our said Court, and the
Seal of our said Court at the Court House at Tavares,
aforesaid, on this the 20th day of July, A. D. 1949.
(Official Seal.)

Geo. J. Dykes, Clerk. By Florence Robertson, D. C.

Received this writ on the 25th day of July, 1949, and did
not execute same as during the attempt, the within named,
Ernest J. Thomas, was killed for resisting arrest, in
Madison County, Florida.

This the 29th day of July, 1949.
(Signed) Simmie H. Moore, Sheriff, Madison County.

By Louise Wycks, D. S.

[File endorsement omitted.]

[fo l. 68] 1st C ircuit C ourt of L ake C ounty

A ffidavit of L. E. T hom as , in r e : S tate of F lorida v .
S h eph erd , et al .

S tate of F lorida,
County of Dade, ss.:

Personally appeared before me an officer duly authorized
to administer oaths and take acknowledgments, L. E.
Thomas, who on oath says: That he is a licensed practicing
attorney with offices at 1035 N. W. Second Avenue, Miami,
Florida, and has so been licensed and practicing at the
above address for the past 13 years immediately prior to
making this affidavit.

That on Monday August 8, 1949, he received a long dis
tance telephone call from Mr. J. W. Hunter, State Attorney
at Tavares, Florida, at which time Mr. Hunter inquired
whether affiant represented the defendants in the care of—
State of Florida vs. Shepherd, et A l; said state attorney
further stated that he wished to arraign said defendants
during that week and that he had been advised affiant had
made some inquires about the case and wished to know
affiant’s status in connection therewith. That affiant stated
he was not retained to represent said defendants, had not
planned to be present at arraignment, but that he was
employed by a national organization to make a prelim
inary investigation and forward information as to the
nature of the indictment, time of arraignment and the like;
that said state attorney advised affiant that he would ask
for arraignment not later than Friday of that week. Affi
ant stated to said state attorney that he would let him know

not later than Thursday August 11, 1949, whether affiant
would be engaged in defense of said defendants. Affiant
says that about 12 noon on the 11th day of August 1949, he
placed a long distance telephone call from his office to State
Attorney J. W. Hunter, Tavares, Florida, and after having
Tavares local operator try phones numbers— 82, 19, and
43, he did succeed in contacting said state attorney at his
offices under one of these telephone numbers. That affiant
advised Mr. Hunter that affiant would not engage in the
defense, that he was not retained to represent said defend
ants ; affiant further stated that he had been authorized to
[fol. 69] request arraignment be postponed a week or ten
days in order to enable persons interested to complete their
plans for employing defense counsel; that said state attor
ney again said to affiant over said long distance telephone
that he would not postpone the arraignment for such a
period of time, that he would request the court to arraign
said defendants that week not later than Friday August
12, 1949; that said state attorney further said that if no
counsel had been retained by the time of arraignment the
court would appoint counsel and any attorney employed by
the defendants or on their behalf subsequent to arraign
ment could, of course, come into the case and the appointed
counsel could retire; that in the event other counsel were
employed after the arraignment, he, the said state attorney,
would waive any and all right to object to any motion made
to quash the indictment or any other motion that should
have or could have been made prior to arraignment. That
affiant did then and there and that time forward to Attorney
Franklin H. Williams, 20 West, 40th Street, New York 18,
New York, for the benefit of the National Association for
the Advancement of Colored People, the following tele
gram :

“ Personal Health Will Not Permit My Engagement
in Bigorous Trial Unless Other Counsel Unavailable
(Stop) Prosecutor Declines Arraignment Delay but
Will Thereafter Waive Bight Against Motions On In
dictment (Stop) Court in Session Counsel Will Be Ap
pointed Temporarily Trial Date 7 to 10 Days Away.
Prosecutor Awaiting Information on Counsel.”

That the statements here made with respect to telephone
conversation August 11, 1949, are in accordance with affi

ant’s memory and pencil memorandum made by him during
the course of conversation.

Further Affiant Sayeth Not.
L. E. Thomas.

[fols. 70-77] Sworn to and subscribed before me at Miami,
Florida, this the 26th day of August A. D. 1949, at Miami,
Dade County, Florida.

E. B. Brooks, Notary Public State of Florida at
Large: [Notarial Seal.]

[ fo l. 78] I n th e C ircuit C ourt, F if t h J udicial C ircu it ,
IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF LAKE

[Title omitted]

A pplication for R emoval of Cause—Filed August 29, 1949
Come now the defendants, Charles Greenlee, Samuel

Shepherd and Walter Irvin, by their attorney undersigned,
and file this, their Motion for Removal of the Cause from
the Circuit Court of the Fifth Judicial Circuit in and for
the County of Lake, Florida, and respectfully show unto
the Court:

I
That the above named defendants, Charles Greenlee,

Samuel Shepherd and Walter Irvin were taken in custody
by the Sheriff of Lake County on the 16th day of July, A. D.,
1949. That, shortly thereafter, they were removed from
the County jail at Tavares, Lake County, and transported
to the State Prison at Raiford, because of the general state
of excitement, prejudice, mob violence and lawlessness then
existing in and throughout the County of Lake, caused and
created by an attitude of prejudice directed at and towards
your defendants and because of the fear that your defend
ants would be subject to physical harm and violence by
lawless persons.

II
That, thereafter, on or about the 31st day of July, A. D.,

1949, they did request, Franklin H. Williams, a member of
the Bar of the State of New York, to obtain for them, a
competent and qualified member of the Bar of the State of

[fol. 79] Florida to take every legal step necessary and
proper in their defense to whatever charge upon which
they were then being held in custody.

III
That the said Franklin H. Williams did inform your de

fendants that he would immediately make every effort to
obtain such a qualified member of the Bar of the State of
Florida as requested by them to carry out their wishes in
the premises and that he did immediately, thereafter, make
a constant and diligent effort to obtain a qualified defense
counsel for your defendants. That the said Franklin H.
Williams contacted numerous members of the Bar of the
State of Florida but was unable to retain any one of them
for the purpose of conducting the defense of your defend
ants until the night of the 22nd day of August, A. D., 1949,
at which time, Alex Akerman, Jr., agreed to act in the
capacity of defense counsel and was retained by your de
fendants.

IV
That since your defendants’ counsel has been retained

he has had to appear before this Court in numerous hear
ings and has had to prepare numerous pleadings and it was
necessary to investigate in connection with the prepara
tion for this Motion and that this is the earliest opportunity
your defendants have had to prepare and file this Motion
for Removal of the Cause.

V
That your defendants have made diligent effort to obtain

affidavits in support of this Motion but because of the feel
ing of ill_ will and prejudice toward your defendants and
hostile public sentiment on the part of a great number of
citizens of Lake County and because other citizens, al
though they believed your defendants could not receive a
fair and impartial trial in Lake County, Florida, feared
for their own safety if they made such affidavits, and be
cause of the lack of time, your defendants have only been
able to obtain such affidavits as are attached hereto.

[fol. 80] VI
That shortly after their arrest, a mob of several hundred

persons gathered around the jail at Tavares where your

defendants have been incarcerated, demanding that de
fendants be turned over to them and that upon learning
that your defendants were no longer in said jail, said mob
did seek its vengeance by destroying and damaging the
residence of the family of one of your defendants and de
stroying and damaging the property of other members of
your defendants race and generally intimidating and ter
rorizing all of the citizens of the Negro race in and around
the town of Groveland and other communities in Lake
County; that it was necessary for the State Militia to be
called out and it was necessary for your defendants to be
removed to the State Prison under heavy guard where they
have remained until the arraignment; that the great public
indignation and hostility was aroused not only against
your defendants, but against many members of their race;
which indignation continues up to the date of this Motion;
that widespread newspaper publicity has been given and
your defendants have been warned through the editorial
column of at least one of the newspapers, which is widely
real throughout Lake County, that if their attorneys at
tempt to diligently defend them, that mob violence may oc
cur and other inflammatory newspaper articles and car
toons have been published and disseminated throughout
Lake County, copies of some of said newspaper stories are
hereto attached and marked exhibits number one to twenty
and made a part of this Motion; that because of the above
facts, it was practically impossible for your defendants
to obtain counsel to defend them and counsel was only ob
tained after diligent efforts made over a period of one
month; that, as shown above, a situation now exists in the
County of Lake which makes it practically and psychologi
cally impossible to secure a fair and impartial trial in the
County of Lake and unless the cause is removed from Lake
County, Florida your defendants will not receive a fair and
impartial trial and will be denied fundamental rights guar
anteed them by the Constitution of the United States of
ffol. 81] America and the Constitution of the State of
Florida.

VII
That your defendants believe that if they are brought to

trial in Lake County, Florida, lawless and threatening mobs
will be in and around the court house evincing a hostile and
threatening attitude toward your defendants, their coun

sel and their witnesses and because of said mobs and crowds
your defendants and their attorney will not be able to
properly present their defense and that the jury will not
be able to calmly and deliberately consider their case.

VIII
That rumor is prevalent in Lake County, Florida and

articles have appeared in newspapers and have been dis
seminated throughout Lake County, Florida to the effect
that unless your defendants are found guilty at their trial,
mobs will take the law into their own hands and lynch your
defendants.

IX
That the prejudice and ill-feeling on the part of a great

number of the citizens of Lake County toward your de
fendants is so great that it has been necessary for this
Court to adopt and post rules for their intended trial, a
copy of said rules so posted is hereto attached, marked
Exhibit XXI, and made a part of this Motion.

X
That on account of the ill-feeling and prejudice on the

part of a great number of the citizens of Lake County and
because your applicants are so odious to the inhabitants of
Lake County, your defendants fear that if compelled to
stand trial in Lake County, take the stand and testify in
their own behalf that grievous bodily harm may be inflicted
upon them or they may be lynched.

XI
That directly after their arrest your defendants were

brutally beaten and abused by persons purporting to be
law enforcement officials of Lake County, Florida and that
[fob 82] they are now in the custody of the law enforce
ment officials of the County of Lake and if compelled to
stand trial in Lake County, Florida, they will be in cus
tody of the said law enforcement officials; that, because of
said beatings and other intimidations, they are in great
fear of said law enforcement officials and fear for their
safety if they are to be compelled to stand trial in Lake
County, Florida.

X II
That after a hearing on the pleadings in this cause held

on the 25th day of August, A. D., 1949, your defendants
were again questioned by law enforcement officials of the
County of Lake, Florida, in whose custody your defendants
are, and said law enforcement officials did ask “ What are
those nigger lawyers putting you up to now” and were in
formed by said law enforcement officials that their “ nigger”
lawyers better watch their step or they would be in jail
along with them and that your defendants did believe that
if compelled to stand trial in Lake County, Florida, their
counsel will not be able to properly defend them because,
not only of intimidation by the public generally, but be
cause of the fear and intimidation on the part of law en
forcement officials of Lake County, Florida.

X III
That the Mother and Father and other members of the

family of Samuel Shepherd are material witnesses for
your defendants; that, directly after the occur-ance of the
crime for which these defendants are charged a lawless and
threatening mob went into the home of the defendant,
Samuel Shepherd, which was also the home of his Mother
and Father and burned said home to the ground; that the
Mother and Father and other members of the family of
Samuel Shepherd were forced to flee from Lake County,
Florida for their safety and were told that if they returned
to Lake County, Florida they would be lynched; that the
Mother, Father and other members of the family of Walter
Irvin are material witnesses for your defendants and the
[fob 83] Mother, Father and other members of the family of
Walter Irvin were forced to flee from Lake County, Florida
for their safety and were told that if they returned to Lake
County, Florida, they would be lynched; that the presence
of these witnesses is necessary for the proper defense of
your defendants; that your defendants fear for the life and
safety of their parents and other members of their family
if they are compelled to come into Lake County, Florida
and testify in their behalf; and that, even though proper
protection be taken for their safety, because of the experi
ence they have suffered at the hands of mobs of Lake
County, Florida, the mere return to Lake County, Florida

will so terrify them that they will not have control of their
mental faculties and be able to testify in this cause.

XIV
That because of the above grounds and each of them, if

your defendants are compelled to stand trial in Lake
County, Florida, they will thereby be deprived of life or
liberty without due process of law and denied the equal
protection of the laws as guaranteed them by the Fourteenth
Amendment to the U. S. Constitution and the Constitution
and Laws of the State of Florida.

Wherefore, because of the above stated grounds and each
of them, the defendants pray that this Court will enter an
Order removing this cause from the Circuit Court of the
Fifth Judicial Circuit in and for the County of Lake,
Florida.

Alex Akerman, Jr. Attorney for Defendants.

I, Alex Akerman, Jr., do hereby certify that I am the
counsel for the defendants in the above cause and that the
above and foregoing application is made in good faith.

Alex Akerman, Jr.

[fols. 84-85] Duly sworn to by defendants. Jurat omitted
in printing.

[fol. 86] Here follows clippings from certain newspapers
which are attached to the Motion, “ Application for Removal
of Cause” , and are marked: Exhibits numbers I to X X in
clusive and made a part of said Motion:

I— From The Sunday Sentinel Star dated July 17, 1949.
II— From Orlando Morning Sentinel dated July 18, 1949.
III— From Orlando Evening Star dated July 18, 1949.
IV— —From Orlando Evening Star dated July 18, 1949.
Y—From Orlando Morning Sentinel dated July 19, 1949.
VI— From Orlando Evening Star dated July 19, 1949.
VII— From Orlando Evening Star dated July 19, 1949.
VIII— From Orlando Evening Star dated July 19,1949.
IX — From Orlando Evening Star dated July 19, 1949.
X — From Orlando Morning Sentinel dated July 20, 1949.
X T—From Orlando Evening Star dated July 20, 1949.
X II—From Orlando Evening Star dated July 20, 1949.

X III— From Orlando Sentinel dated July 21, 1949.
X IV — From The Gfroveland Press dated July 22, 1949.
X V — From Orlando Morning Sentinel dated July 22,1949.
XVI— From Orlando Evening Star dated July 22, 1949.
X V II— From Orlando Evening Star dated July 23, 1949.
X V III— From The Clermont and South Lake Press dated

July 28, 1949.
X IX — From The Clermont and South Lake Press dated

August 25, 1949.
X X — From Clermont and Gfroveland News Topic dated

August 25, 1949.

The said Application for removal of cause with the ex
hibits numbers I to X X attached thereto is filed with de
fendants’ exhibits.

X X I

S pecial R ules foe C ircu it C ourt in and for L ake C o u n ty ,
F lorida

For all sessions of the Circuit Court of the Fifth Ju
dicial Circuit of the State of Florida, in and for Lake
County, to be held during the week beginning August 29,
1949, the following rules will be in force and effect:

1. Only such number of visitors will be allowed to enter
the Court room as can be seated by the regular seating ac
commodations of the court room, and no one will be allowed
to stand while Court is in session, except the officers of the
Court and those engaged in the trial.
[fol. 87] 2. No one will be allowed to stand or loiter in
the hallways outside the court room on the third floor of the
court house while Court is in session or during the time
thirty minutes before Court convenes and thirty minutes
after Court recesses or adjourns.

3. No one will be allowed to stand, sit or loiter on the
stair steps of the court house above the second floor.

5. Each person desiring to go to the court room floor
will be required to submit to search by the Sheriff or his
deputies for weapons.

6. No person will be permitted to take any valise, satchel,
bag, basket, bottle, jar, jug, bucket, package, bundle, or
other such item to the third floor of the court house.

7. All crutches, canes, walking sticks, and other aids to
locomotion shall be carefully inspected by the Sheriff or his
deputies, and unless necessary for the individual as an aid
to walking- shall not be allowed above the second floor of
the court house.

8. No demonstration of any nature, handclapping or
otherwise, will be permitted at any time while Court is in
session.

.9. - The Sheriff will permit entry to the court room by the
general public by only two doors, at each of which he will
place a deputy or bailiff at all times while Court is in ses
sion.

10. No one, other than officers of the Court, jurors, the
defendants, members of the bar, witnesses and the press,
exclusive of photographers, shall be allowed inside the
railing.

11. No pictures or photographs shall be made, exposed or
taken inside the court room, and no one will be allowed to
take any photographic picture making devise inside the
court room.

12. The Sheriff of Lake County, Florida, is charged with
the duty of enforcing these rules and to that end he is au
thorized to employ such number of deputies as may be nec
essary at the expense of Lake County, Florida, as part of
the costs of the trial to be conducted during the time cov
ered by these rules.

Done and ordered at Tavares, Florida, this the 23rd day
of August, 1949.

T. G. Futch, Circuit Judge.

Affidavit
S tate of F lorida

County of Lake:

Personally appeared before me, the undersigned au
thority M. A. Peterson, who, after being duly sworn, de
poses and says:
[fol. 88] 1. That he is a citizen and resident of Lake
County, Florida and has resided in Lake County, Florida
for the past 9 years.

2. That because of ill-feeling* and prejudice on the part
of a great number of citizens of Lake County, Florida to
wards Charles Greenlee, Walter Irvin and Samuel Shep
herd and because of undue excitement and prejudice among
the people of Lake County, Florida, he does not believe that
the said Charles Greenlee, Walter Irvin and Samuel Shep
herd can receive a fair and impartial trial in Lake County,
Florida in the case now pending* against them in wfhieh each
of the said defendants are charged with rape.

M. A. Peterson

Sworn to and subscribed before me this 28 day of August,
A. D., 1949.

H. E. Hill, Notary Public. Notarial Seal. Notary
Public State of Florida at Large. My commission
expires July 5, 1953. Bonded by American Surety
Co. of N. Y.

Affidavit
S tate of F lorida

County of Lake:
Personally appeared before me, the undersigned author

ity, Henry C. Dean, who, after being duly sworn, deposes
and says:

1. That he is a citizen and resident of Lake County,
Florida and has resided in Lake County, Florida for the
past 25 years.

2. That because of ill-feeling and prejudice on the part
of a great number of citizens of Lake County, Florida to
wards Charles Greenlee, Walter Irvin and Samuel Shep
herd and because of undue excitement and prejudice among
the people of Lake County, Florida, he does not believe
that the said Charles Greenlee, Walter Irvin and Samuel
Shepherd can receive a fair and impartial trial in Lake
[fol. 89] County, Florida in the case now pending against
them in which each of the said defendants are charged with
rape.

Henry C. Dean

Sworn to and subscribed before me this 28 day of August
A. D., 1949.

H. E. Hill, Notary Public. Notarial Seal. Notary
Public State of Florida at Large. My commission
expires July 5, 1953. Bonded by American Surety
Co. of N. Y.

Affidavit

S tate of F lorida.
County of Lake:

Personally appeared before me, the undersigned author
ity, John Dingle, who, after being duly sworn, deposes and
says:

1. That he is a citizen and resident of Lake County,
Florida and has resided in Lake County, Florida for the
past 41 years.

2. That because of ill-feeling and prejudice on the part
of a great number of citizens of Lake County, Florida to
wards Charles Greenlee, Walter Irvin and Samuel Shep
herd and because of undue excitement and prejudice among
the people of Lake County, Florida, he does not believe
that the said Charles Greenlee, Walter Irvin and Samuel
Shepherd can receive a fair and impartial trial in Lake
County, Florida in the case now pending against them in
which each of the said defendants are charged with rape.

John Dingle

Sworn to and subscribed before me this 28 day of August
A. D., 1949.

H. E. Hill, Notary Public. Notarial Seal. Notary
Public State of Florida at Large. My commission
expires July 5, 1953. Bonded by American Surety
Co. of N. Y.

3—420

[ fo l. 90] A ffidavit

S tate of F lorida,
County of Lake:
Personally appeared before me, the undersigned author

ity, Willie H. Odum, who, after being duly sworn, deposes
and says:

1. That he is a citizen and resident of Lake County,
Florida and has resided in Lake County, Florida for the
past 28 years.

2. That because of ill-feeling and prejudice on the part
of a great number of citizens of Lake County, Florida
towards Charles Greenlee, Walter Irvin and Samuel Shep
herd and because of undue excitement and premjudice
among the people of Lake County, Florida, he does not
believe that the said Charles Greenlee, Walter Irvin and
Samuel Shepherd can receive a fair and impartial trial in
Lake County, Florida in the case pending against them in
which, each of said defendants, are charged with rape.

Willie Odum. Willie H. Odum.

Sworn to and subscribed before me this 28 day of
August A. D., 1949. He E. Hill, Notary Public. (N o
tarial Seal.) Notary Public State of Florida at Large.
My commission expires July 5, 1953. Bonded by Amer
ican Surety Co. of N. Y.

[ fo l. 91] l x th e C ircuit C ourt, F if t h J udicial Circu it ,
ih and for th e C ou nty of L ake

[Title omitted]

A m endm en t to t h e M otion for C ontinuance— Filed
August 29, 1949

Come now the defendants, Charles Greenlee, Samuel
Shepherd and Walter Irvin, by their undersigned attorney,
to file this their Amendment to the Motion for Continuance
heretofore filed in this cause, expressly reserving the right
to file such other Motions or Pleas to the said indictment
as they may lawfully have by the addition of the following
Paragraphs of said Amendment to be in addition to the

grounds set forth in the original Motion and not in lieu
thereof;

X III
That since the filing of the original Motion for Continu

ance your defendants have been advised of many purported
facts, which, if introduced as evidence in the trial, would
prove their innocence, but that in order to present said
facts, a considerable time will be necessary for investigation
and for the obtaining of witnesses to be brought into Court
and to present said facts, that it will be impossible to
thoroughly investigate such matters and obtain said wit
nesses at the time for their trial.

X IV
That since the filing of their Motion for Continuance, a

hurricane has swept through the County of Lake and in
the County of Orange in which your defendants counsel
resides and that because of said hurricane it was impossible
for your defendants to utilize two night and one day in
[fols. 92-93] the preparation of their defense.

Wherefore, your defendants pray that this Court will
consider the above and foregoing as an Amendment to their
Motion for Continuance heretofore filed in this cause and
that the above and foregoing be considered in addition to
the grounds set forth in the original Motion.

Alex Akerman, Jr., Attorney for Defendants.

I, Alex Akerman, Jr., do hereby certify that I am the
counsel for the defendants in the above cause and that the
above and foregoing Amendment to the Motion for Contin
uance in this cause is made in good faith.

Alex Akerman, Jr.

Duly sworn to by Alex Akerman, Jr. Jurat omitted in
printing.

[fol. 94] In th e C ircuit C ourt or th e F if t h J udicial
C ircuit of th e S tate of F lorida, in and for L ake C ounty

[Title omitted]

R eply of S tate of F lorida to M otion for C ontinuance—
Filed August 29, 1949

The State of Florida by its undersigned State Attorney
denies each and every allegation of the Motion for Con
tinuance in this ease and demands strict proof of each
allegation.

J. W. Hunter, State Attorney, 5th Judicial Circuit
of Florida.

[ fo l. 95] I n th e C ircuit C ourt of the F if t h J udicial
C ircuit of th e S tate of F lorida, in and for L ake C ounty

[Title omitted]

R eply to M otion to W ithdraw P leas of N ot Gu ilty and
S et A side A rraignm ent—Filed August 29, 1949

Now comes the State of Florida by J. W. Hunter, State
Attorney for the Fifth Judicial Circuit of the State of
Florida, and for reply to the Motion of the Defendants in
the above styled cause, says:

That the offense alleged in said indictment was com
mitted on the 16th day of July, A. D. 1949 ; that on the
20th day of July, A. D. 1949, indictment was found by
Grand Jury and entered in the office of the Clerk of the
Circuit Court in and for Lake County, Florida;

That on the 24tli day of July, A. D. 1949, J. W. Hunter
representing the State of Florida interviewed each of the
Defendants at the State Prison in R.aiford, Florida, asked
them if they had attorneys to represent them, and told
them that if they did not have attorneys to represent them
that the Judge of the Circuit Court would furnish them
with legal counsel, and would summons any and all witnesses
they needed for their defense;

That on the 26th day of July, A. D. 1949, the following
telegram was received by L. F. Chapman, Superintendent
of the State Prison Farm at Raiford:

“ Tampa, Florida, July 26, 1949. I have been retained
by the National Association for the Advancement of

Colored People in behalf of Samuel Sheppard, Walter
Irvin and Charles Greenlee. Please inform as to what
hour I am interview the above named on, Friday, July
30, 1949. (Signed) Wm. A. Fordham, Attorney at
Law, 1404:i/2 Central Avenue, Tampa, Florida. ’ ’

[fob 96] That on the 27th day of July, A. D. 1949, J. W.
Hunter as State Attorney called Win. A. Fordham at his
office in Tampa, Florida, and told him that the State would
like to arraign the Defendants as soon as the Defendants
were ready, and offered to cooperate with him in securing
a speedy trial of the case;

That on Monday, the 1st day of August, A. D. 1949, J. W.
Hunter as State Attorney again called the said Wm. A.
Fordham and asked him if he would agree to a date for
arraignment and was informed by Fordham that lie would
have to report his findings to the National Association for
the Advancement of Colored People before he could give
his answer. Nothing further has been heard from the said
Wm. A. Fordham;

That on the 11th day of August, A. D. 1949, one John
G. Thomas, an attorney at law in Miami, called the Clerk
of the Circuit Court in Lake County, Florida, and requested
information in reference to said case; on the 12th day of
August, A. D. 1949, J. W. Hunter as State Attorney called
the said Thomas in Miami and informed him that the
Defendants would be arraigned on the 12th day of August,
A. D. 1949, at which time he was informed by Thomas that
he had been approached by the National Association for
the Advancement of Colored People but had not yet
definitely accepted employment;

That on the 11th or 12th day o f August, A. D. 1949,
Alexander Akerman of Orlando called J. W. Hunter, State
Attorney, and stated to him that he was considering the
defense of the three Defendants, and was told by J. W.
Hunter of their arraignment;

That on the 12th, day of August, A. D. 1949, Hon. Harry
E. Gaylord was appointed by the Court to represent the
Defendants as their Attorney. The Defendants Sheppard
and Irvin informed the Court that Mr. Gaylord was satis
factory to them; at said time and place Tom Greenlee, the
father of Charles Greenlee, informed the Court that Mr.
[fol. 97] Gaylord was satisfactory to them. Mr. Gaylord
has, prior to that time, examined the indictment and it

was agreed by the counsel for the State and for the
Defendants and by the Defendants themselves, together
with Tom Greenlee the father of Chas. Greenlee, to try
the case on the 29th day of August, A. D. 1949, and at
said time and place in open court the State Attorney
offered to summons at the expense of the State any and all
witnesses desired by the Defendants or Tom Greenlee the
father of the Defendant Charles Greenlee or Harry Gaylord
their attorney. A jury has been summoned and the wit
nesses for the State have been subpoenaed. On the 24th
day of August, A. D. 1949, the Motion before this Court
was filed by Mr. Alexander Akerman representing the
Defendants.

As a matter of fact, the National Association for the
Advancement of Colored People is conducting the defense
in this case, and an intensive investigation has been made
by Assistant Special Counsel Franklin TI. Williams for
the National Association for the Advancement of Colored
People from a few days after the commission of this crime
until the present time. Mr. Alexander Akerman was accom
panied before the Court on the 24th day of August, A. D.
1949, when this Motion was filed, by the said Special Coun
sel Franklin H. Williams.

On the 13th day of August, A. D. 1949, a dispatch sup
posing to have originated at Raiford, Florida, was pub
lished in many northern newspapers, where it was stated
that Franklin Williams, Special Counsel of the National
Association for the Advancement of Colored People, made
an on-the-spot investigation of violence and race rioting at
Groveland, Florida, and that the three young men charged
with attacking Mrs. Willie Padgett had retained the Na
tional Association for the Advancement of Colored people
[fols. 98-99] to handle their defense. Said dispatch further
quoted the said Williams with saying that the three Defend
ants had signed retainers for said defense with said Asso
ciation. Said newspaper articles, broadly circulated all
over this country, also quoted Williams as citing evedence
that has entirely convinced him that the three Defendants
are entirely innocent.

Williams, as early as the 13th day of August, A. D. 1949,
when these dispatches were published, had extensively
made such a thorough investigation of the matter that he
had convinced himself in advance of the innocence of the
Defendants.

The State Attorney further says, on information and
belief, that the said Alexander Akerman is employed by
the National Association for the Advancement of Colored
People to defend these Defendants, and that he has all
of the information obrained by Williams in his investiga
tion of the case over a period of more than a month; that
Williams on yesterday before this Court was in company
with Mr. Akerman and evidently has given Mr. Akerman
the benefit of his thorough investigation.

The Defendants, Sheppard and Irvin, were incarcerated
in the State Penitentiary at Raiford, Florida, on the 16th
day of July, A. D. 1949, and the Defendant Greenlee on the
19th day of July, A. D. 1949. They were returned to
Tavares on the 12th day of August, A. D. 1949, and have
been in the jail at Tavares since that time.

Dated this 25th day of August, A. D. 1949.
J. W. Hunter, State Attorney.

[fols. 100-102] In th e C ircuit C ourt of th e F if t h J udi
cial C ircuit of th e S tate of F lorida, in and for L ake
C ounty

[Title omitted]

A nsw er to A pplication for R emoval of S aid C ause— Filed
August 29, 1949

Now comes the State of Florida by its State Attorney,
J. W. Hunter, for the Fifth Judicial Circuit of Florida and
denies each and every allegation for Application for. Re
moval of cause and demands strict proof of said allegations.

J. W. Hunter, State Attorney, 5th Judicial Circuit
of Florida.

[fols. 103-108] In th e C ircu it Court of th e F if t h J udi
cial C ircu it of th e S tate of F lorida, in and for L ake
C ounty

[Title omitted]

A nsw er to A m endm en t to M otion for C ontinuance—
Filed August 29, 1949

Now comes the State of Florida by its undersigned State
Attorney for the Fifth Judicial Circuit of Florida, J. W.
Hunter, and says:

That it denies each and every allegation of said Amend
ment to Motion for Continuance and demands strict proof
of said allegations.

J. W. Hunter, State Attorney, 5th Judicial Circuit
of Florida.

[fol. 109] In t h e C ircuit C ourt, F if t h J udicial C ircu it ,
IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF LaKE

[Title omitted]

A m endm en t to A pplication for B emoval of C ause— Filed
August 30, 1949

Come now the defendants, Charles Greenlee, Samuel
Shepherd and Walter Irvin, by their attorney undersigned,
and file this, their Amendment to Application for Bemoval
of Cause from the Circuit Court of the Fifth Judicial Cir
cuit in and for the County of Lake, Florida, and respect
fully show unto the Court; that due to mistake and inadver-
tance and due to the pressure under which your defend
ants’ counsel was laboring in an effort to meet the time
set by this Court for all preliminary Motions, that the fol
lowing paragraphs were omitted in the final draft of the
Application for the Bemoval of Cause, and therefore, said
defendants file this their Amendment to the Application
for Bemoval of Cause and amend said Application.

XV
That because of the great publicity given this cause and

because of the rumors now prevalent in Lake County, most
of which, are not founded on facts, your defendants be
lieve that most of the citizens of Lake County qualified

to serve on the jury have pre-conceived ideas of their guilt
and that it will be impossible to obtain a fair and impartial
jury in this cause, thus denying your defendants rights
guaranteed them by the Constitution of the State of Florida
and the Constitution of the IT. S. of America.

[fol. 110] XVI
That your defendant, Charles Greenlee is a Xegro, age

16, and did not reside in Lake County, Florida and his
family does not reside in Lake County, Florida; that your
defendant, Samuel Shepherd is a Negro, age 22, and since
the occurrence of the crime of which he is charged, his
family have been compelled to flee from Lake County for
their safety; that your defendant, Walter Irvin is a Negro,
age 22, and since the occurrence of the crime of which he
is charged, his family have been compelled to flee from Lake
County for their safety; that the prosecutrix is related by
blood or marriage to a great number of the citizens of Lake
County, Florida; that the family of the prosecutrix and
the family of her husband have resided in Lake County,
Florida for a long period of time and are prominent eco
nomically and politically and have great influence in Lake
County, Florida; that because of the influence of the prose
cutrix, her husband, and their families, your defendants
believe that it will be impractical to obtain a fair and im
partial jury in Lake County, Florida.

XVII
That immediately after your defendants were arrested

they were brutally beaten and abused over a long period
of time by persons purporting to be law enforcement offi
cers of Lake County, Florida in an effort to intimidate
and compel your defendants to confess to the crime for
which they are now charged; that as a result of said beat
ings and fear and intimidation your defendants Samuel
Shepherd and Charles Greenlee did make purported con
fessions ; that said confessions do not speak the truth and
were only made because of the beatings and fear of con
tinued beatings and because defendants did fear unless
they made such purported confessions the beatings would
continue even to the extent of the taking of the lives of
your defendants; that the Sheriff of Lake County, Florida
did announce that all of the said defendants had confessed

to the crime for which they are now charged and the news
[fol. I l l ] of such confessions was widely disseminated
through the County of Lake, through newspaper and radio
reports and otherwise; that your defendants fear most of
the citizens of Lake County, Florida qualified to serve on
the jury in this case have heard of the confessions and be
lieve all of your defendants have confessed to the crime
for which they are now charged; that although said con
fessions are clearly inadmissable in evidence is will he
impracticable for said jurors to erase these purported con
fessions are clearly inadmissable in evidence is will be
impossible for your defendants to received a fair and im
partial trial, thus denying them rights guaranteed them by
the Constitution of the State of Florida and the Constitu
tion of the U. S. of America.

Wherefore, your defendants pray that this Court will
consider the above and foregoing as an Amendment to
their Application for Removal of Cause heretofore filed
in this cause and that the above and foregoing be consid
ered in addition to the grounds set forth in the original
Application for Removal of Cause.

Alex Akerman, Jr., Attorney at Law.

I, Alex Akerman, Jr., do hereby certify that I am the
counsel for the defendants in the above and foregoing-
cause and that the above and foregoing Amendment to
the Application for Removal of Cause in this cause is made
in good faith.

Alex Akerman, Jr.

[fols. 112-114] Duly sworn to by defendants. Jurats
omitted in printing.

[fol. 115] In t h e C ircuit C oubt of th e F if t h J udicial
C ircuit of th e S tate of F lorida, in and for. L ake County

[Title omitted]

A n sw er of th e S tate to th e A m endm en t to A pplication
for R emoval of Cause— Filed August 30, 1949

Now comes the State of Florida by J. W. Hunter, State
Attorney for the Fifth Judicial Circuit of Florida and for

answer to the said amendment to application for removal
of cause says:

1. That same is vague and indefinite.
2. That same are mere conclusions and inferences there

from by the pleader.
3. That the information attempted to be furnished is

immaterial.
4. That there is no foundation for the causes and im

plications in said pleading.
5. The State of Florida denies each and every allega

tion of said amendment to application for removal of cause
and demands strict proof of all that part, if any, which
is material to that cause.

J. W. Hunter, State Attorney, 5th Judicial Circuit
of Florida.

[fol. 116] In th e C ircuit Court, F if t h J udicial Circu it ,
IN AND FOR THE. COUNTY OF LAKE

[Title omitted]

Challenge to the P anel— Filed September 1, 1949

Come now the defendants, Charles Greenlee, Samuel
Shepherd and Walter Irvin, by their undersigned attorney
and file this their Challenge to the Panel herein and as
grounds for said Challenge state:

I
That your defendants are Negroes and were indicted

for the crime of rape by a grand jury of the County of
Lake, State of Florida, on the 20th day of July, 1949.

II
That trial upon the charge contained in the said indict

ment has been set by the Judge of the Circuit Court for
the 1st day of September, 1949. That on or about the
19 day of August, 1949, a panel of veniremen was sum
moned for this case consisting of approximately 150 citi
zens and residents of the County of Lake; and that among
such veniremen so summoned there were 3 Negroes.

That a large proportion of the residents and citizens of
said Lake County are members of your defendant’s race;
more specifically, of a total population over 21 years of
age of approximately 18,000 residents, Negroes constitute
one-fourth or approximately 4,500.

[fol. 117] IV
That for over a long and extended period of years, few,

if any members of your defendants’ race have served on the
petite juries of the said Lake County.

V
That among the Negro citizens of the said Lake County

there are a very great many who have resided in the State
for one year, and in the County of Lake for six months;
who are law-abiding citizens of great integrity, good char
acter, sound judgment and intelligence; and who are not
physically or mentally infirm; and who possess all of the
other qualifications for petite jury service set forth in the
statutes and laws of the State of Florida.

VI
That the Jury Commissioners of the said Lake County

have and for many years have had the custom, practice
and usage of selecting prospective petite jurors from the
registration rolls of the said county; with knowledge of the
fact that Negroes in the said County had failed, refused
or been prevented for many years from freely registering
to vote in said county and that of a total of 14,182 regis
tered voters in the County, Negroes constituted one-six
teenth or 802; and that such practice, custom and usage
has resulted in few, if any Negroes serving or having the
opportunity to serve on the petite juries of the said County,
so ley because of their race or color.

VII
That the purposeful and deliberate use by the said Jury

Commissioners of the registration rolls of the County for
choosing or selecting prospective petite jurors is neither
required nor warranted by the statutes and laws of the
State of Florida.

III

That the said Jury Commissioners of Lake County know
that a large and substantial proportion of the Negro citi-
[fol. 118] zens of Lake County own property, pay taxes,
conduct themselves as law-abiding citizens of high integ
rity and character; who possess all of the qualifications
for petite jury service required by the laws or statutes of
the State of Florida; and they also know that of such citi
zens a very small number register to vote or appear on the
registration rolls of the said County; and with such knowl
edge have had and still have the practice and custom of
choosing prospective petite jurors from the said registra
tion rolls.

IX
That these facts establish that the venire in the instant

cause was not selected or drawn according to law but rather
that it was summoned, chosen, impanelled or drawn by
state officers in a manner that has resulted in a denial to
your defendants of rights guaranteed them by the equal
protection and due process clauses of the Fourteenth
Amendment to the U. S. Constitution and the Constitution
and Laws of the State of Florida.

Wherefore, your defendants pray that this Court sustain
this Challenge to the panel herein upon the grounds set
forth above.

Alex Akerman, Jr., Attorney for Defendants.

V III

[fols. 119-133] Duly sworn to by defendants. Jurats
omitted in printing.

[ fo l. 134] 1st th e C ircuit C ourt of t h e F if t h J udicial
C ircuit of th e S tate of F lorida, in and for L ake C ounty

[Title omitted]

M otion for N ew T rial-—Filed September 6, 1949

Come now the defendants, Samuel Shepherd and Walter
Irvin by their attorney undersigned and move the Court

to grant a new trial herein and for grounds for said Motion
say:

1. The Verdict is contrary to the evidence.
2. The Verdict is contrary to the law.
3. The Verdict is contrary to the law and the evidence.
4. The Court erred in denying Motion of the defendants

to Withdraw Plea of Not Guilty and Set Aside Arraign
ment filed on August 25, A. D., 1949.

5. The Court erred in refusing to consider the Motion
to Quash filed on August 25, A. D., 1949 and ordering such
Motion stricken from the file.

6. The Court erred in denying the defendants Motion for
Continuance filed on August 25, A. D., 1949.

7. The Court erred in denying the defendants’ Motion to
Withdraw Plea of Guilty and Set Aside Arraignment filed
on August 29, A. D., 1949.

8. The Court erred in refusing to require the State to
file in its Bill of Particulars the information sought in
Paragraphs II and III of defendants’ Motion for Bill of
Particulars.
[fol. 135] 9. The Court erred in denying defendants’
Application for Removal of Cause.

10. The Court erred in refusing to admit, in the hearing
for the Motion for Continuance and Motion for Application
for Removal of Cause, the testimony of Dr. Nelson W. B.
Spaulding, as to the physical condition of the defendants
showing that they had been beaten.

11. The Court erred in refusing to allow the defendant,
Charles Greenlee to testify at the hearing for the Motion for
Continuance and Application for Removal of Cause that he
had been beaten by law enforcement officials of the County
of Lake, Florida.

12. The Court erred in refusing to allow the defendant,
Samuel Shepherd to testify at the hearing for the Motion
for Continuance and Application for Removal of Cause
that he had been beaten by law enforcement officials of
the County of Lake, Florida,

13. The Court erred in refusing to allow the defendant,
Walter Irvin to testify at the hearing for the Motion for
Continuance and Application for Removal of Cause that
he had been beaten by law enforcement officials of the
County of Lake, Florida.

14. The Court erred in denying the defendants’ Chal
lenge to the Panel.

15. The Court erred in denying the defendants’ Motion
for Continuance made September 1st, A. I)., 1949.

16. The Court erred in admitting into evidence, over the
objections of the defendants, the shoes and pants alleged
to have been the property of Walter Irvin.

17. The Court erred in admitting into evidence, over the
objections of the defendants, the cast of the alleged tire
tracks.

18. The Court erred in admitting into evidence, over the
objections of the defendants, the east of the alleged shoe
prints.
[fols. 136-137] 19. The Court erred in allowing the witness
Ethel Thomas to testify over the objections of the defend
ants, as to an alleged conversation she had with Ernest
Thomas.

Alex Akennan, Jr., Attorney for Defendants.

[fols. 138-139] lx th e C ircuit Court op th e F if t h J udicial
Circuit of th e S tate op F lorida, in axi> for L ake C ounty

[Title omitted]

J udgm ent and Sentence— Filed September 8, 1.949
You, Walter L. Irvin, having had a fair trial by a jury

of your countrymen, and having been found guilty of the
crime of rape, the Court now adjudges you to be guilty of
that offense. What have you to say why the sentence of
the law should not be pronounced upon yon!

Saying nothing to preclude such sentence
It is thereupon the judgment of the Court and the sen

tence of the law that you, Walter L. Irvin, for the crime
for which you have been and stand convicted, be delivered
by the Sheriff of Lake County, Florida, to the proper officer
of the State Prison of the State of Florida, and be by him
safely kept until such day and time as the Grovenor by his
warrant may appoint, at which time, as by said warrant
directed, and within the walls of the permanent death
chamber provided by law, you, Walter L. Irvin, be by the
proper officer of said Prison, electrocuted until you be dead;
and may God have mercy on your soul.

Done, ordered and adjudged in open Court at Tavares,
Lake County, Florida, this the 8th day of September 1949.

T. G. Futch, Circuit Judge.

Clerk’s Certificate to foregoing paper omitted in print
ing.

| fols. 140-144] In th e C ircu it C ourt of th e F if t h J udicial
C ircuit of th e S tate of F lorida, in and for L ake C ounty

[Title omitted]

J udgment and S entence—Filed September 8, 1949
You, Samuel Sheppard, having had a fair trial by a

jury of your countrymen, and having been found guilty of
the crime of rape, the Court now adjudges you to be guilty
of that offense. What have you to say why the sentence of
the law should not be pronounced upon you?

Saying nothing to preclude such sentence
It is thereupon the judgment of the Court and the sen

tence of the law that you, Samuel Sheppard, for the crime
for which you have been and stand convicted, be delivered
by the Sheriff of Lake County, Florida, to the proper officer
of the State Prison of the State of Florida, and be by him
safely kept until such day and time as the Governor by his
warrant may appoint, at which time, as by said warrant
directed, and within the walls of the permanent death cham
ber provided by law, you, Samuel. Sheppard, be by the
proper officer of said Prison, electrocuted until you be
dead; and may God have mercy on your soul.

Done, ordered and adjudged in open Court at Tavares,
Lake County, Florida, this the 8th day of September 1949.

T. G. Futch, Circuit Judge.

Clerk’s Certificate to foregoing paper omitted in printing.

[Title omitted]

O rder D en yin g M otion for N ew T rial— Filed September 8,
1949 ■

This cause coming on to be heard further upon motion
of the defendants Samuel Sheppard and Walter Irvin for
a new trial, upon nineteen assignments of error, most of
which present matters and questions heretofore ruled upon
by this Court.

[This case has been handled in what appears to this
Court to be a very peculiar manner, in that counsel for the
defendants seem to have been far more intent upon inject
ing the racial question into the record than in maintaining
the presumption of innocence with which the law clothes
the defendants in their trial.] However the defendants
were accorded a fair and impartial trial throughout the
proceedings. The record will show that when there was
any possible room to question the qualification of a juror
to sit in this case he was excused. The record will further
show that the State’s Attorney was particularly careful
to be fair and honest with the defendants in presenting the
State’s case. The record shows that the defendants were
given ample opportunity to prepare their defense, and
there is a total lack of so much as a suggestion on the part
of the attorneys for the defendants that they were unable
to procure the attendance of any witness which they
desired. There appears to this court not the slightest rea
son for granting the motion on either, any or all of the
grounds set forth therein, therefore, it is
[fols. 146-153] Ordered that the motion for a new trial,
filed on the 6th day of September 1949, in behalf of the
defendants, Samuel Sheppard and Walter Irvin, by their
attorney, Alex Akerman, Jr., be and the same is denied.

Done and ordered at Tavares, Lake County, Florida,
this the 8th day of September 1949.

T. Gl. Futch, Circuit Judge.

[ fo l . 145] I n th e C ircuit Court of th e F if t h J udicial
C ircuit of t h e S tate of F lorida, in and foe. L ake County

4—420

[Title omitted]
N otice of A ppeal—Filed September 23, 1949

Come now the defendants, Samuel Shepherd and Walter
Irvin and appeal to the Supreme Court of Florida from
the Judgment and Conviction and the Sentence in the
above entitled cause entered on September 8, A. D., 1949
and recorded in Minute Book 20, pages 276-77, and from
the Order denying the motion for the new trial entered on
September 8, A. £>., 1949 and recorded in Minute Book 20,
page 279.

Alex Akerman, Jr., 401 First National Bank Build
ing, Orlando, Florida, Attorney for Defendants.

[ fo l . 154] I n th e C ircuit C ourt of th e F if t h J udicial
C ircuit of th e S tate of F lorida, in and for L ake County

[fols. 155-156] In th e C ircuit C ourt of th e F if t h J udicial
C ircuit of t h e S tate of F lorida, in and for L ak e C ounty

S tate of F lorida,

versus
W alter L. I rvin , S am uel S heppard and C harles G reenlee

Y erdict

We the jury find the defendants guilty.
So say we all, By majority recommendation of mercy

for Charles Greenlee.
Charles A. Blaze, Foreman.

[fol. 157] In t h e C ircuit C ourt of th e F if t h J udicial
C ircuit of th e S tate of F lorida, in and for. L ake Cou nty

[Title omitted]
G rounds of A ppeal—Filed November 21, 1949

Comes now the defendants, Samuel Shepherd and Walter
Irvin, by their undersigned attorneys and file this, their
grounds of appeal in the above cause:

1. The Verdict is contrary to the evidence.
2. The Yerdict is contrary to the law.

3. The Verdict is contrary to the law and the evidence.
4. The Court erred in denying Motion of the defendants

to withdraw Plea of Not Guilty and Set Aside Arraign
ment filed on August 25, A. D., 1949, thereby depriving said
defendants of life or liberty without due process of law
and denying them the equal protection of the laws as
guaranteed them by the Fourteenth Amendment to the
United States Constitution and the Constitution of the
State of Florida.

5. The Court erred in refusing to consider the Motion to
Quash filed on August 25, A. D., 1949, and ordering such
Motion stricken from the file, thereby depriving said de
fendants of life or liberty without due process of law and
denying them the equal protection of the laws as guaran
teed them by the Fourteenth Amendment to the United
States Constitution and the Constitution of the State of
Florida.
[fol. 158] 6. The Court erred in denying the defendants’
Motion for Continuance filed on August 25, A. D., 1949,
thereby depriving said defendants of life or liberty with
out due process of law and denying them the equal pro
tection of the laws as guaranteed them by the Fourteenth
Amendment to the United States Constitution and the
Constitution of the State of Florida.

7. The Court erred in denying the defendants’ Motion
to Withdraw Plea of Guilty and Set Aside Arraignment
filed on August 29, A. D., 1949, and thereby depriving said
defendants of life or liberty without due process of law and
denying them the equal protection of the laws as guaran
teed them by the Fourteenths Amendment to the United
States Constitution and the Constitution of the State of
Florida.

8. The Court erred in refusing to require the State to
file in its Bill of Particulars the information sought in
Paragraphs II and III of defendants’ Motion for Bill of
Particulars.

9. The Court erred in denying the defendants’ Applica
tion for Eemoval of Cause, thereby depriving said defend
ants of life or liberty without due process of law and
denying them the equal protection of the laws as guaranteed
them by the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States
Constitution and the Constitution of the State of Florida.

10. The Court erred in refusing to admit, in the hear-

mg for the Motion for Continuance and Motion for Appli
cation for Removal of Cause, the testimony of Dr. Nelson
W. B. Spaulding, as to the physical condition of the defend
ants showing that they had been beaten, thereby depriving
said defendants of life or liberty without due process of
law and denying them the equal protection of the laws as
guaranteed them by the Fourteenth Amendment to the
United States Constitution and the Constitution of the
State of Florida.
[fol. 159] 11. The Court erred in refusing to allow the de
fendant Charles Greenlee to testify at the hearing for the
Motion for Continuance and Application for Removal of
Cause that he had been beaten by law enforcement officials
of the County of Lake, Florida, thereby depriving said de
fendants of life or liberty without due process of law and
denying them the equal protection of the laws as guaran
teed them by the Fourteenth Amendment to the United
States Constitution and the Constitution of the State of
Florida.

12. The Court eri’ed in refusing to allow the defendant,
Samuel Shepherd, to testify at the hearing for the Motion
for Continuance and Application for Removal of Cause
that he had been beaten by law enforcement officials of the
County of Lake, Florida thereby depriving said defend
ants of life or liberty without due process of law and deny
ing them the equal protection of the laws as guaranteed
them by the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States
Constitution and the Constitution of the State of Florida.

13. The Court erred in refusing to allow the defendant,
Walter Irvin, to testify at the hearing for the Motion for
Continuance and Application for Removal of Cause that he
had been beaten by law enforcement officials of the County
of Lake, Florida thereby depriving said defendants of life
or liberty without due process of law and denying them
the equal protection of the laws as guaranteed them by the
Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution
and the Constitution of the State of Florida.

14. The Court erred in denying the defendants’ Chal
lenge to the Panel, thereby depriving said defendants of
life or liberty without due process of law and denying them
the equal protection of the laws as guaranteed them by the
Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution
and the Constitution of the State of Florida.

15. The Court erred in denying the defendants’ Motion
for Continuance made September 1st, A. D., 1949, thereby
depriving said defendants of life or liberty without due
[fol. 160-168] process of law and and denying them the
equal protection of the laws as guaranteed them by the
Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution
and the Constitution of the State of Florida.

16. The Court erred in admitting into evidence, over the
objections of the defendants, the shoes and pants alleged
to have been the property of Walter Irvin.

17. The Court erred in admitting into evidence, over the
objections of the defendants, the cast of the alleged tire
tracks.

18. The Court erred in admitting into evidence, over the
objections of the defendants, the cast of the alleged shoe
prints.

19. The Court erred in allowing the witness Ethel
Thomas to testify, over the objections of the defendants, as
to an alleged conversation she had with Ernest Thomas.

20. The Court erred in denying defendants’ Motion for
a New Trial.

Alex Akerman, Jr., Joseph E. Price, Jr., Attorneys
for defendants. 401 First National Bank Building,
Orlando, Florida.

T he S tate of F lorida, Plaintiff,

[ fo ls . 169-172 ] I n th e C ircuit C ourt, F if t h J udicial
C ircu it , in and for L ake C o u n ty , S tate of F lorida

vs.

S am uel S heph erd , W alter L. I rvin , C harles G reenlee,
E rnest E. T h om as , Defendants

Transcript of Testimony and Proceeding's

Tavares, Florida,
August 29, 30; September 1, 2, 3, 1949.

Before: Honorable Truman G. Futcb, Circuit Judge.
And a jury.

A ppearances : For the State: Honorable J. W. Hunter,
State Attorney; Hon. Samuel Buoy, Asst. State Attorney.

For the Defendants: Mr. Alex Akerman, Esq., Attorney
at Law, Orlando, Florida; Mr. Franklin L. Williams, Esq.,
Attorney at Law; Mr. Robert Hill, Esq., Attorney at Law,
Daytona Beach, Florida; Mr. Joe Price, Esq., Attorney at
Law, Orlando, Florida.

[fol. 173] Tavares, Florida.
August 29, 1949.

(The Court opened at 10 A. M. August 29, 1949.)
(A jury was called, qualified on voire dire and excused

until 10 o ’clock, A. M., Thursday, September 1st, 1949.)
(The Court then proceeded to hearing on motions for

change of venue and continuance and the following pro
ceedings were had:)

C olloquy re M otions

Mr. Hunter: Your Honor, There have been some motions
filed here by the Defendants, we would like to have them
presented to the Court.

Mr. Akerman: If the Court please, at the conclusion of
the hearing on the 25th in which the Court denied the
motion to withdraw the plea of not guilty, set aside the
arraignment, we tendered and filed to the Court a motion
to quash the indictment and I would like to ask for a

ruling of the Court whether that motion to quash will be
considered?

Mr. Hunter: My understanding was that the motion was
considered and denied.

Mr. Akerman: My understanding was that the Court
denied the motion to set aside—withdraw the plea and
set aside the arraignment but after a decision, we tendered
the motion to quash.

Mr. Hunter: Well it is untimely filed for one thing, and
testimony taken here on the motion as made and was denied
by the Court. Is my recollection of it.
[fol. 174] The Court: There was no action taken on the
motion to quash. The motion to withdraw the plea was
of course heard and denied.

Mr. Hunter: That’s right.
The Court: But the motion to quash being filed too late

will not be considered by the. Court and is stricken from
the record.

Mr. Akerman: At the conclusion of the hearing—
Mr. Hunter: Now just wait a moment, here. The Defend

ants are not here
Mr. Akerman: W e’ll waive that.
Mr. Buoy: No, we can’t waive it.
Mr. Hunter: We have ordered the Sheriff to bring the

defendants into Court, Your Honor.
The Court: Sheriff, bring the defendants down.
Mr. Akerman: At this time, if the Court please, while

they are bringing the defendants down, we ask the Court to
set bail for James Shepperd, who is being held under Court
[fol. 175] orders as a material witness.

The Court: Motion denied.

(At this point, the defendants were brought into the
Courtroom and the foregoing proceedings read back by
the Reporter.)

Mr. Hunter: I want the record to show that the defend
ants are now in the Courtroom and have heard the reading
of the proceedings to this point.

Mr. Akerman: On August 25th, at the conclusion of the
hearing the defendants filed a motion for continuance. On
this morning, we filed an amendment to that motion for a
continuance. We would like to have the Court set a time
for the hearing of that motion.

Mr. Hunter: We would like to have the motion read to
the Court, including the amendment.

(Whereupon, the Motion was read.)
Mr. Akerman: In paragraph 9, I ask at this time to

amend in open Court so that it will read in accordance
with the fact, “ That your defendants were held in custody
at Raiford up until the time of their arraignment. And
their only opportunity to contact parties------
[fol. 176] Mr. Hunter: What are you going to do about
the time after the arraignment?

Mr. Akerman: All right.
“ At which time they were sent to the County of Lake

and have remained since then.”
The Court: Motion granted.
(Whereupon, the reading was continued.)
Mr. Akerman: We want to amend paragraph No. 10 to

the effect that,
Your defendants were incarcerated in the State Prison

at Raiford until the time of their arraignment. At which
time, they were returned to Lake County, Florida, and
have ever since remained.

The Court: Permission granted.
Mr. Akerman: That said State Prison at Raiford is at a

distance of more than 100 miles from Lake County and
that it is at a distance of more than 100 miles from the
offices of their defense counsel and that it is extremely
inconvenient and impractical for your defendants to confer
with their counsel, and so forth.

(The reading of the motion was continued to the end.)
Mr. Akerman: Attached to that is a certificate by defense

counsel which is filed in good faith.
[fol. 177] Mr. Hunter: Now, before we go on, I have the
exceptions to the motion.

(Whereupon, the paper was read to the Court.)
Mr. Hunter: Let that be filed and give Mr. Akerman a

copy of it. Now, you have a motion for an amendment to
that document?

Mr. Akerman: Amendment to the motion for continuance.

(Whereupon the paper referred to was read.)

Mr. Akerman: That also carries a certificate filed in good
faith.

Mr. Hunter: Now comes the State of Florida * * *
(Whereupon, Exceptions to the Amendment to Motion

for Continuance was read to the Court.)
Mr. Akerman: All right, sir. That’s the issue before

the Court. We would like to have it set for hearing.
Mr. Hunter: Let me make this suggestion, Mr. Akerman.

I presume you are going to present proof as to your alle
gations in this. Now, the same proof very likely will go
to other motions that you have. Would it not be a good
idea to finish the filing of these motions and then set
all of them for a hearing at some future date?
[fob 178] Mr. Akerman: Well, I think considerable por
tion of the same proof would be applicable and I think it
is perfectly agreeable to us and to the State and to the
Court.

The Court: All right. Let’s have your next motion.
Mr. Akerman: We have also filed a motion for a bill of

particulars.
(Whereupon, the said motion was read to the Court.)
Mr. Hunter: I haven’t filed an answer to that, Your

Honor, but I will say that I will file one later to this effect.
The law only requires in a case of this kind that a list of
witnesses upon which the indictment was found be filed.
However, I will file a list including all the witnesses that
I know at the present time, that we will use and, “ (2) a
complete statement showing* her activities from 6 PM up
to the time she alleged she first saw the defendants.”

That, we will object to for two reasons.
1. That her activities prior to the time of meeting these

parties would very likely be irrelevant and immaterial.
2. The State is not required to plead its evidence by way

of a bill of particulars and the same thing applies to Willie
Padget, which is No. 3.

The Court: What have you to say as to the rest?
Mr. Hunter: As to No. 4, the state will furnish that to

[fob 179] the best of its ability. I don’t know that this
woman had a stop watch and took that time but they will
give it the best they can.

And the 5th. We will furnish a bill of particulars show
ing to the best of our ability what that time was but we may

not be able to show an exact time. The Supreme Court
has held that in a bill of particulars of this kind, that you
are allowed such latitude as is reasonable and necessary
in answering a bill of particulars.

And the 5th, we’ll furnish that to the best of our ability
but possibly not exact, because the law doesn’t require to
furnish it exact.

Now, the only one we object to is the third and fourth,
which attempt to have us plead all of the evidence which
we have, a large part of which would probably be irrelevant
and immaterial. The State can’t be compelled to plead
all its evidence by way of a bill of particulars. I f it did,
you might just as well try the case before the Judge before
you start.

Mr. Akerman: If it is immaterial it wouldn’t be admis
sible but if it does develop material facts we allege to
believe is necessary for the preparation of our case.

The Court: I can’t see how that would have anything
to do with the defense. More of a fishing expedition than
anything else.

I understand the State is willing to respond to the motion
[fol. 180] with the exception of items 3 and 4?

Mr. Hunter: Well let’s see. —I t ’s 2 and 3.
(Whereupon, Items 2 and 3 were read to the Court.)
The Court: Motion granted with the exception of items

2 and 3.
It is understood, too, that they can give such witnesses

as they know of at this time.
It is understood of course that there are exceptions to

all these rulings.
Mr. Akerman: This is a motion to set aside the arraign

ment with motion to withdraw pleas, set aside arraignment
and file motion to quash the indictment.

Mr. Hunter: That’s been passed on.
Mr. Akerman: It is on additional grounds tendering

additional indictment.
The Court: You are filing a second motion?
Mr. Akerman: That’s right.

[fol. 181] (Whereupon the motion referred to was read to
the Court.)

Mr. Akerman: And the Motion to Quash the Indictment.
(Whereupon, the paper referred to was read.)

Mr. Hunter: Now to that, we answer that the same is
vague and indefinite.

(Whereupon, the Answer of the State was read.)
Mr. Akerman: And we ask for a hearing* on that.
The Court: Well, we can hear them all at the same time.

The evidence on one will be good on the other.
Mr. Akerman: We also file in the cause application for

removal of cause.

(Whereupon, the paper was read.)

Mr. Akerman: That is also bearing a certificate of good
faith filed by me. It is sworn to by each of the defend
ants. And attached to it are the exhibits referred to and
in addition to that, there is attached to the affidavits of
four citizens of Lake County to the effect that because of
the ill feeling, prejudice and so forth on the part of that,
it does not—and because of the undue excitement they do
[fol. 182] not believe that the defendants will receive a fair
and impartial trial in Lake County, Florida.

Mr. Hunter: Now to that, we file an answer. We deny
each and every allegation or application for removal for
cause and demand strict proof of same.

Mr. Akerman: Now as I understand the ruling of the
Court, I am asking* the Court for its ruling on the filing
of motions you set at 11 o ’clock, today. Just what effect
does that have?

The Court: Well, I stated it covered all preliminary mo
tions that counsel might have in mind filing. If there is
something else that comes up that there is some reason for
filing, we will give it due consideration. Not an absolute
exclusion.

Can we hear these things tomorrow morning at 10
o ’clock? I f you have your witnesses here you might pro
ceed today.

Mr. Akerman: It is going to require the summoning of
quite a number of witnesses, some of them from other parts
of the State. I don’t see how we can prepare our praecipes
for summons.

The Court: Motions will be set for hearing at 10 o ’clock,
s tomorrow morning.

[fol. 183] Mr. Akerman: Exceptions to all rulings, as I
understand it?

The Court: Yes. That’s understood.

Mr. Akerman: There’s been no ruling of course, as yet,
upon the motion to set aside the arraignment!

The Court: Not to the last motion.
Mr. Akerman: In the event that the Court should rule

in our favor, and allow us to file the motion to quash, we
will then be allowed some time to bring evidence in? In
other words, we will have some motions to the County Com
missioners and jury list and so forth, and I didn’t want
to summons these until the ruling of the Court on the mo
tion to set aside.

The Court: Recess until tomorrow morning at 10 o ’clock.
(The Court then recessed until 10 o ’clock AM, August

30, 1949, at which time the following proceedings were
had:)

Mr. Akerman: If the Court please, after I returned to
Orlando, yesterday, I discovered that in the final draft of
the amendment for the application for removal of cause
that certain paragraphs were omitted. So we sent over
an amendment that was filed yesterday afternoon and I
would like to read that amendment to the Court before
we proceed.

[fol. 184] (Whereupon, the amendment was read.)
Mr. Akerman: That’s certified by the attorneys.
Mr. Hunter: To that, we file an answer.
(Whereupon, the answer referred to was read.)

Mr. Hunter: Now I want to call the attention of one
thing to the Court. That there is a lot of absolutely false
things going into these pleadings that are being sworn to
here. I presume now that Mr. Akerman will want to prove.

Mr. Akerman: I move that that remark of the State
Attorney be stricken from the record. There is a proper
method of determining whether these will be true or not
by the giving of testimony before the Court, today.

Mr. Hunter: Then I will amend and say further that
since it is a libel upon the people of the County of Lake,
that we demand strict proof of each one of these allega
tions.

The Court: Hoes the State object to the amendment
being filed?
[fol. 185] Hunter: No sir.

The Court: All right. Let the amendment be filed.

Mr. Hunter: That is, I do not object to it for what it is.
The Court: I said, to it being filed.
Mr. Hunter: That’s right.
Mr. Akerman: If the Court please, it is my understand

ing on yesterday that this hearing*, today, is set for the
purpose of taking testimony both in support of and in op
position to the various motions that have been filed?

The Court: That’s right.
Mr. Akerman: Can we at this time get a stipulation or

an order of Court that testimony shall go to each one of
the motions?

The Court: That’s what I understood was to be the re
sult of it yesterday.

Mr. Akerman: Yes sir.
Mr. Hunter: That’s right.

[fol. 186] The Court: To take testimony on all of them
at the same time.

(Whereupon, certain witnesses were called.)
Mr. Akerman: At this time, the defendants ask that the

following subpoenas.be issued and served:
Subpoena issued to the Managing Editor of the Lakeland

Ledger, whose name is unknown to your defendants, re
quiring him to appear in this Court instanter and bring
with him copies of the newspaper, The Lakeland Ledger,
from July 15, 1949, up to the date of the issuance of this
subpoena and, to also bring with him his records showing
the circulation of the Lakeland Ledger in Lake County.

Defendants further request that a subpoena be issued
to John Doe, Special Agent, of the FBI, whose further
name is unknown to your defendants. Said agent being
the agent of the Federal Bureau of Investigation who ex
amined your defendants in the State prison at Baiford
approximately August 7tli, 1949 and that at further sub
poena be issued to Richard Roe, Special Agent of the
Federal Bureau of Investigation, whose true and correct
name is unknown to your defendants. Said Agent of the
Federal Bureau of Investigation of the United States G-ov-
ernment, who examined your defendants in the State Prison
at Raiford on or about August 7, 1949.

We ask those subpoenas be issued and an attempt made
to serve them.
[fol. 187] Mr. Hunter: Your Honor, I object to that. It
is entirely beyond any request that should be made of this

Court. If the Defendants want these witnesses here let
it he not by a special order of this Court but b y a regular
method of filing a praecipe with the clerk of this Court for
the issuance of those subpoenas.

The Court: The Court will not issue any order requir
ing the subpoenaing of the witnesses mentioned.

Mr. Akerman: We now ask a recess until the praecipes
can be written.

The Court: We will proceed with the issue before the
Court.

(Whereupon, certain other witnesses were called.)

Mb. C harles M edlin , being first du ly sw orn, testified as
fo l lo w s :

Direct examination.

By Mr. Akerman:
Q. State your name, please?
A. Charles Medlin.
Q. Where do you live, Mr. Medlin?
A. Orlando.
Q. What is your business or profession?
A. Business Manager, Orlando Daily Newspapers.
Q. Does the Orlando Daily Newspaper Corporation pub

lish any newspapers in the State of Florida?
A. Yes, sir.

[fol. 188] Q. Kindly name the papers published by the
Corporation of which you are the business manager.

A. Orlando Evening Star and Orlando Morning Sen
tinel. Sunday Sentinel Star.

Q. Where are those papers published?
A. Orlando.
Q. Orange County, Florida?
A. That’s right.
Q. Do those papers have circulation in Lake County,

Florida?
A. They do.
Q. Do you have your circulation figures for the circula

tion of these newspapers throughout Lake County, Florida,
from the time beginning approximately July 15th, 1949,
up until this date?

A. Yes, sir.
Q. Will you kindly give the circulation of each of those

papers, until this date?
A. The Sentinel, Orlando Morning Sentinel, was ap

proximately 3,858 papers. The last—we have four figures
there. That’s approximately estimated, Covering South
Lake County, Clermont, and the mail. Three files.

Q. And what was the figure of the approximate circula
tion of the Orlando Morning Sentinel in Lake County,
Florida?

A. 3,858.
Q. Is that the approximate figure of that circulation of

the Orlando Morning Sentinel from a period of time, July
l i5th, 1949, up to the present date?

A. It is.
Q. Do you have the circulation figures for the Orlando

Evening Star?
A. I do. 398.

[fol. 189] Q. And is that the approximate circulation in
Lake County, Florida?

A. Yes, sir.
Q. Covering the entire period of time from July 15, 1949,

up to the present date?
A. It is.
Q. Do you have the circulation figures of the Sunday

Sentinel Star in Lake County, Florida?
A. I do.
Q. Will you give us the approximate circulation of the

■Sunday Sentinel Star in Lake County, Florida in the period
of time, July 15th, 1949, up until the present date?

A. 4,137.
Q. Do you have with you the issue of the Sunday Senti-

nal Star for July 17th, 1949?
A. (Indicating by head.) Yes.
Q. Will you let me have it, please, sir?
A. (Witness produced paper.) That’s the right one,

isn’t it?
Q. Yes. Is this the paper published by your organiza

tion for July 17th, 1949?
A. If that’s the date on it, yes. July 17th.

! Q. And about what you have been testifying as being
circulated throughout Lake County, Florida?

A. (Indicating by head.) Yes.

Mr. Akerman: Defendants offer in evidence that part of
the newspaper appearing on page 1 of said newspaper,
headlined, “ Lake County Bride Kidnapped,” and the news
story column, being the last column on the righthand side
of the front page.

Mr. Hunter: I have no objections to that.
Mr. Akerman: Defendant’s exhibit A.

[fol. 190] Mr. Akerman: Admitted, Your Honor?
The Court: That’s admitted with the understanding that

you procure a copy of that, article and substitute for it.
Mr. Hunter: I ’d like to ask a question. I withdraw my

not objecting to this and ask you this question, sir.

Cross-examination.

By Mr. Hunter:
Q. Where did you get this paper?
A. Out of our files.
Q. Is it your private files?
A. (Indicated by head.) Yes.
Q. Do you object to using them in a proceeding of this

kind under a subpoena of this kind?
A. Well, we like to continue to hold our files intact.
Mr. Hunter: Then I ’ll object to the introduction as being

improper and an invasion of the private rights of this
newspaper. It is immaterial, anyway. The whole thing,
is immaterial.

Mr. Akerman: In reply to the objection of Mr. Hunter,
I think the lives of three persons are possibly more im
portant than the private files of a newspaper.

Mr. Hunter: I don’t accept that issue because that’s not
the issue here at all.
[fol. 191] The Court: Well, the article referred to will
be admitted. But the newspaper as a whole is not admitted
and you will have to procure a copy of the items and return
the original paper to the witness intact.

Mr. Akerman: I believe we can handle it in this manner,
if the Court please.

Redirect examination.

By Mr. Akerman:
Q. Mr. Medlin, I hand you here a newspaper article

appearing in the Sunday Sentinal Star of July 17th, 1949,

and ask you to read from the article starting with the
headlines. Read the article into the record.

Mr. Hunter: Object to that. First, the article is irrele
vant and immaterial to any issue in this case. Second,
the article has been introduced, itself. Now I want to make
this statement.

I may be mistaken hut I have been informed—those
gentlemen can correct me if I ’m not correct.—that it is
their purpose to read newspaper articles and other things
for the balance of this week so that the Court cannot func
tion here in the trial of this case on Thursday. Now that’s
my information.

Mr. Akerman: The gentleman is entirely incorrect. We
do not intend to put into this record every newspaper
article that disseminated throughout Lake County, Florida.
It is definitely material to our motion for a removal of
cause and for continuance in the case.
[fol. 192] The Court: Well, the objection to reading the
article is sustained. I told you how you can get it into the
record.

Mr. Hunter: I want this observation to go in this record.
There will be a jury called here and the defendants’

attorneys will have every opportunity to question those
jurors as to whether they read these papers or not and
whether they formed an opinion from those papers, that
will preclude them from rendering a fair and just verdict
in this case.

Mr. Akerman: If the Court please, we have alleged the
dissemination of newspaper articles throughout Lake
County, Florida. The State has denied it and demanded
strick proof thereof of each and every allegation. The
State’s attorney, this morning------

The Court: No use taking up the time of the Court argu
ing there. I told you how to get those articles in and that’s
the only way they are going in.

Mr. Akerman: All right. I t ’s admitted in evidence.
May I be allowed to read the article to the Court.

The Court: No. I ’ll read it, myself.
[fol. 193] Mr. Akerman: We at this time offer to read and
call the Court’s attention to the fact that the hearing on
the previous motion, the State’s Attorney was allowed to

5—420

read the articles into the evidence under the same circum
stances.

Mr. Hunter: We deny that. It is not true.
The Court: The Court is able to read. He may not be

able to go much further.

By Mr. Akerman:
Q. Mr. Medlin, .do you have with you a copy of the

Orlando Morning Sentinal for July 18th, 1949?
A. (Paper was produced by the witness.)
A. I do.
Q. May I have it, please, sir? (Paper was handed to

counsel)
Q. I ask you, is there an article appearing in that paper

on the front page of the paper, headlined, ‘ ‘ Troops Ordered
to Groveland” ?

A. Yes.
Q. And is there an article then under that headline

appearing in the last column on the right-hand side of the
front page of that paper, sub-headlined, “ Mob Violence
Flared after Kidnapping?”

A. Yes.
Q. Was that article published in your paper as of that

date ?
[fob 194] A. Yes sir.

Q. And disseminated throughout Lake County, Florida.
A. Yes.
Mr. Akerman: Defendants offer that part of the Orlando

Morning Sentinal of Monday, July 18th, 1949, consisting
of the headline, “ Troops ordered to Groveland,” and the
subheadline, “ Mob Violence feared after kidnapping,”
and the rest of the article immediately following the sub-
headline appearing on the last righthand column of the
front page of said paper.

Mr. Hunter: I have seen that.
Mr. Akerman: It is tendered.
Mr. Hunter: I have no objection to it on the order made

in the former paper.
The Court: The article, itself, is admitted in evidence

but it will have to be a copy substituted for the one that’s
there and the paper returned to the witness.

(Whereupon, the article referred to was received as
Defendant’s Exhibit B.)

The Court: The copies in the motion for the change of
venue may be used.
[fol. 195] Mr. Akerman: At this time, the defendant prof
fers to have the article read into the record.

The Court: Proffer overruled.

By Mr. Akerman:
Q. Mr. Medlin, do you have a copy of the Orlando Eve

ning Star for Monday, July 18th, 1949!
(Whereupon, the paper referred to was produced by the

witness.)
Q. I ask you if that paper contains a headline entitled,

“ Third Kidnapper Captured!”
A. Yes.
Q. And does it contain a subheadline, “ National Guard

Leaves Groveland?”
A. That’s right.
Q. Does it show that article is by Ormond Powers?
A. Yes sir, it does.
Q. Who is Ormond Powers?
A. Reporter for Lake County for the Orlando Evening

Star and the Orlando Sentinal Star.
Q. Your special reporter for Lake County?
A. Yes.
Q. And then following that is a column down, the last

righthand column of the newspaper ?
A. There is.
Q. I ask you if there are some pictures at the bottom of

the front page of the newspaper ?
A. Yes.
Q. Pictures of the National Guard in Lake County, on

duty in Lake County?
A. Yes.

[fol. 196] Q. 1 ask you if, in black type, approximately
one fourth of the way down the column, is there h box
entitled demonstration,” with a question?

A. Yes.
Q. Was this paper about which you have just been testi

fying a paper published by the Orlando Daily Newspapers?
A. It is.
Q. And the same Orlando Evening Star about which you

have quoted the circulation figures ?
A. Yes.

Mr. Akerman: We offer in evidence that part of the Or
lando Evening Star consisting of the headline, “ Third
Kidnapper Captured,” and the entire last column on the
righthand side of the front page and the bottom of the front
page of the paper with the exception of the first column on
the lefthand side as defendant’s exhibit C.

The Court: The same order as in the other.
Mr. Akerman: The same pro-fer, to read into the record.
The Court: The same ruling. Let it be understood each

time that he offers to read it.
Mr. Akerman: All right. Will you put that into the

record each time?

By Mr. Akerman:
Q. Mr. Medlin, do you have a c o p y of the Orlando Morn

ing Sentinal for Tuesday morning, July 19th, 1949?
A. Yes.

[fol. 197] Q. Will you hand it to me, please, sir?
(Whereupon, the witness produced the paper.)
Q. I ask you, Mr. Medlin, did that paper contain a head

line, “ Mob Violence Flares in Lake?”
A. Yes.
Q. Subheadline, “ Negro Houses Burned?” “ Men to

Defy Officers?”
A. Yes.
Q. Does that contain a by line by Ormond Powers?
A. Yes.
Q. Is that the same Ormond Powers you have previously

testified to as your special reporter that reports for all
three of your newspapers for Lake County?

A. It is.
Q. Does that, following that, is there an article going

down the entire righthand column of the front page?
A. Yes.
Q. Is that article continued?
A. It is.
Q. To what page?
A. Page 2.
Q. Will you turn to page 2? And describe the location

in the paper where that is?
A. Third column.
Q. Third column in the second page?

A. That’s right.
Q. Is that headed, “ New Violence In The Groveland

Kidnaping Case, continued from page 1?”
A. That’s right.
Q. Will you turn back to the front page?—Is there a car

toon appearing on the front page of the paper?
A. Yes.
Q. Is that a cartoon consisting of 4 electric chairs, headed

“ No Compromise?”
A. “ The Supreme Penalty.”

[fol. 198] Q. Pour electric chairs?
A. Yes.
Q. Who is that cartoon prepared by?
A. By Mr. Lynn Brewton.
Q. Is he the regular front page cartoonist for your paper ?
A. He is.
Q. General custom of your papers when Mr. Brewton is

there, to run a cartoon each morning. Is that correct?
A. That’s right.
Q. In the Orlando Morning Sentinal?
A. Yes.

Mr. Akerman: Defendants offer in evidence that part of
the issue of the Orlando Morning Sentinal dated Tuesday,
July 19th, 1949, consisting of the headline heretofore de
scribed by the business manager of that paper; the cartoon
heretofore described, and the news column appearing on
the last column on the righthand side of the front page
and in the third column of the second page. Said column
being written by Ormond Powers, special reporter for the
Orlando Daily Newspapers.

By Mr. Hunter:
Q. Does this cartoon referred to by Mr. Akerman bear

any names? Mention any names?
A. No sir. There is not any names on it except the car

toonist.
Q. Is that cartoon intended to express a principle behind

which this paper stands?
A. I couldn’t say on that.
Q. Well don’t you think it expressed very strongly the

[fol. 199] idea that whoever was guilty of viciously raping

a woman on the public highways of this county should pay
the supreme penalty for it?

A. I do.
Q. And don’t you think that’s right?
A. (Indicated by head) Yes.
The Court: The same ruling on the admission that has

been made on the others.
Mr. Akerman: Just a minute. I f I can look at this.
The Court: You had offered it is evidence, as I under

stood it.
Mr. Akerman: He asked some questions.
(Whereupon, the exhibit was received, the same proffer

and ruling made as before.) (Defendant’s Ex. D.)

By Mr. Akerman:
Q. Mr. Medlin, do you have a copy of the Orlando Eve

ning Star for the 19th of July, 1949?
A. I do.
Q. May I have that?

A. (Whereupon, the paper was produced by the witness.)

Q. I ask you, does that contain a headline entitled, “ Tense
Quiet At Groveland” ? And a subheadline, “ Sheriff
Promises to Halt Violence?”

A. Yes sir.
[fol. 200] Q. Does it also, and following that subheadline,
have a 2-column story on the righthand side of the front
page of the Orlando Evening Star, and then bucking a
one column story and going down the entire righthand side
of the paper?

A. It does.
Q. I ask you, is there a picture in the middle of the front

page of the paper entitled, “ Night Riders Burn Lake Ne
gro Homes?”

A. Yes.
Q. And below that picture, another picture consisting of

a picture of Groveland Police Chief, George Mays point
ing out some clothes that were pierced by bullets fired into
the door of a negro honky-tonk. I ask you to turn to the
editorial page of the paper, and ask you if there is an
editorial appearing in the paper, entitled, “ Cool Heads

Needed,” with the reference, farther down, to ‘ smart law
yers,’ in it?

A. Yes.
Mr. Akerman: Defendant offers in evidence that part

of the issue of the Orlando Evening Star—Just one ques
tion.

Q. Is this the same Orlando Evening Star about which
you testified concerning its circulation throughout Lake
County, Florida?

A. Yes.
Mr. Akerman: Now Defendant offers in evidence that

part of the Tuesday afternoon issue, July 19th, 1949, of the
Orlando Evening Star, consisting of the headline, “ Tense
[fol. 201] Quiet at Groveland,” Subheadline, “ Sheriff
Promises to halt Violence,” and the story appearing on
the—under the headline and subheadline. Also that part
of the paper consisting of the 2 pictures appearing on the
front page of the paper, one of them entitled, “ Night
Riders Burn Negro Homes,” and the other one, picture,
a purported picture of Police Chief George Mays, of Grove-
land, pointing out where clothes had been pierced by bul
lets fired into a negro honky-tonk. Also, the editorial ap
pearing on page 4 of the newspaper hereinbefore described
by the witness.

By Mr. Hunter:
Q. Do you know how many houses were burned in Lake

County?
A. I do not.
Q. Do you know of any others, except this one?
A. I do not.
Q. Do you know where this was?
A. No.
Q. There’s nothing in this paper to indicate that colored

houses were being burned all over Lake County, was there?
A. I believe not.
Q. Did you ever hear of anything of that kind?
A. No.
Q. This was an isolated instance, then?
A. (Indicating by head) Yes.
Q. Who wrote this editorial?
A. I couldn’t answer that. I do not know.

[fol. 202] Q. Mr. Anderson is the editor of the paper?
A. Mr. J. C. Barsier is the editor of the evening paper.

He writes the editorials as a rule. I do not say that he
wrote that one.

Q. Did you read the editorial?
A. No, I haven’t.
Q. Would you please read it? I t ’s headed, “ Cool Heads

Needed.”
(Whereupon, the witness perused the paper.)
Q. Do you subscribe to and believe that the thought in

that editorial is correct?
A. I do.
Mr. Akerman: I object to what he subscribes to. Imma

terial and irrelevant. Move to strike the answer.
The Court: Well, it is not going to the jury. I don’t

think it makes a whole lot of difference and I am not going
to grant the motion to strike it. Let it go into the record.

Mr. Akerman: Now, you testified as to this editorial.
I ask you if the following appears in the editorial: “ A few
smart lawyers who are agents of different organizations,
seek to hamper justice through the employment of legal
technicalities. They may bring suffering to many innocent
negroes.” Does that appear in the editorial?

A. I believe it does. Yes.
[fol. 203] Q. Now you have testified that you subscribe to
that. What do you consider legal technicalities ?

A. Well, I don’t know hardly how to answer that.
Q. Do you consider this hearing a legal technicality?
A. (Indicating by head) No.
Q. Mr. Hunter: He said he didn’t know.
A. I say I didn’t hardly know how to answer that ques

tion.
By Mr. Hunter:

Q. You are not a lawyer?
A. No.

By Mr. Akerman:
Q. But you subscribe to it anyway?
A. (No answer.)
Mr. Akerman: All right. The same proffer.

The Court: The same ruling.
(Exhibit was received as Ex. E.)

By Mr. Akerman:
Q. Do you have with you the issue of the Orlando Morn

ing Sentinal for Wednesday, July 20th?
A. I do.
Q. Will you give it to me, please, sir?

(Whereupon, the witness produced the paper.)

' Q. I ask you if there appears on the front page of the
issue of the Orlando Morning Sentinal for Wednesday,
July 20th, in the second column from the left of the front
page, an article entitled “ Groveland Under Virtual Martial
Law?”

A. Yes.
[fol. 204] Q. Does that column extend the entire front
page of the paper?

A. Yes.
Q. I ’ll ask you if there appears on page 8 of the paper,

at the top of the first two columns from the left an article
entitled, “ Negro Evacuees Sheltered Here” ; and in the
article, it says, among other things, The negroes have been
brought here because of inter-racial tension that has been
built up in Lake County following* the kidnapping of a 17
year old white woman.”

Q. Does that appear?
A. I haven’t read the story.
Q. Well will you read it through?
(Witness perused the paper.)
Mr. Hunter: Your Honor, I don’t see the necessity to

read it.
(Whereupon, it was argued to the Court.)
A. Yes sir. It is.
Q. Is that there?
A. Yes.
Q. And, on page 10 of the same issue of the Orlando

Morning Sentinal, I ask you, is that a picture entitled,
“ Flames From Negro Homes Light Night Sky in Lake
County?”

A. Yes sir.
Q. And, a picture of Police Chief George Mays of Grove-

land inspecting, pointing out the bullet wounds in the shirt
coming from a bullet fired into a negro honky-tonk?

A. Yes.
Q. Are these papers the same papers you have testified

about as to the circulation throughout Lake County, Flor
ida?

A. (Indicating* by head) Yes.
[fol. 205] Q. Another picture, “ Standing Road guard at
Stuckey’s still on a weapons carrier with a 50 caliber ma
chine gun mounted are Florida National Guardsmen of the
116th Field Artillery Battalion. The Battalion moved in
las., night heavily armed to prevent further violation fol
lowing outbreak Monday night. Three negro homes were
burned here, Monday night.”

A. Yes.
Q. And is that the same paper that you have testified

about as being published by your corporation for circula
tion as you have testified in Lake County, Florida?

A. It is.
Mr. Hunter: No objection.
Mr. Akerman: Same proffer.
The Court: The same Order.
(Whereupon, the exhibit was received as Ex. G for de

fendant.)
Q. Do you have the issue of your Orlando Morning Senti-

nal for Thursday, the 21st day of July, 1949?
A. Yes.
Q. May I see it, please, sir?
(Witness produced paper.)
Q. Handing you the issue of the Orlando Morning Senti-

nal, Thursday, July 21, 1949, I ask you if there appears on
the front page of that issue a paper entitled, “ Lake Jury
indicts trio for assault.?’-’

A. Yes sir.
[fol. 206] Q. That article doesn’t say who it was -written
by. Do you know whether Mr. Ormond Powers wrote that
article or not?

A. I do not know.
Q. Following that headline, is an article extending down

the second column from the left approximately three fourths
of the way of the paper.

A. Yes.

Q. Turning to that article, I ask you if the following ap
pears in there, “ March DuBose, first negro to serve on Lake
Grand Jury, accepted without protest.”

Mr. Hunter: We object to that, if you are going to intro
duce the paper . It speaks for itself. Just killing time read
ing from these papers he’s reading into evidence.

The Court: You can identify that item without so much
dramatics and they don’t impress the Court in the least.

Mr. Akerman: Is the objection sustained?
The Court: Objection sustained. Identify the article and

then introduce it.
Q. I ask you if, appearing on page 3 of the paper, is a

picture that a “ Lake County Grand Jury probing in the
case?”

A. Yes.
Q. Is this the same Orlando Morning Sentinal about

which you have testified as to the circulation throughout
Lake County, Florida?
[fol. 207] A. Yes.

Mr. Akerman: Defendant’s proffer that part of the paper
consisting of the newspaper article headed, “ Lake Jury
indicts trio for Assault,” appearing on page — in the sec
ond column on page 1 of said newspaper, and the picture
appearing on page 3 of said newspaper.

The Court: The same order.
(Whereupon, the paper was received and marked as De

fendant’s Exhibit H.)
Q. Do you have the Orlando Evening Star for Thursday,

July 21st?
A. Yes.
Q. May I see that, please?
(Witness produced paper.) —
Q. I ask you if there is an article appearing in that paper

entitled, “ Groveland Tension Simmers?”
A. Yes sir.
Q. Does that appear in the 4th column on the front page

of the paper?
A. Yes sir.
Q. The same Orlando Evening Star about which you

testified?
A. Yes.

Mr. Akerman: Offered in evidence.
The Court: The same order.

[fol. 208] (Whereupon, the paper referred to was re
ceived in evidence as Defendant’s Exhibit I.)

Mr. Akerman: If the Court please, if we could have about
5 minutes conference with Mr. Medlin, we can eliminate
quite a number of the rest of the issues of his papers and
save the time of the Court.

The Court: All right. Take 5 minutes recess.
(The Court then recessed for 5 minutes, at the end of

which time, the Court took further recess until 1 o ’clock,
PM, at which time, the following proceedings were had:)
(Mr. Wood reporting.)

[fol. 209] August 30, 1949
C harles M edlist, fu rth er testified on d irect exam ination

as fo l lo w s :

By Mr. Akerman:
Q. Mr. Medlin I hand you herewith Orlando Morning

Sentinel of Friday, July 22nd, and ask you if an article ap
pears on the front page in next to the last column at the
right hand side entitled “ Troops remain at Groveland!”

A. Yes, sir.
Q. Is this the same Orlando Morning Sentinel that you

testified to with reference to circulation in Lake County?
A. Yes.
Mr. Akerman. Defendants offer in evidence that part

of the Orlando Morning Sentinel of Friday, July 22nd,
identified by the witness, being* next to the last column,
next to the last right hand colume, on page one of the news
paper.

Mr. Hunter. May I ask a question? Is it the intention
of counsel to introduce only articles that refer to this par
ticular case?

Mr. Akerman. Yes, sir.
Q. Is it your intention to introduce all articles in the

newspapers you have that refer to this case?
A. Yes, sir. We have gone through them, and picked out

the one with such articles in them.
Q. That is your intention?

A. Yes, sir. We may have overlooked one or two. We
went through them at noon and picked them out.

Q. You intend to introduce everything that has reference
to this particular case, is that right?

A. That is right.
The Court. The article is admitted with the same pro-

[fol. 210] visions made before noon, that a copy be obtained
and substituted for the original.

Article filed in evidence as Defendants Exhibit J.
Mr. Akerman. Same proffer.

By Mr. Akerman:
Q. Mr. Medlin I hand you herewith issue of the Orlando

Morning Sentinel for Saturday, July 23rd, 1949, and ask
you to turn to page seven and see if there is an article en
titled “ McCall reports all quiet in Groveland” ?

A. Yes, sir.
Q. Does that article appear on page seven of the July

23rd issue of the Orlando Morning Sentinel, being the top
three columes in the middle of the page, being the top three
columes of page seven?

A. Yes, sir.
Mr. Akerman. We offer that in evidence as Defendants’

Exhibit K.
The Court. Same ruling.
Mr. Akerman. Same proffer.
Mr. Hunter. While I have it on my mind, I think it

probably has not been done, I would like for the record to
show that the defendants are all in court during this entire
proceeding today.

Q. Mr. Medlin I hand you the issue of the Orlando Morn- —
ing Sentinel of Wednesday, July 27th, and ask you if an
article appears in next to the last colume on the front of
the page entitled “ Negro attack suspect killed” ?

A. Yes.
Q. That was published in the Orlando Morning Sentinel

of that date?
A. Yes.
Q. Is that the same Orlando Morning Sentinel that you

[fol. 211] testified as to the circulation of in and through
out Lake County, Florida?

A. Yes, sir.

Mr. Akerman: We offer in evidence that part of the
Orlando Morning Sentinel of Wednesday, July 27th, con
sisting of an article headed “ Negro attack suspect killed”
and appearing in next to the last colume on the right hand
side, front page, as Defendants’ Exhibit L.

The Court: Same ruling.
Q. I hand you an issue of the Orlando Evening Star for

July 27th, 1949, and ask you to look at the third colume and
say if there is an article there entitled “ Negro killed” ?

A. Yes.
Q. Is that the same Orlando Evening Star that you have

testified to concerning its circulation in and throughout
Lake County, Florida?

A. Yes, sir.
Q. That article did appear in it?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. In this issue of July 27th 1949?
A. Yes, sir.
Mr. Akerman: We offer this article in evidence as De

fendants’ Exhibit M.
The Court: Same order.
Mr. Akerman: Same proffer.
Mr. Hunter: It seems to me that this method of intro

ducing these papers is simply in line with the statement I
made this morning, that the defendants’ attorneys intend
to kill time here as long as they can, to reach beyond Thurs
day, on account of the trial of this case being set for that
[fol. 212] day. These papers all identify themselves, the
heading of the papers and the articles. If he wishes he
can ask this witness to identify the paper itself. That is
simply a method of killing time. I just make that observa
tion for the record.

Mr. Akerman: I would like to make an observation for
the record. I am attempting to the limits of my power to
defend these defendants as an attorney and officer of this
court, and in both motions, for continuance and for removal
of the cause we have alleged wide spread newspaper pub
licity in and throughout Lake County, Florida, and I know
of no other proper way to prove those allegations. They
have been denied by the State. Our motion was filed in
good faith.

The Court: I think you are probably taking up more
time in questioning the witness than is necessary, but I am

not going to hold it down on you further than I have so
far. Go ahead.

Q. I hand you herewith, Mr, Medlin, copy of Orlando
Morning Sentinel of Saturday, August 13th, and ask you to
look at page five, next to the last colume, and state if there
is an article entitled “ Trial scheduled in attack ease” 1?

A. There is.
Q. Is that the same Orlando Morning Sentinel that you

have testified to concerning its circulation in and through
out Lake County, Florida?

A. Yes, sir.
Q. Does that appear in this paper as of Saturday, August

13, 1949?
A. Yes, sir.
Mr. Akerman: We offer this article in evidence as De

fendants’ Exhibit N.
The Court: Same ruling.

[fol. 213] Q. I hand you herewith copy of the Orlando
Sentinel Star of Sunday, August 14, 1949, and ask you to
look at page seven, and ask you if there is an article ap
pearing in the top of the page entitled ‘ ‘ McCall says beat
ing charge damn lie” ?

A. Yes, sir.
Q. Is that the same Sentinel Star that you testified to

concerning its circulation in and throughout Lake County,
Florida?

A. Yes, sir.
Q. Did that article appear in this paper?
A. Yes, sir.
Mr. Akerman: We offer this article in evidence as De

fendants’ Exhibit 0.
The Court: Same ruling.
Mr. Akerman: Same proffer.

Q. Mr. Medlin how long has the Orlando Morning Sen
tinel been published?

A. As the Orlando Morning Sentinel I couldn’t give the
exact date on that, but a number of years.

Q. Does it enjoy the reputation of one of the leading
newspapers throughout Central Florida?

A. Yes, sir.
Q. How about the Orlando Evening Star?

A. Same thing.
Q. Was the Orlando Evening Star published formerly

under the name of Orlando Reporter Star?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. And for many years it has circulated throughout Flor

ida?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. And has enjoyed the reputation of being one of the

leading newspapers in Florida?
[fol. 214] A. Yes, sir.

Q. Mr. Medlin were you in Orlando, Orange County,
Florida, on last Friday, Saturday and Sunday?

A. Friday and Saturday, yes, sir.
Q. Did you have a tropical disturbance there?
A. We had quite a bit of wind.
Q. And it did quite a bit of damage?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Did it blow down quite a number of trees in the City of

Orlando ?
A. Some, yes, sir.
Q. Do you remember about how long the wind blew at

fifty miles an hour?
A. No, sir.
Q. Do you have any idea?
A. No, sir.
Mr. Akerman: No further questions.
Mr. Hunter: No questions.

H abby E. Gaylobd, being first duly sworn, testified as
follows:

Direct examination.

By Alex Akerman, J r .:
Q. State your name please?
A. Harry E. Gaylord.
Q. Your profession?
A. Attorney at law.
Q. How long have you practiced?
A. Thirteen years.
Q. In Lake County, Florida?

A. In Lake County, Florida.
Q. Were you appointed by the Court as defense coun-

[fol. 215] sel in this case!
A. I was.
Q. After the arraignment in this case did you come to

my office?
A. I did.
Q. Did you discuss with me whether or not I was going

to appear as defense counsel?
A. I did.
Q. What did I tell you at that time?
A. You said no.
Q. Did I tell you what the situation was?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Did I tell you I didn’t want to take the case?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Did I tell you I would take it only in the event they

were unable to employ other counsel?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Did you go with me to Daytona Beach to discuss the

matter of employing other counsel with Horace Hill?
A. I did.
Q. Did you at a later date meet Franklin Williams, an

attorney of New York?
A. I did.
Q. Are you familar with the efforts, or some of the efforts

we went to to obtain defense counsel?
A. I am.
Q. Will you kindly state what you know of our efforts

to obtain defense counsel?
A. I told Mr. Akerman that if counsel was to appear for

the defendants that I was withdrawing from the case, but
if they didn’t have other counsel I would defend them to
[fol. 216] the best of my ability. I learned that a colored
lawyer by the name of Fordham, of Tampa, Mr. Akerman,
Horace Hill and Franklin Williams had been contacting-
counsel and had employed counsel for the defendants.
When I met with Mr. Akerman and Horace Hill I made the
same statement, that if they were going to get counsel I
wanted to know it, became I would have to make prepara
tion for the trial of the ease. Williams asked me if I would
be employed by the NAACP, or the defendants, to try the
case. I told him no, under no circumstances, for no amount

6—420

of money; that I had been appointed by the court and that
I would defend the defendants to the best of my ability as
the court appointed attorney, but I didn’t care to be em
ployed by any outside source. He told me he thought an
attorney in Polk County was going to handle the case, and
that he was going down to see him, and in a few days
he would let me know if he was going to handle the case.
A few days later he told me that attorney was not going
to handle it. He showed me a list of eleven or twelve at
torneys he had contacted concerning the case, and none of
them would handle it. A week ago last Monday I contacted
Horace Hill and asked him if they had secured counsel, that
I had to know. He said there had been an attorney in
Daytona Beach contacted and they thought he was going
to represent them. He gave me his name and I went to see
him. He told me the night before he had decided not to
enter the case, and he was not going to appear as counsel.
I informed Hill and Williams of that and Williams called
another attorney on the telephone, and when he told him
he would not handle the case Williams said he was going
to see Mr. Akerman again concerning it, and I was present
when he saw Mr. Akerman, and Mr. Akerman at first said
he wouldn’t take the case because of the circumstances in
volved, and public opinion, but at last he said he would try
[fol. 217] the case. I then told him I would withdraw from
the ease and he could enter his appearance as attorney.

Q. You know considerable of the efforts that were made
to obtain counsel?

A. Yes, sir.
Q. I believe you said you talked with one of the attor

neys at Daytona Beach?
A. That is right.
Q. And you were informed at first that he would take

it?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. What did he say about it?
A. He said he thought it over at night and discussed it

with his wife and decided not to take it.
Q. You came with them over to my office?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. About what time did you arrive there as well as you

remember ?
A. A week ago last Monday night.
Q. Late in the afternoon?

A. Yes, sir.
Q. We liad considerable discussion did we not!
A. Yes, sir. From about four o ’clock until six-thirty.
Q. As a matter of fact your wife was waiting for you to

take her to supper, and you had to call her over the phone
did you not?

A. Yes, sir.
Q. And finally your arrangements were made around

seven or eight o ’clock?
A. That is right.

[fol. 218] Q. When were you first called in as defense
counsel?

A. Friday,. August 12th.
Q. Was it your understanding by the arraignment that

they were going to waive any rights they had prior to the
arraignment ?

A. I didn’t discuss it with them.
Q. What was your understanding about that?
A. They gave me to understand they had not definitely

employed counsel. Greenlee’s father told me he thought
Fordham of Tampa was going to represent his son, and I
told Greenlee’s father, and each of the defendants, that if
they secured other counsel I would withdraw from the case,
and they could have whoever they wanted.

Q. Do you remember the discussion with me and that
I raised the question of filing motions ?

A. Yes, sir. You asked me concerning a motion for
change.,of venue. I didn’t raise the question because I
thought no change of venue was necessary.

Cross-examination.

By J. W. Hunter:
Q. You say you told Mr. Akerman you didn’t think any

change of venue was necessary in this case?
A. That is true.
Q. You live in this county?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Knowing what you do you thought these men could

get a fair and impartial trial here?
A. Yes, sir. I told Mr. Akerman that I knew of my own

knowledge there had been a colored man on the grand jury,
and of my own knowledge knew that for several years
colored men had been in the box, and I didn’t feel that the

disturbance that bad occurred at Groveland would effect
the trial; that we has always had good jurors in Lake
[fol. 219] County.

Q. Where do you live?
A. Eustis.
Q. Did the people there know of this disturbance that

was going on down at Groveland?
A. I knew of it.
Q. Was there any rioting or burning of buildings in

Eustis?
A. No, sir.
Q. Did you hear of any widespread prejudice against the

colored race there which would prevent them from getting
a fair trial?

A. No, sir.
Q. Did you ever hear anything like that in Lake County?
A. No, sir.
Q. It is your opinion now that they can get a fair — in

this county?
A. That is the reason I wouldn’t ask for a change of

venue.
Q. That is still your opinion?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. You would have done anything you thought proper

in the defense of these men?
A. Yes, sir. I didn’t solicit the appointment. In fact

I was on my vacation when I was notified of the appoint-
ment, and I told every person who asked me about the
employment that being an officer of the court, having been
appointed by the court, I would do everything in my power
to see that they got a fair and impartial trial, and I was
going about the business of seeing they did get that.
[fol. 220] X[. You say you negotiated here with a man
by the name of Williams?

A. That is right.
Q. And he was trying to employ an attorney?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Did you know in whose behalf he was trying to employ

an attorney?
A. No, sir. He told me he had talked with the defendants

at Raiford, and had talked with several attorneys concern
ing the case, and asked me if I would consider being
employed ?

Q. Did he tell you who he represented?

A. I learned from the Pittsburgh Courier that it was
the National Association for the Advancement of Colored
people.

Q. Did you know when you talked with Mr. Akerman,
and he hesitated about taking the case, whether he had
taken other suits in Florida from that same association
or not?

A. I know he had handled the University of Florida case,
for entrance in the college.

Q. For the entrance of colored students in the College
at Gainesville?

A. Yes, sir. I didn’t know he was representing the
National Association for the Advancement of Colored
People, but I did know he represented the colored students
who had applied for entrance, from reading the Orlando
Sentinel Star.

Q. It is in this record that Franklin II. Williams wTas
representing the National Association for the Advancement
of Colored People, that is in the record here—Now Williams
was the man who tried to employ you was he not?

A. Yes, sir.
Q. And he was the man who tried to employ Mr. Akerman

[fol. 221] was he not?
A. That is right.

Re-direct examination.

By Mr. Akerman:
Q. You are familiar with the purported confessions are

you not?
A. I am.
Q. And the publicity that has been given them?
A. I am.
Q. Do you believe that it is possible for any person who

has read those purported confessions to completely erase
them from his mind and act on the jury?

A. Do you mean the newspaper account of the confes
sion?

Q. I mean if he is asked questions concerning the excite
ment, any juror who has been informed and believes the
defendants have confessed the crime, do you think it is
possible for them to erase that from their minds, assuming
the confessions are not admissible or not introduced in

evidence, is it possible for them to erase it from their minds,
or would they consider it in connection with the case?

A. That will depend on the individual juror.
Q. It would be practically impossible to erase something-

like that from their minds, would it not?
A. Well that would depend on the individual juror, the

question of getting a jury.
Q. There has been quite wide spread publicity through

out LaEWCofflaty that they confessed has there not?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. You didn’t go down to Groveland?
A. No, sir.
Q. You were not over in Tavares right after they w-ere

[fol. 222] arrested?
A. No, sir.

Re-cross examination.

By J. W. Hunter:
Q. Do you think it would be impossible to get a jury

in this county, or that there would be any trouble getting
a jury in this county to try this case on account of what
they had heard or read in the newspapers?

A. I felt I could get a proper jury if I had tried the case,
or get a better jury in Lake County than in any other
county.

Q. Do you, still think that?
A. Yes, sir.

Re-direct examination.

By Alex Akerman, Jr.:
Q, Didn’t you tell me it might take two weeks to'get a

A. I did tell you that, to get one that you felt would
fairly and impartially, try it..

Re-cross examination.

By J. W. Hunter.
Q. That is just a guess?
A. Yes, sir,

D r . N elson W . V . S paulding , b e in g first du ly sw orn,
testified as fo llo w s :

Direct-examination.
By Franklin H. Williams:

Q. Where do you reside?
A. Jacksonville, Florida.
Q. Have you been admitted by the State of Florida to

practice medicine in this state?
A. I have.
Q. You are a medical doctor?

[fob 223] A. I am a medical doctor.
Q. Where is your office?
A. 805 Broad Street, Jacksonville, Florida.
Q. Do you have a pre-medical degree?
A. Yes, I do, Bachelor of Science.
Q. What University?
A. X-vier University, New Orleans, Louisiana.
Q. Is that an accredited institution?
A. It is, yes.
Q. Do you have any other degree ?
A. Yes. Doctor of Medicine.
Q. Where did you obtain that degree?
A. Howard University, Washington, D. C.
Q. Is that an accredited Medical College?
A. It is.
Q. Did you serve any internship?
A. Yes I did.
Q. How long and where?
A. I served nine months, rotating internship, in Kansas

City General Hospital, #2, Kansas City, Missouri.
Q. Did you serve as resident anywhere?
A. I served nine months at Brewster Hospital, Jackson

ville, Florida.
Q. When was the first time you saw me Doctor?
A. This morning when I came in this court room.
Q. When was the first time you saw Mr. Akerman?
A. When I walked in this court room this morning.
Q. And Mr. Price sitting behind me?
A. This morning was the first time I have seen him.
Q. Dr. Spaulding have you ever seen the defendants in

this case, Samuel Sheppard, Walter L. Irvin and Charles
Greenlee?

[fol. 224] A. Yes, sir, I have.
Q. On what date and where?
A. I_saw them on August 7, 1949, at Raiford State Peni

tentiary.
Q. How did you happen to go to Raiford to see the

defendants?
A. Attorney Horace Hill called me and asked would I

go up and examine these men.
Q. Did you examine them?
A. I did.
Q. What did your examination consist of?
Mr. Hunter: I object to that as being totally irrelevant

and immaterial. It has no connection whatever with this
case.

The Court: The objection is sustained. It has nothing
to do with these motions.

Mr. Akerman: At this time, may it please the Court,
the defendants make a proffer of proof by this witness. It
is the intention of the defendants to prove by this witness
that he in his capacity------

The Court: That has all been gone over. There is no
use to encumber the record with it any further.

Mr. Akerman: Is it the ruling of the Court that we
cannot make a proffer of the proof?

The Court: You have already offered the proof.

Ormond P owers, being first duly sworn, testified as
follows :

Direct-examination.
By Alex Akerman J r .:

Q. State your name please sir?
A. Ormond Powers.
Q. Where do you live?
A. Leesburg.

[fol. 225] Q. What is your business or profession?
A. Newspaper Reporter.
Q. For who?
A. Orlando Sentinel Star.
Q. The morning paper is called the Orlando Morning

■Sentinel, the afternoon paper the Orlando Evening Star,

and the Sunday paper the Orlando Sentinel-Star, do you
report for all of them?

A. Yes, sir.
Q. Were you reporting for them during the months of

July and August 1949?
A. Yes.
Q. You work for them in Lake County?
A. Yes.
Q. Did you in connection with your business investigate

and report to them on the case now pending before this
court?

A. Yes.
Q. Did you write the article which is in the issue of July

17th, which has been filed in evidence as Defendants’ Ex
hibit A?

A. Yes, I did.
Q. In that article, quote: “ We will wait and see what,

the law does, and if the law doesn’t do right then we will
dg Tt, was the opinion of many outraged citizens” ?

Al~TEat Is correct.
Q. You reported that?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. What was the basis of that report?
A. Times were pretty high, or it was pretty obvious it

was. 1 got~that from white people, I don’t know their
[fol. 226] names. I would tell if I knew, but I don’t know
them.

Q. Did you write the article which appears in Defend
ants’ Exhibit B?

A. Well, strictly I didn’t write that, but I telephoned
the information in. It was written in the main office.

Q. Was this article written on the basis of information
you received and reported to the paper?

A. Yes, sir. And probably information furnished by
other people as well.

Q. Did you report to them the following: “ The town
was quiet last night, but Saturday night and early Sunday
morning at times it was to the breaking-point when angry
mobs of men when in search of the negroes who had been
arrested?”

A. Those are not my exact words, no. I think they have
been colored somewhat.

Q. Did you report that information?
A. I did, or some of it.

Q. Where did yon receive that information?
| A. It was common knowledge.
| Q. Did you talk to the sheriff about it?

A. Yes, sir.
Q. Did he tell you about it?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Do you recall whether that information came from

him?
A. A delegation called on the sheriff. That is correct.

I don’t recall whether the sheriff told me there were a hun
dred men, or whether that came from somebody else.

Q. Does that article reflect a report of what you had
ascertained?

A. Yes, sir, not all of the information, of course, came
[fob 227] from official sources. In a matter of that kind
you take what you can get.

Q. Now this: “ Unappeased, however, the group returned
to Gfroveland where they toured the negro section and
stopped in front of a cafe said to be owned by the father
of one of the suspects, and they drew their guns and fired
into the building. The mob then speeded away and stopped
in front of a negro dwelling in the southwest part of
Groveland ’ ’------

The Court: Hand the article to Mr. Powers and let him
state what part of it is based on information he sent in.

Q. Is that article as you read it substantially what you
saw and learned in connection with your investigation and
your report to the paper?

A. Yes, that is correct.
Q. I hand you Defendants’ Exhibit C and ask you to

glance through that?
A. This is based on information I telephoned to the

newspaper.
Q. Is Exhibit D the same?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Exhibit E?
A. Yes, sir.
0. Were you present when the pictures were taken, in

Exhibit E?
A. Yes, I was. I didn’t actually take the pictures.
Q. Did you see the building that was burned down there?
A. Yes, sir.

Q. Did you see anything else denoting violence or law
lessness—did you see any shooting?

A. Yes.
[fol. 228] Q. Tell us about those, tell what you saw?

A. It was an orderly sort of disorder. Actually the men
toured the City of G-roveland in automobiles. They were
not masked. They were not intoxicated I would say. They
drove through the negro quarters and stopped at the edge
of the quarters in G-roveland, and I would say about six
men got out of the cars and formed a distance of ten or
fifteen feet from a small cafe, the Blue Flame, I believe
it is called, and fired at the rear door of the building. My
impression was that they made no real effort to injure
any one.

Q. Did you see any negroes around at that time?
A. No, sir.
Q. Did you investigate where they had gone?
A. Yes.
Q. What did you find?
A. That they had been removed to Lakeland and Or

lando, by white citizens of the town who did this to prevent
an incident. The white people were quite concerned be
cause they felt trouble makers might come into the county
from other counties and use this incident as a basis for
real trouble. I personally saw many cars from Orange
and Polk counties in Groveland during the tension, and I
came to the belief that they would plan a parade, or demon
stration of some nature. Getting back to the shooting—
they fired I would estimate eight or ten shots into this cafe.
Then they got in their cars and went to the south part of
town, then they went west and had a conference for a few
minutes, and I lost them somewhere out there. I couldn’t
keep up with them, but I understood they fired into an
other negro dwelling presumed to be the home of the Shep
pard boy’s father. No one was injured there. Actually
not much damage was done to the house.
[fol. 229] Q. Did you see the burning houses?

A.
Q.
A.
Q.
A.
O.
A.

P A\

. I .

jYes, sir.
Tell how many houses were burned?
Three houses.
Had they burned when you arrived at the
They were burning.
D id an ybod y try to put the fire out?
No, sir. We saw they were burning, and that they/

fi „
IJ\ IfjL

scene? !.;tiv ; s,,;
ST f

would continue to burn, and there wasn’t any hope of sav
ing them, so we drove on.

Q. Do you know of your own knowledge whether they
completely burned?

A. I would say so, except the foundations. They had
concrete block foundations.

Q. Here is a statement in here: ‘ ‘ Situation cooled off,
but quickly flared up after the houses were destroyed, one
being the home said to belong to the father of one of the
suspects,” do you recall where you got that information?

A. No, I don’t. I do believe that was incorrect, though.
I think it was later changed.

Q. I ask you to take a look at Defendants’ Exhibit F.
Is that a true report of what you found?

A. Yes, sir.
Q. And G?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. H?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. In Exhibit H you have reported “ March DeBose

first negro to serve on jury without protest,” where did
you get that information?

A. From Mr. Hunter.
Q. Did Mr. Hunter tell you he was the first negro to

[fol. 230] serve on a grand jury in Lake County?
A. On a grand jury, yes, sir; not an ordinary jury.
Q. Look at Defendants’ Exhibit I?
A. This is an Associated Press story.
Q. You didn’t have anything to do with that?
A. No, sir.
Q. This is a special story, Defendants’ Exhibit J, is that

yours?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Does that truly report the conditions in Lake County

as you found them?
A. Yes.
Q. Defendants’ Exhibit K, does that report the correct

conditions in Lake County as you found them?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Does Defendants’ Exhibit N correctly report the con

ditions in Lake County as you found them?
A. Yes.
Q. Is 0 the same?
A. Yes.

Q. Bid Mr. Willis McCall, Sheriff of Lake County, in
form you that all of the defendants had confessed!

A. Yes.
Q. You reported that?
A. Yes.
Q. That was common knowledge in Lake County as far

as you know?
A. I would think so if people had read it in the news

papers.
Mr. Akerman: No further questions.

Cross-examination.

By J. W. Hunter:
Q. In the issue of July 17th you are reported to have

[fol. 231] said that someone told you: “ We will wait to
see what the lawT does, and if the law doesn’t do right we
will do it.” Is there any reason for anybody doing any
thing now since the court has taken this matter up?

A. No, sir. I don’t think so. I think that the situation
has cooled off.

Q. In the questions Mr. Akerman asked you he used these
words “ conditions in Lake County at that time,” did you
notice that?

A. No, sir. I missed that.
Q. He asked you that every time, and you said “ yes”

did you not?
A. No, sir, actually not. I am sorry. I should have

said “ conditions in one area of Lake County.”
Q. How large an area in Lake County?
A. Five miles square, or less possibly.
Q. Would you say there were any conditions of that kind

in any other section of Lake County?
A. No, sir.
Q. Was there any hysteria, prejudice or ill feeling to

ward the negroes exhibited in this county outside of that
small area down there?

A. No, sir. Not a bit.
Q. These conditions they have been trying to prove here

were conditions that existed only there near where this
tragedy took place?

A. Yes, sir.
0. And didn’t affect the balance of Lake County?
A. No.

Q. There was no rioting, burning of houses, or prejudice
shown in the City of Leesburg against colored people?
[fol. 232] A. No, sir.

Q. Or any where else in this county that you knew of?
A. No, sir. We checked it and didn’t find any evidence

of it at all.
Q. As a matter of fact are not the respectable white

people in Groveland themselves undertaking to protect
these negroes?

A. Yes. They had a volunteer citizen’s committee, I
guess a good many of them I could name to you, to take
the negroes to other places for safe keeping, and they
patroled the negro quarters, actually patroled the quarters
themselves, and put on extra policemen.

Q. The white people did that?
A. Yes, sir, the white people. And they stayed up all

night trying to prevent trouble.
Q. How long did that disturbance you are talking about

last down there?
A. By that you mean the tension?
Q. The actual disturbance, or disorder?
A. Saturday night and Monday night.
Q. After that things quieted off?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. The men who engaged in that disorder on Saturday

night and Monday night, were they respectable citizens of
Lake County?

A. Well, I don’t know them very well, Mr. Hunter. I
wouldn’t say. I hardly know how to answer that question.
I wouldn’t say they were people who are generally known
in the county to be active in civic affairs and things of that
nature. I think most of them were farmers who wouldn’t
have time for those things.
[fol. 233] Q. In that particular section?

A. Yes, sir.
Q. Were many of them actually active?
A. I would say three or four.
Q. Three or four men?
A. Three or four were the leaders, and the others fol

lowers.
Q. Did you notice whether or not they undertook to hurt

anybody, or kill anybody, or anything of that kind, in the
neighborhood you mentioned?

A. No one was injured, no, sir.

Q. Were you there the night they caught a drunken white
man and brought him into Groveland? And a colored man?

A. Yes.
Q. Tell us about that?
A. Well two men from Clermont, as I understand it,

had been drinking and they brought a negro into Groveland
and parked their car on the main street and left the negro
alone, and passed the word up and down the street that the
negro was armed and they defied anybody to try to take him.

Q. Was there a big crowd there?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Did anybody undertake to lynch him?
A. No, sir.
Q. What did they do?
A. They watched him and arrested the two white men.
Q. Did they put them in jail?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. If there had been any disposition there to lynch any

one they could not have had a better opportunity to do it
than that could they?

[fol. 234] Mr. Akerman: I object to that question.
The Court: The objection is sustained.

Q. No effort was made at all to harm the negro?
A. No, sir.
Q. You say there — two buildings that were fired into,

one of them was Thomas ’ building, the father of one of the
men in Groveland, is that correct?

A. That was the only one in that section.
Q. Were there other colored buildings in there?
A. Yes, sir, a good many.
Q. That is a big settlement down there ?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Were any of their buildings burned or anything done

to them?
A. No, sir.
Q. How many buildings were burned in the Groveland

section and the Maseotte section?
A. Three in that area.
Q. One belonged to Sheppard, the father of one of the

defendants, did it not?
A. I am not sure Mr. Hunter. I heard it did, and I

heard later that he rented it.

Q. The other two, who did they belong to?
A. George Valree, was my understanding.
Q. Did he have any connection with the defendants in

any way?
A. Not that I know of, no, sir.
Q. W asn’t he what is known as a Voodoo Doctor, and

just as offensive to the colored people there as to the white
people?

A. On the basis of what I found out about him he was
[fol. 235] consulted by a good many white and colored
people for his mystical power, and I understood he had been
engaged in some sort of activity like Bolshevism, and I also
understood he was a wealthy negro. I think he was resented.

Q. By white and colored?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. How long have you lived in Lake County?
A. Sixteen years.
Q. Being a newspaper man you are pretty well acquainted

with this county?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. What is your opinion about the rfelations between

colored people and white people in this county, is it good
or bad?

A. Good.
Q. It is exceptionally good isn’t it?
A. Exceptionally good for the south, yes, sir.

Redirect examination.

By Alex Akerman, J r .:
I Q. You have described an area about how wide?
{ A. I said five square miles. That takes in Groveland
hnd Mascotte pretty well. That was where the trouble was.
! Q. How far is Tavares?
i A. Twenty miles from Groveland.
\ Q. There was trouble in Tavares wasn’t there?

A. Not directly. They had to leave Groveland to ger
here.

Q. You told me about a white citizens’ protective league?
A. It was some kind of committee. I don’t think it had a

name.
[fol. 236] Q. A group of white citizens of Groveland area
banded together, what did they do?

A. They first removed all of the negroes.
Q. From the area?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. From what you found out it was the opinion of the

substantial white citizens of Groveland that the negroes
had better leave that area?

A. Temporarily at least.
Q. They were the substantial leading white citizens of

the community?
A. Yes, sir. The very biggest men there.
Q. They gave them transportation, trucks, etc. to get

them out?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Did they give them protection? Do you know whether

they put armed guards around them?
A. I don’t think they did.
Q. Isn ’t it true that the guards protected them?
A. They protected the quarters. It is true that they

had special armed policemen patrolling the quarters day
and night. That is the only thing I know about guards.

Q. Who was this Voodoo man?
A. George Valree. He was reported to have been con

nected with Bolshevism. That was the rumor.
Q. That was the reason people didn’t like him?
A. I don’t know why they didn’t like him.
—. In order to get this area a little better tied down, can

you give another description of it, give a boundary or
something, so we will know what you are talking about?

A. I would say Mascotte and the immediate area of
[fol. 237] Sturkeys Still.

Q. Where is that?
A. Several miles west of Groveland, a colored settle

ment.
Q. Was there some trouble there?
A. Some, yes, sir.
Q. Describe the nature of that?
A. Well a group of men, estimated at about thirty five

or forty, white men, collected there one evening and said
they were going to destroy Sturkeys Still. The Sheriff,
who was there, told them he would not permit it—that
was Sheriff McCall—and he threw tear gas bombs in their
midst. He did it with very little help, and did it expertly.
This occurred in the Sturkeys Still area. They had fired a

7—420

few rounds at a building before the sheriff arrived. In all
I understand he fired two tear gas bombs in the crowd, and
told them he wasn’t going to permit an exhibition that
night, and finally persuaded them to go home. I may be a
little confused on my time, but by mutual consent the
National Guard retired, and also later in the event the
group of men retired and went home, and the National
Guard went home to prevent an incident. I hope that
answers your question.

Q. Do you remember about what night that was?
A. Monday night, the 18th.
Q. Was that the first time the National Guard appeared

on the scene?
A. No, sir. They were there the night of the 17th.
Q. How many National Guardsmen were there?
A. About seventeen Sunday night, and about twenty

Monday night.
Q. They were the local National Guardsmen?
A. Leesburg and Eustis.

[fol. 238] Q. After that time were other National Guards
present?

A. Yes, sir, Tuesday afternoon. The Eustis Company.
Q. Do you remember what date that was?
A. That would be the 19th. They were relieved the night

of the 19th by a Battalion from the Tampa area, of 300
men. They arrived with heavy artillery. They stayed
until the following Sunday. 1 don’t recall the date.

Q. Do you recall where they were stationed in Lake
County?

A. Clermont, Groveland and Mascotte.
Q. Is that the area you have described?
A. Not actually. I never figured Clermont in the troubled

area, because I don’t think it deserves to be, but because
of another incident in Clermont in which a drunk wdiite
man threatened to do harm they placed an attachment of the
National Guard there.

Q. Do you recall wThen the two drunks brought the negro
over to Groveland ?

A. I am sorry, but I am not sure. It was right at the
outset, but I am not sure of the date.

Q. Do you cover all of Lake County?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Practically everybody in Lake County knows about this

case?

A. I think so.
Q. They have talked with yon about it?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. It is the general subject of conversation?
A. Not any more.
Q. At the time it was going on ?

[fol. 239] A. Yes, sir.
Q. That extended throughout Lake County?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. They asked you questions about it?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Have you ever discussed the confessions or anything

like that?
A. The confessions haven’t been referred to much in

conversations. I don’t think anybody made much point
of the confessions.

Re-cross examination.

By J. W. Hunter:
Q. The discussion you heard over the county was that

a crime had been committed in the south end of the county.
A. Of course everybody was disturbed by the acts of vio

lence, concerned about it, yes, sir.
Q. Did you find any great prejudice against the colored

race in any other parts of the county?
A. No. They thought the crime was a horrible thing,

but I don’t know that they actually felt it would have been
as bad if it had been white peojjle.

Q. Decent people don’t like to have their women raped?
A. No. sir.
Q. There was no general feeling against colored people

at all?
A. No, sir.
Q. And there isn’t yet?
A. I haven’t seen any evidence of it, no.
Q. Is that still a topic of conversation in the county?
A. No, sir.
Q. It has all died out?
A. Except for the last day or so when the date for trial

[fol. 240] approaches, and things like that.

100

A lex A kermast, J r ., being first duly sworn, testified as
follows:

My name is Alex Akerman Jr. I am defense counsel in
tliis case. My reply to statements and inferences of the
State Attorney as to my employment by the NAACP, and
inferences of other litigation I am handling, I would like
to make the statement that this is the first case in which the
NAACP is interested which I have defended. The only
other representation in any way connected with the NAACP
in which I have appeared as counsel was one criminal
case in Orange County, in which the National Association
had nothing to do, only the local Branch. Any statement
that it has anything to do with the cases now pending in
which certain negro students are seeking admission to the
University of Florida, or equal facilities for them, is en
tirely unfounded, and has no basis.

Cross-examination.

By J. W. Hunter:
Q. You represent four colored boys who are trying to

get in the University of Florida do you not?
A. I represent six.
Q. They are poor people are they?
A. I don’t know that they are so very poor.
Q. How many of them are from Marion County?
A. I think three or four of them.
Q. Do you think they are furnishing the money for the

handling of the case?
A. My statement was that the NAACP is having noth

ing to do with the case.
Q. Does the local association have anything to do with it?

[fol. 241] A. Not that I know of.
The Court: I don’t think this has anything to do with

this ease.

101

M rs. M abel N orris R eese, b e in g first du ly sw orn, testi
fied as fo l lo w s :

Direct examination.

By Joseph E. Price:
Q. Mrs. Reese where do you live?
A. Mount Dora.
Q. Are you connected with a newspaper, or one or more

newspapers, being* published in Mount Dora ?
A. My husband and I own the papers.
Q. What is your official capacity?
A. Editor.
Q. What are the names of these newspapers?
A. Mount Dora Topic, Groveland News Topic, and Cler

mont News Topic.
Q. Do you have your circulation figures in Lake County

of these papers?
A. 3600.
Q. Do you have the individual figures of circulation for

the three papers?.
A. It is about 1500 for the Mount Dora paper, and the

balance is in south Lake County.
Q. The balance is divided between the Groveland paper

and the Clermont paper?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Your position is editor of the three publications?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. I hand you a newspaper, The Mount Dora Topic, of

Thursday, July 21st, is that one of your papers published
on that date?
[fol. 242] A. Yes, sir.

Q. In the last two columes on the right side of the page
there is an article which is headed------

The Court: Ask her if the article refers to the alleged
crime.

Q. Does this article cover events which happened in con
nection with this crime?

A. Yes, sir.
Q. Could you tell me who wrote this particular article?
A. I did.
Q. On what did you base the article from the standpoint

of information, information you personally gathered?

102

A. I attended the grand jury hearing.
Q. Was this article based on any other information?
A. Preceding the grand jury investigation I covered the

case in south Lake County. However I dont think you will
find anything in that article on it. That was up to date at
the time I came out with that issue.

Q. You have a statement in this article to the effect that
State Attorney, J. W. Hunter, indicated that the trial would
be held as speedily as possible and bring to a close mass
demonstrations at Groveland, what was the basis for that
particular statement?

A. I talked with Mr. Hunter about that.
Q. Are those substantially the words of Mr. Hunter?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Let me read the article: “ The trial, State Attorney

Hunter indicated will be held speedily for the purpose of
bringing to a close the mass demonstration in Groveland”
is that correct?

A. Yes, sir.
Q. On what did you base your idea there was mass dem-

[fol. 243] onstration?
A. As I said I had been down in south Lake County

prior to the grandjury hearing. However I didn’t go into
details on that, because the grandjury hearing was new.

Q. When you did go to south Lake County where did
you go? _

A. Main Street in Groveland.
Q. Did you go any further than the Main Street in Grove

land ?
A. Not prior to that publication.
Q. There is also a statement in this article that the negro

who served on the grandjury was the first negro to serve
on a grandjury in Lake County, what was your basis for
that statement?

A. Well I think if you will read further there you will
see that in the past they had had trouble getting negroes
to serve on juries.

Q. Who gave you that particular information?
A. Mr. Hunter.
Q. Did he say for what reason they had not served?
A. That they dont want to serve.
Mr. Price: I would like to offer in evidence the article

covering the two right hand eolumes of the Thursday, July

103

21st edition of the Mount Dora Topic. This newspaper was
circulated under the figures you gave me?

A. The 1500 figures, yes, sir. May I have the paper back?
The Court: A copy of the article will be substituted and

the paper returned.

Q. I show you another copy of the Mount Dora Topic of
Thursday, July 28th, and particularly in the fourth and
fifth columes of that paper there is an article. Would you
read the title of that article?
[fol. 244] A. “ The true Groveland story to be told in this
week’s L ife ’ ’ , and “ Negroes trial now to be set” . There is
another reference in that paper if you would like for me
to find it for you.

Mr. Price: Defendants offer these articles in evidence.
Mr. Hunter: In regard to the hack page of the same

paper, July 28th, there is an article which begins as fol
lows—

Mr. Price: I object to the State Attorney reading the
article.

The Court: The objection is sustained.
Mr. Hunter: I call to your attention to the “ News in East

Town” and ask you if you are going to introduce that?
Mr. Price: This I believe is a letter, not a regular article

in the paper. A letter from some one to the paper.
The Witness : It is a regular by-line colume.
Mr. Price: I have no objection to its introduction. I

have no desire to introduce it.
The Court: He declines to introduce it. You can in

troduce it.
Mr. Hunter: The paper of the 28th, under “ East Town-

you say that is a regular colume in your paper each week?

A. Yes, sir.
Q. It is signed by T. M. Thomas, is he a white man or

a colored man?
A. A colored man. He has been writing for the paper a

number of years.

Mr. Price: Defendants offer in evidence the two articles,
columes four and five in the Mount Dora Topic of July
28, 1949, as Defendants’ Exhibit Q.

The Court: Same order.
Mr. Price; Same proffer,

104

[fol. 245] Q. Next I show yon a copy of the Mount Dora
Topic of August 18, 1949, and call your attention to the
two left hand columes, would you kindly read the titles of
those two articles'?

A. “ Surprise witness to be called at Negro trial which
opens August 29th” . “ Drama and Bitter Disappointment
fill the atmosphere at this hearing” .

Q. May I ask who wrote these articles?
A. I did.
Q. I notice in the latter part of your first colume you say

“ A hint of man’s inhumanity to man” , what was the basis
of that observation?

A. It is explained a little further on.
Q. Would you mind telling me what your opinion was?
A. I would rather not say what my opinion was.
Q. The words you wrote are your picture of the situation?
A. My impression of it.
Q. You were present at the whole hearing were you not?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. It was your impression that you saw a hint of man’s

inhumanity to man ?
Q. I would rather you would read it------
The Court: The article will speak for itself.
Q. Are there further articles in your paper concerning

this particular case?
A. The editorial is in the following issue.
Mr. Price: Defendants offer in evidence the first two

columes of the Mount Dora Topic of August 18, 1949, as
Defendants’ Exhibit R.

The Court: Same ruling.
Mr. Price : Same proffer.
Q. I show you an article in the middle of colume two

[fol. 246] of the Clermont News Topic, under date of Au
gust 11, 1949, and ask you if this article to which I now refer
was written by you?

A. Yes, sir.
Q. You have a statement in your article here: “ Hunter

said the first negro attorney assigned to the case by the
NAACP, William Fordham of Tampa, had dropped out of
the case after investigation” what was the basis of the
statement that he had been retained by the NAACP—-on
what information did you base that statement?

105

A. Well there had been considerable other statements
published prior to that in other newspapers, to that effect;
that he had been, and Mr. Hunter told me.

Q. You based that statement on articles in other news
papers and on the statement of Mr. Hunter!

A. Yes, sir.
Q. You have another statement here, quoting Mr. Hunter,

a statement in the lower part of the article, last paragraph:
“ Hunter said he was determined that the trial of the three
negroes would be conducted without any recurrence of mob
violence which followed the arrest of the negroes” , did
Mr. Hunter at that time tell you there had been mob violence
here in Lake County?

A. He didn’t tell me at that time no, sir.
Q. Hid you base that statement on a statement by Mr.

Hunter?
A. I based it on reference to the entire episode. It was

much easier to refer to it in simplified terms rather than
go into details each time of what happened.

Q. In other words it was your opinion there was mob
violence ?

A. I never express any opinion in news stories.
[fol. 247] Q. You must have gotten the statement from
somewhere; you more or less stated what you wrote to be
a fact?

A. What is the point of your question?
Q. I am now going to ask you if there was mob violence

in Lake County? You have made the statement that Mr.
Hunter said he was determined that the trial of the three
negroes would be conducted without re-occurrence of mob
violence which followed their arrest?

A. That refers back to other published accounts on the
case. I think you have missed a couple of editorials in the
first issue.

Q. In other words what made you think there had been
mob violence? Was that based on a statement by Mr.
Hunter in a complete discussion of the case?

A. Yes I woulcl say it was. I didn’t give word for word
the account of what Mr. Hunter said about the case.

Q. You gathered those things from what Mr. Hunter
related to you, that there had been mob violence?

Mr. Hunter. I object to the question. The article speaks
for itself.

106

The Court. The objection is sustained.
Mr. Price. Defendants offer in evidence the middle part

of the second colume of the Clermont News Topic, issue of
August 11, 1949, as Defendants’ Exhibit S.

The Court. Same ruling.
Mr. Price. Same proffer.
Q. I hand you a copy of the Gfroveland News Topic dated

August 11,1949, and ask you to look at an article appearing
in the second colume, is that your paper?

A. Yes, sir.

Mr. Price. Defendants offer in evidence Gfroveland News
Topic of Thursday, August 11, 1949, second colume, as
[fol. 248] Defendants’ Exhibit T.

The Court. Same ruling.
Mr. Price. Same proffer.
Q. All of these papers have been circulated under the

circulation figures you have previously given?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. I hand you herewith copy of the Mount Dora Topic

dated Thursday, August 25, 1949, and call your attention
to the two right hand columns of that publication, those
are your articles are they?

A. Yes, sir.
Q. Would you read the title of those articles?
A. “ Weapons to be barred from trial” . “ Women beg

for reserved seats at trial” .
Q. I ask you if this is your editorial?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. The editorial to which I am presently referring is on

page four of this same issue. In this editorial you make
this statement: “ That is when the court will bring reason
into turbulence” , just what do you mean by turbulence?

A. To the effect that when it does come to trial, like
today, etc. it will be ironed out, cleared up ; that is the mob
violence that has been referred to.

Mr. Price. Defendants offer in evidence the two right
hand columns of the Mount Dora Topic, issue of Thursday,
August 25, 1949, on page four; also the editorial colume
of that page, as Defendants’ Exhibit TJ.

The Court. Same ruling.
Mr. Price. Same proffer.

107

Mr. Price. The defendants also would like to introduce
in evidence these same articles which appear in the Cler-
[fol. 249] mont News Topic, right hand two columes, and
also on page four editorial colume, issue of Thursday,
August 25, 1949, as Defendants ’ Exhibit V.

The Court. Same ruling.
Mr. Price. Same proffer.
Mr. Price. Defendants would like to introduce in evidence

the same articles which appear in the two right hand col
umes of the Groveland News Topic, issue of Thursday,
August 25, 1949, and also as part of that same exhibit page
four, the editorial colume, as Defendants’ Exhibit W.

The Court. Same ruling.
Mr. Price. Same proffer.

Q. I hand you copy of the Clermont News Topic, dated
July 28,1949, and call your attention to an article appearing
in the second and third columes of that publication, first
page—is that your article?

A. Yes, sir.
Mr. Price. Defendants offer in evidence columes two

and three of the Clermont News Topic, issue of July 28,
1949, as Defendants’ Exhibit X.

The Court. Same ruling.
Mr. Price. Same proffer.

Cross-examination.

By J. W. Hunter:
Q. Mrs. Reese how long have you been in Florida?
A. Almost two and a half years.
Q. Where are you from?
A. Akron, Ohio.
Q. As an investigator and reporter, writing for your

papers, have you become somewhat acquainted with condi
tions around Mount Dora and that territory?

A. Yes, sir.
[fol. 250] Q. What would you say the relations are there
between white people and colored people ?

A. As a matter of fact since I have been in the south
I have come to have a better feeling toward the colored
race than while I was in the industrial north. I feel there
is considerable more satisfaction among the negroes here.

108

I have made a lot of friends with them. I think they are
much happier here.

Q. Their relations with the whites are good?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. When this socalled rioting was going on in south

Lake County, did that effect Mount Dora in any way?
A. Not in the lease.
Q. Did you find any prejudice over there against the

colored race, or any expressed desire of the people over
there not to give the colored people fairness because they
are colored people?

A. No sir.
Q. Is there any such evidence there now?
A. No, sir. Not at all.

J am es H eklong, being first duly sworn, testified as fol
lows :

Direct examination.

By Mr. Akerman:
Q. State your name please sir?
A. James Herlong.
Q. Where do you live?
A. Leesburg.
Q. How long have you lived there?
A. Twenty seven years.
Q. How old are you now?
A. Twenty Seven years. I was born and raised in Lake

County, Florida.
Q. What is your business?

[fol. 251] A. Citrus business.
Q. Do you hold any official position with the Florida

National Guard?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. What is that position?
A. Commanding Officer of Co. H, 124th Infantry.
Q. From what area does the personnel of Co. H. 124th

Infantry come ?
A. Leesburg, Lady Lake, Fruitland Park and Oka-

humpka.
Q. And of what does the company consist, officers and

men?

A. At the present time our strength is 53 men and 4
officers.

Q. That is an infantry company?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. What arms does the company usually carry when on

duty?
A. That depends on the situation.
Q. What arms to you have issued to your company?
A. We have 75 MM rifles, 81 MM mortars, 30 caliber

machine guns, 50 caliber machine guns, rocket launehe-s,
M-l rifles, carbines and automatic pistols.

Q. How long have you been commanding officer?
A. Since the 14th of February 1949.
Q. Hid your company receive any orders, or were you

called out on active duty during the month of July 1949?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. State just what orders you received?
A. We received a telephone call from the Governor of

Florida, Fuller Warren; that was on the 17th of July at
approximately 8 :30 in, the evening. The order was for me
to contact the Sheriff of Lake County, Willis McCall, and

/ [fol. 252] if he needed my services to report to him
j according to his order.

Q. What did you do?
1 A. I took steps to muster the company, and made an
1 effort to contact Sheriff McCall, which I did, and at
1 approximately 9:15 we received orders from him to report
' at Main Street in Groveland, Florida.

Q. What did you do then?
A. I departed from Leesburg and arrived in Groveland

at 10:30 P.M. I reported to the Sheriff for orders, and
acting upon his orders I distributed my men on either side
of the street in Groveland, the main street in Groveland.

Q. You arrived there about 10:30?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. The night of the 17th?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. What did you find on your arrival?

I A. Quite a few people, about seventy five or a hundred
people in cars and on the side walks, and I immediately
/surveyed the situation and found practically every one
/ there—in fact I found no one unruly. They were just

/ bystanders looking on.
Q. What did you do then?

110

A. I remained there until approximately 1 :30 A. M., at
which time the Sheriff said there would be no further need
of us and we were relieved and returned to Leesburg.

Q. What did you do then?
A. On the night of the 18th of July I received another

call from the Sheriff of Lake County for us to come to
Mascotte, Florida.

Q. Where is Mascotte with relation to Groveland?
A. About three miles to the west.
Q. Go ahead?
A. We cleared through the State Military Department

[fol. 253] at St. Augustine and went to Mascotte.
Q. About what time did you arrive there?
A. Around 11:30 P. M.
Q. What did you find then?
A. In the center of Mascotte I estimated there were fifty

or seventy five people, at the cross roads there in Mas
cotte. I reported to the Sheriff again for orders and he
told me to remain in Mascotte until he ordered otherwise.

Q. You mean your company?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Yours was the only company that was out at that

time ?
A. The only one on the 18th.
Q. Was there another company called out?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. What company was that?
A. Headquarters Company, Third Battalion, 124 In

fantry.
Q. Where is that company?
A. Eustis.
Q. Who is the commanding office- of that company?
A. Lt. Paul Hutchins.
Q. Do you know where they were stationed?
A. They were in Groveland with us.
Q. Coming back to the night of the 18th, you were in

Mascotte, where you reported to the sheriff, now pick up
from there?

A. A short time after we reached Mascotte a group of
people there approached me and said they had decided to
go home, that there would be no trouble, and they would
appreciate it if I would take my unit and leave that there

I l l

would be no more trouble, and that they had told the sheriff
that. I told the group that under orders from the sheriff
[fob 254] I had to remain, but that I would contact him and
see if there had been any change, but that I was staying
until he ordered me out. I did contact the sheriff. There
was no evidence of any violence there, no violence toward
us. This was just a conversation between myself and this
group of men. Under the sheriff’s order we left Mascotte
around 12:15 and went to Groveland, Florida, and re
mained until approximately 2:30 in the morning. It was
very quiet and nothing to do there and again the sheriff
said there was no further need of my company and we
were dismissed and returned to Leesburg.

Q. Were you called out after that!
A. No, sir.
Q. That finished your service?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Do you know whether any other troitps, or National

Guards were called out after that?
A. It is my understanding that the 116th Field Ar

tillery of Tampa was called.
Q. Do you know when they came?
A. I think the 19th.
Q. What time did you leave on the 18th?
A. Around 2 :30 the morning of the 19th.
Q. And it is your understanding that the 116th Field

Artillery was called out that night?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Did you go down to Sturkeys Still?
A. No, sir.
Q. Were you present at the time of the burning of the

three negro homes down there?
A. That fire occurred near the same time of our arrival

there.
Q. Were they burning when you got there?

[fol. 255] A. Shortly after we got there.
Q. Were you present in Groveland, down in the negro

quarters, when some persons fired into the Blue Flame ?
A. No, sir.
Q. Do you know when that occurred?
A. Just hearsay. I don’t know any of the particulars of

it.

112

Q. Do you know whether guards have been alerted to
remain in Lake County in the event they are called out
for duty?

A. I received no orders.

Cross-examination.

By J. W. Hunter:
Q. Did you see any necessity for calling the guards

down there?
A. There was no violence. We were called down on

orders. According to our instructions to prevent any,
but there was nothing to prevent, no shooting or anything
along that line.

Q. Those people you saw riding up and down the
street in automobiles were they doing anything dis
orderly?

A. X didn’t see groups of automobiles. That might have
happened before we got there.

Q. Did you ever load your guns while you were down
there?

A. Each man had ammunition but never put it in his gun.

Redirect examination.

By Mr. Akerman:
Q. What guns did you carry there?
A. Pistols, carbines and M -l rifles.
Q. How many men were with you?
A. Twenty-eight men and four officers.

Recross examination.

By J. W. Hunter:
Q. Mr. Herlong in one of the sworn documents in this

[fol. 256] case says that at the time the grand jury which
found and returned the indictment against these defendants
was empaneled that mobs were roaming throughout Lake
County, is that true?

A. I didn’t hear of any sir, or see any.
Q. And at the time said grand jury was called there was

a state of hysteria, prejudice and ill feeling rampant
throughout Lake County, is that true?

113

A. I didn’t know the grand jury had been called until
it was over.

Q. Was there any trouble in the Town of Leesburg,
where you live ?

A. No, sir.
Q. Or anywhere else in the county that you know any

thing about!
A. No, sir.
Q. As a matter of fact, being on the ground, wasn’t the

worst part of this mob business down there in the news
papers?

A. The newspaper people were a definite hindrance to the
situation down there in my opinion.

Redirect examination.

By Mr. Akerman:
Q. When you say it was a hindrance what do you mean?
A. It brought us out for one thing*, and they were trying

to get pictures, stories and everything.
Q. You might agree with the British system, that it is a

good idea not to have reports published?
A. I am not familiar with the British system sir, but when

you are called out for military duty you have a job to
do, and anybody running around trying to get pictures—-
in one case the AP man wanted me and another man to
pose while he took our pictures.

Q. Newspapers are pretty widely read throughout Lake
County are they not?

A. Yes, sir.
[fol. 257] Q. They wanted you to pose for a picture?

A. Yes, sir.
Q. Do you know whether on the 20th of July 1949 the

116th Field Artillery was still on duty in Lake County,
Florida?

A. I am not sure whether they were or not.

W. V. M orrow , being first duly sw orn, testified as fo l
low s :

Q. State your name please sir?
A. W. V. Morrow.
Q. Where do you live?

8—420

\
r

114

A. Clermont.
Q. Are yon connected with a newspaper at Clermont!
A. Yes, sir, the Clermont Press and the Groveland

Press.
Q. What is your capacity on these newspapers!
A. Editor.
Q. I hand you copy of the Groveland Press dated Friday,

July 22, 1949, and call your attention to the right hand
colume, first page, of that publication, an article entitled:
“ Trowps patrol south Lake County” , is that your article!

A. Yes, sir.
Q. What is the circulation of your papers!
A. The Clermont Press as near as I can get at it from the

postoffice statement, the paid circulation of the Clermont
Press was 1300, that was on April 20, 1949. It is some
what greater now. The Groveland paper wrns 450. Com
bined circulation of the two papers 1750.

Q. Is that figure, 1750, according to your last postoffice
report?

A. I will take that back. The postoffice statement I
have— do you want the circulation within the county?
[fob 258] Q. Yes, sir.

A. The paid circulation out of town is 433. The present
run is 1300; that is the Clermont paper. The Groveland
paper is 450, the present run.

Q. Is about all of the circulation confined to this county?
A. Yes, sir. Some to other parts of the country, to

winter visitors.
Q. But you would say most of it is here in Lake County?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Those are in excess at the present time of 1700?
A. Yes, sir. 1750'lapproximately.
Q. Would that same figure pretty candidly represent

the circulation from July 15th until the present time?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Can you tell me, in this issue of the paper I have re

ferred to, was the writer of the article appearing in the
right hand colume?

A. I was.
Q. You have made the statement in this article that

Sheriff McCall said all three negroes had confessed, and
identified the fourth negro for whom intensive search is
being conducted” , what was the basis of that statement in
that article.

A. I think the preceding paragraph explains that. When
this thing happened I didn’t attempt to dispute the daily
papers, but I did attempt to give the people in Clermont
and Gfroveland a weekly resume of what took place, and the
information is based on articles in the various daily papers,
and personal conversations I had with people generally.
That is the policy I followed out, to take the last papers
[fol. 259] and if articles appear in those papers that have
stood the test two or three days without denial or correc
tion, based on my previous experience as an editor, I
assume them to be true. The,article you called my attention
to appeared to the best of my recollection in a number of , ■■
daily papers and was not denied for a period of three
days. I don’t think they were ever denied. The papers,^
I use are: The Tampa Tribune, Orlando Sentinel, Miami
Herald and the Associated Press dispatches that went north
and came back to us in exchange.

Q. You got the information from reading other papers?
A. Yes, sir, and personal talks with peace officers, citi

zens, etc. It was based, if my recollection of the thing
is correct, on material appearing in other newspapers.

Mr. Akerman: The defendants would like to offer in
evidence the right hand colume of the Groveland Press,
issue of Friday, July 22, 1949, as Defendants’ Exhibit Y.

The Court: Same ruling.
Mr. Akerman: Same proffer.

Q. I hand you herewith copy of the Clermont Press and
call your attention to the right hand colume, is that the same
article you have referred to as being in the other paper?

A. Yes, sir. V ^ l
Mr. Akerman: Defendants offer in evidence the right ^

hand colume of the Clermont Press, issue of July 21, 1949,
as Defendants’ Exhibit Z.

The Court: Same ruling.
Mr. Akerman: Same proffer.

Q. I hand you copy of the Clermont Press, edition of
July 28, 1949, and call your attention to an article in the
right hand colume entitled: “ Negro suspect in assault case
shot to death. Troops withdrawn” . That article does ap
pear in that paper?
[fol. 260] A. Yes, sir.

116

Mr. Akerman: Defendants offer in evidence the top
right hand colume of the Clermont Press, edition of Thurs
day, July 28, 1949, continuing on the last page of that
same edition, in the first colume, as Defendants’ Exhibit
AA.

The Court: Same ruling.
Mr. Akerman: Same proffer.

Q. I have a copy of the Clermont Press published Thurs
d a y , August 4, 1949, and in the next to right hand colume

is an article which is continued on page five of that same
publication at the foot of colume three, does that article
appear there?

A. Yes, sir.
Q. Is that your article?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. On page five you have made the statement that the

other three negroes involved in the crime are in Eaiford
Prison, would you tell me what you mean by the word
involved?

Mr. Buie: We object to the question on the ground that
it is irrelevant and immaterial.

The Court: The objection is sustained.
Mr. Akerman: Defendants offer in evidence the second

from right hand colume of the issue of the Clermont Press
dated August 4, 1949, the article being continued on page
five of the same paper, lower part of colume three, as
Defendants’ Exhibit BB.

The Court: Same ruling.
Mr. Akerman: Same proffer.

Q. I now call your attention to the Clermont Press, issue
of Thursday, August 18, 1949, page three of that paper,
in the right hand colume of that page, an article appears,
will you read the title?
[fol. 261] A. Trial of three negroes set for August 29th.

Q. This article was written by you?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. On what information was this article based?
A. From the daily newspaper reports and wire reports.
Q. In other words it was widely mentioned in the news-

: papers you have referred to before?
| A. Yes, sir.

Q. You have made the statement that Sheriff McCall

117

who saved the three negroes from a mob on the night of
July 16th spirited them away, etc., that was gathered from ,
the reports?

A. Yes, sir.
Q. Do you believe that to be a correct representation?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Did you rely on the newspaper reports which you

have received as being correct unless they were corrected
in a short period?

A. Yes, sir.
Q. At the time you printed this article you believed that

to be a correct representation of the conditions existing
in regard to this particular matter at that time—in other
words you believed these statements about Sheriff McCall
having to spirit the negroes away to prevent serious harm
being done to their persons?

Mr. Hunter : I object to the question on the ground that
the article speaks for itself, and is rather plain language.

The Court: The objection is sustained.
Mr. Akerman: Defendants offer in evidence the right

hand colume of page three of the Clermont Press, edition
of Thursday, August 18,1949, as Defendants’ Exhibit CC.
[fol. 262] The Court: Same ruling.

Mr. Akerman:, Same proffer.

Cross-examination.
By J. W. Hunter:

Q. How long have you lived down there at Clermont?
A. As close as I can state—I don’t remember the exact

date, but this year.
Q. How long have you been editor of the paper ?
A. Since the last week in July.
Q. You were editor when this thing happened?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Was there any rioting in Clermont, or any colored

people’s houses burned there?
A. I didn’t see any or hear of any in Clermont.
Q. How far are you from Groveland?
A. I think six and a half or seven miles.
Q. Everything was peaceable there?
A. Yes, sir. Mrs. Morrow and I drove through there

that Sunday night, coming from Cypress Gardens. We cut
around there some place.

118

Q. Did you go through Groveland?
A. No, sir, around Groveland.
Q. Was every thing peaceable?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. No colored people were run out of Clermont, or any

homes burned?
A. No, sir, not to my knowledge. I never heard of any.
Q. Everything was peaceable there?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. And it has been that way ever since?
A. Ever since I have been there, to the extent of my

observation and knowledge.
[fol. 263] Q. Where are you from?

A. The last place was Buffalo, New York. Almost eight
years before that I was in the Army of the United States.

Redirect examination.

By Mr. Price:
Q. You say you rode through Clermont ?
A. Around Groveland into the Clermont road that cuts

off there. I cannot tell what road it is.
Q. Did you go over to Groveland at any time during this

period?
A. Yes, sir. I was in Groveland quite a number of

times.
Q. Were you there any time around from the 16th to the

19th of July?
A. I was there yes, sir.
Q. Do you recall seeing any negroes there at that time?
A. No, I didn’t see any there.
Q. Just from your own personal feeling do you think

if you had been a negro yourself, do you think you would
have gone over there?

A. I am not able to put myself in a negro’s mental
process. I don’t know just offhand.

Q. On the basis of what you read in other papers, and the
situation as you believed it to be, do you think if you were
a negro you would have gone over there?

A. I won’t answer that. I don’t think I should be forced
to answer that.

Mr. Hunter: I object to the question.
The Court: You are not required to answer it.

119

[ fo l. 264] W illie P adgette, b e in g first duly sw orn, testi
fied as fo l lo w s :

Direct examination.

By Alex Akerman, J r .:
Q, State your name?
A. Willie Padgette.
Q. Where do you live?
A. Groveland.
Q. Within the Town of Groveland?
A. No, sir. In the Bay Lake section about nine miles

from Groveland?
Q. In the section known as Bay Lake about nine miles

from Groveland?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. How long have you lived there?
A. About three years.
Q. Where did you — before then?
A. Georgia.
Q. When did you come down from Georgia?
A. About 1947.
Q. Where does your father live?
A. Bainbridge.
Q. Do you have relatives living here on your side of the

family?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Name them?
A. Milton Moody, my half brother. He lives at Bay

Lake.
Q. How long has he lived there?
A. About four years.
Q. Any others?
A. Nancy Lee Moody, my half sister. She lives at Bay

Lake.
[fol. 265] Q. How long?

A. Since 1946.
Q. Any others?
A. Harold Moody, my half brother, in the Bay Lake

section.
Q. How long?
A. Since 1946.
Q. Any others?

320

A. My mother, Sallie Padgette, in the Bay Lake section
since 1946.

Q. Are any of these parties married?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. State the maiden names of their wives, whether they

are of Lake County families, and the number of children?
A. Katie Euth Tootle. Ina Price, one child.
Q. Who did she marry?
A. Harold Moody. Albert Pearce Caldwell, no children.
Q. Who did he marry?
A. My sister, Nancy Lee Padgette.
Q. What was your w ife’s name?
A. Norma Lee Tyson.
Q. Where is she from?
A. G-roveland, Florida.
Q. Is her father living?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. His name please?
A. Coy Tyson.
Q. Where does he live?
A. Groveland.
Q. Do you know how long he has lived in Groveland?
A. No, sir, I don’t.

[fol. 266] Q. You don’t know whether he was born here
or not?

A. No, sir.
Q. Is her mother living?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. What is her name?
A. Edna Tyson.
Q. She lives at Groveland?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Does she have brothers or sisters?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Name them and give their residences?
A. Geneva Gray, Brewster, Florida, Polk County; Addie

Thompson, Groveland, Florida. Neda Garton, Groveland,
Florida. Alma Garton, Groveland, Florida. That is all.

Q. Do you know whether your wife has any cousins liv
ing in and around Lake County ?

A. Yes, sir.
Q. Name them?
A. Betty Lou Thomas, Groveland, Florida. Margaret

Joiner, Groveland, Florida, Bernice Joiner, Groveland,

121

Florida. June Gar ton, Groveland, Florida. Darrell Story,
Groveland, Florida. Donald Story, Groveland, Florida.
That is about all I know.

Q. What is your business?
A. Farming.
Q. Wliat is your father-in-law’s business?
A. Farming.
Mr. Akerman: That is all at the present time. If you get

any more on that let me know and we will call you back
for that purpose.

Cross-examination.
By Mr. Hunter:

Q. What do your people do, are they all farmers?
A. Yes, sir.

[fol. 267] Reporter’s Certificate to foregoing transcript
omitted in printing.

[fol. 268] (The Court reopened after a short recess.)
Me. R ichard T. M u llin s , being first du ly sw orn, testified

as fo l lo w s :

Direct examination
By Mr. Price:

Q. State your name, please sir?
A. Richard T. Mullins.
Q. Where do you live, sir?
A. (No answer)
Q. Where do you live, sir?
A. Eustis, Florida.
Q. What is your occupation?
A. Publisher of a newspaper.
Q. And that newspaper is?
A. Eustis------ . (Out of hearing of the Reporter)
Q. Mr. Mullins, I wonder of you would mind giving us

the figures which represent your circulation through Lake
County?

A. My figures as I picked them up, today, at the office,
run around 1475.

122

Q. That circulation is in Lake County?
A. Yes. (Further response out of hearing of the Re-

porter.)
Q. Mr. Mullins, then your actual circulation in Lake

County is around 12001
A. That’s right.
Q. That figure was the circulation during the period,

say, from July 16th until the present time?
A. Approximately. Yes.
Q. That wouldn’t vary materially? (Indicating by head)

No.
Q. All right. I have here a copy of the Eustis Lake

Region News, which is dated July 21st, 1949. The right-
hand column of that edition of your paper carries an art
icle which is entitled, “ National Guard Here called out in
[fol. 269] South Lake County. Mob Disturbances. Vio
lence Flares. ’ ’ I show you that paper. That’s dated Thurs
day, July 21st. That article does appear there?

A. Yes sir.
Q. Now I ask you who wrote that particular article?
A. I did.
Q. Now you have stated that there was, in South Lake

County, mob disturbances. I think, you used those words.
Violence Flares.” Just what, if you would mind telling
me, what, Mr. Mullins, was the basis for those statements
in your article and in the Head of your article ?

A. Well as far as I recollect, it was the mob violence, the
houses were burned in Stuckey’s Mill. That was the main
thing.

Q. All right, sir. I hand you again this same page, call
ing your attention to 4 pictures which appear thereon,
with the heading, “ Eustis Guard Unit Moves.” Would
you mind telling me what those 4 pictures are?

A. Those 4 pictures of the local guard unit in Eustis
making preparations to move to Groveland that Sunday
night.

Q. In other words, that was on the Sunday before, those
pictures were taken, on the Sunday before, of that unit mak
ing preparations?

A. That was the Sunday night that they did move. In
other words, the night that they moved. Sunday night
before the Thursday. Yes sir.

Q. Sunday before Thursday. That’s what I meant.

123

A. I don’t know what the date was.
[fol. 270] Q. All right, sir. Those are the 4 pictures which
take up the second and third columns from the righthand
side of the page ?

A. That’s right.
By Mr. Price:

Q. All right. The Defendant offers in evidence the right-
hand column and the 2 adjoining columns of the Eustis
Lake Eegion News dated Thursday, July 21, 1949. Like
to offer this as Defendant’s Exhibit DD.

The Court: Admitted. Show the proffer to read and
ruling the same as before.

(Whereupon, the exhibit was received and so marked.)
By Mr. Price:

Q. All right. I have in hand a copy of the Eustis Lake f
Eegion News, which is dated, Thursday, August 11, 1949. !
On page 7 of that publication, there is an article which is I
found in the third and fourth columns of that page. That j
article is headed, “ Past Talking Sheriff makes National
News.” Does that appear on that page?

A. It does.
Q. All right.
Mr. Price: The Defendant offers in evidence, third and

fourth column, page 7, of the Eustis Lake Eegion News,
dated, Thursday, August 11, 1949. Offered as Defendant’s
Exhibit EE.

The same proffer.
The Court: The same ruling.
(Whereupon, the exhibit was received and so marked.)

[fol. 271] Q. All right. I have in hand a copy of the
Eustis Lake Eegion News, which is dated, Thursday,
August 18, 1949. On the top of the third column of the first
page of that paper is an article. Does that appear there
and in that particular place ?

A. It does.
Mr. Price: All right. The Defendant offers in evidence

the third column of the Eustis Lake Eegion News, dated,
Thursday, August 18, 1949, with the said proffer.

The Court: Admitted. Same ruling.

124

(Whereupon, the exhibit was received and marked, De
fendants, Exhibit FF.

Mr. Price: That’s page 1.
Q. I have now in hand a copy of the Eustis Lake Region

News which is dated, Thursday, August 25th, and I have
rather bold headnotes on this, which covers 3 columns,
and an article heading down from that bold type, the right-
hand column, which is continued on page 4 and column 4
—I beg your pardon—in column 5, page 4. I hand you this
paper?

A. That’s correct.
Q. All right. Would you mind stating who wrote this

particular article, sir ?
A. Our Editor wrote that. Mrs. Bolles.
Mr. Price: Defendant offers in evidence the heading of

the first three columns on the righthand side of the page
and righthand column of page 1 and the fifth column of
page 4 of the Eustis Lake Region News, which is dated,
[fol. 272] Thursday, August 25th, ’49.

Same proffer.
The Court: Same ruling.
(Whereupon, the exhibit was received and marked De

fendant’s Exhibit GO.)

Cross-examination
By Mr. Hunter:

Q. In preparing these articles, did you make any investi
gation in Groveland and down in that country?

A. I was down, Sunday night, yes sir.
Q. What was it? What did you find down there?
A. I got down rather late. The Guard was still there.

And it was comparatively quiet. I mean, just a few people
out on the street. Most of those were, I think, the deputy
sheriff and guard unit.

Q. Have anyone with you?
A. I was with a party of people. Yes sir.
Q. Any women and children with you?
A. Yes sir. Two ladies.
Q. Do you feel you were in any danger down there?
A. Not when we were down there. Not particularly,

no sir.

125

Q. Everything was quiet?
A. Yes sir.
Q. How long have you been in this section!
A. Well, I have lived here off and on 7 or 8 years.

[fol. 273] Q. Lived around Eustis?
A. Yes sir.
Q. Great many colored people in Eustis, aren’t there?
A. Yes sir.
Q. Whole sections of the town are colored, aren’t they?
A. I believe there are 2 sections.
Q. What is the relationship between the colored people

and the white people in Eustis?
A. Well from my observation, very good.
Q. Now in one of the documents that they have filed in

this case, and sworn to, it says, “ At the time of the grand
jury returned a verdict against your defendants herein,”
I believe it was on August 20th, “ Lawless mobs were roam
ing throughout the County of Lake, attempting to seek and
find the defendants and inflict great bodily injury on them
and take their life and liberty without the due process of
law and, that at the time the said Grand Jury was sum
monsed and empanelled and prior thereto, a state of hys
teria, prejudice, ill feeling, was rampant throughout Lake
County, and among a large body of citizens directed against
the defendants and other members of the negro race.”
Is that statement true?

A. Not as far as I know. No sir.
Q. Was there any such condition as that in existence in

Eustis or any other place that you went?
A. No.
Q. Were there any colored buildings burned in Eustis or

any families driven out of Eustis?
A. No sir. Not that I know of.

[fol. 274] Q. In your experience as a newspaper man,
did you find and rempant hysteria and prejudice against
the colored race up there around Eustis or at any other
place, now or at any other time?

A. No. I haven’t.
Q. The relations are good, are they not?
A. That’s right.

126

Re-direct examination

By Mr. Akerman:
Q. There’s quite a number of negroes in Eustis?
A. I say, quite a number. I don’t know how many, ex

actly.
Q. Could you give us any idea of the proportion to the

population ?
A. Well, I understood just roughly, I think there’s prob

ably a few thousand there. As against 6,000, now. The last
census figures, I think were, ’45, showed five thousand or
6,000 people, altogether, in Eustis.

Q. You would estimate, then, the percentage of colored
population of Eustis, was approximately 25%. Is that
correct?

A. In other words, 2,000 out of six.
Q. 2,000 out of six. Approximately a third, 33%%?
A. Yes sir.
Q. Are any of them property owners?
A. I imagine they are. Yes.
Q. Considered substantial citizens?
A. Quite a number of them.

[fol. 275] Q. Now you testified concerning relations in
Eustis. You were aware of the fact that it was necessary
for all negroes to be moved out of Groveland area, are you
not ?

A. I was aware of the fact that they had been moved out.
Q. Did you investigate to find out whether they were

moved out by the better, more substantial white citizens
for protection?

A. My only knowledge of that was from what I heard
and what I had seen in the other papers.

Q. When you went down there to Groveland, you didn’t
see any negroes around there?

A. No, I didn’t, that night.
Q. So your testimony is limited to the Eustis area and not

to the Groveland area?
A. In regard to what?
Q. The relationship. You said there was no burning?
A. Yes. That would be the Eustis area. Sure.
Q. You know there was some burning down near Grove

land, don’t you? A home?
A. That’s right.

Q. And yon know there was some shooting into a negro
honky-tonk known as the Blue Flame?

A. Yes sir.
Mr. Akerman: No further questions.
Mr. Hunter: That’s all.
(Whereupon, the witness was excused and withdrew.)

[fol. 276] Mr. Akerman: If the Court please, it is after
5 o ’clock and it is necessary for defense counsel to drive
to and from Orlando in the preparation of this case, and in
addition to the preparation for this hearing, I am attempt
ing by working night and day to get ready for the other
hearing. We would like at this time to ask for an adjourn
ment.

The Court. W7e won’t adjourn at this time until we finish
with the newspapers.

1 2 7

M b . J ack G ran t ., being first du ly sworn, testified as fo l
low s :

Direct examination.

By Mr. Price:
Q. Would you please state your name?
A. Jack Grant.
Q. Where do you live, Mr. Grant?
A. Leesburg.
Q. How long have you lived in Leesburg, Mr. Grant?
A. About 5 years.
Q. AVhere did you live prior to that time?
A. 6 months in Seattle, Washington, lived in Detroit,

Michigan, off and on; spent the winters in Florida. At
tended Michigan schools.

Q. You are connected with the Lake County Citizen?
A. I am.

[fol. 277] Q. What is your capacity on that paper ?
A. I am general business manager.
Q. You are also connected with the Leesburg Commer

cial. Is that true?
A. I am.
Q. And your capacity with that paper?
A. The same capacity.
Q. Mr. Grant, I wonder if you could tell us, give us the

128

circulation figures on these two papers, the Lake County
Citizen and the Leesburg Commercial, in Lake County,
which would represent that circulation during the period
of July 16th, until the present time?

A. 3620. y V A
Q. IsThat combined now? Both?
A. That’s the combined circulation.
Q. About how does that break down as to each paper?
A. 2880 for the—Leesburg Commercial, 2880, and the

balance is taken up with the Citizen.
Q. And your Leesburg Commercial is the daily paper?
A. No. It is a weekly paper.

By Mr. Hunter:

Q. In Lake County?
A. No, Mr. Jeff. That’s our total circulation. We don’t

have it broken down.

By Mr. Price:

Q. Now I asked you a moment ago if that was your cir
culation in Lake County.

A. All I have is my total circulation. That was what I
had on my subpoena, wTas the circulation rates. That’s
[fol. 278] what I broug*ht over. Our circulation figures.

Q. Would you like to make an estimate or approxima-
jytion of what percent of that or, about how many papers you

do circulate?
A. I mail out about 200 of the Leesburg paper. Mail

out about 75 of the Citizen.
Q. In other words, those figures will be correct, deduct

ing those amounts ?
A. Approximately. Yes sir.
Q. Approximately correct within a very few. All right.

I have before me the Lake County Citizen, the issue dated,
Friday, July 29, 1949. I would like to call your attention to
the article appearing in column 2. That article appearing
there. Would you read the heading of that article?

A. “ Inquest had to Killing of fourth suspect.”
Q. That article refers to facts involved in this case, does

it not?
A. Yes sir.

129

Q. I wonder if you can tell me wlio wrote that article!
If you do know!

A. I know. An Editor. Member of my staff.
Mr. Price: All right. Defendant offers in evidence

column 2, page 1, Lake County Citizen, issue of Friday, July
29, 1949. The same proffer.

(Whereupon, the paper was received and marked De
fendants exhibit HH.)
[fol. 279] Q. All right. I hand you, Mr. Grant, a copy of
the Lake County Citizen, dated, Friday, August 19, the
article which I am particularly referring to is in 3 columns
from the righthand side of the page, there. Does that
article, up at the top, here, I wonder if you would read the
title of that article f

A. ‘ ‘ Trial Set August 29 for Attack Case. ’ ’
Q. And one of your editorial staff also wrote this article!
A. The same person.
Mr. Price: All right. The Defendants offer in evidence

third column from the righthand side of page 1, Lake County
Citizen, edition dated, Friday, August 19, 1949. That’s
offered as defendant’s exhibit II.

The same proffer.
The Court: Same ruling*.

(Whereupon, the exhibit was received and so marked.)

Q. All right, I hand you now a copy of the Lake County
Citizen, which is dated, Friday, July 22, 1949. There is a
headline which reads, “ Jury indicts three Negroes,” also
a subheadline, covering the first three columns on the right-
hand side of the page, “ Unrest in South Lake Eases as
Sixth Day of Tension Passes.” Does that appear on that
page in that place!

A. Eight.
Q. And a member of your editorial staff also wrote that?
A. That’s right.
Q. Would you mind stating the name of the writer of the

[fol. 280] various stories; if it is the same?
A. I t ’s the editor that appears in the mast heading, there.

Mrs. Jean Snead.
Mr. Price: All right. The defendant offers in evidence

the headlines as well as the subheading covering the top of
9—420

130

the first three columns from the righthand side of the page
as well as the column covering the righthand side of the
page, which is continued on page 4 of this same paper,
being continued in column 4 of page 4.

Same proffer.

The Court: Same ruling.

(Whereupon, the paper was received and marked De
fendant’s Exhibit JJ.)

Q. Now all of these papers were printed and disseminated
during the period covered by your circulation figures which
you have previously given ?

A. With a fluctuation of 50, one way or the other, depend
ing upon the street sale.

,, Q. All right. I have now a copy of the Leesburg Com
mercial which is dated, Thursday, August 18th, and would
like to call your attention to column 2 of the first page, which

1 is entitled, “ Trial Set August 29 For Attack Case.” Does
that appear at that particular place ?

A. It does.

Mr. Price: All right, the defendants would like to offer
in evidence this paper. The same proffer.

The Court: The same ruling.

[fol. 281]
marked

(Whereupon, the exhibit was
as Defendants’ Exhibit KK.)

received and

Q. I have here a copy of the Leesburg Commercial, which
is dated, August 11,1949. I ’ll call your attention to columns
1—pardon me— rather the righthand column and the column

' next to the righthand side, which is headed, “ Negro attack
suspects will be arraigned at the Court House Today. Trial
will be set soon for

A. That’s right.
Three Indicted Groveland negroes.”

Mr. Price: Offered as Exhibit LL. The right hand
column and next to the righthand column of the Leesburg
Commercial, which is dated, August 11,1949. Same proffer.

The Court: Same ruling.

Q. I have a copy of the Leesburg Commercial, which is
dated, Thursday, July 28; call your attention to column 5
of the first page of that paper, which is headed, “ Inquest

Today of Killing of fourth suspect.” Does that appear at
that place?

A. It does.
Mr. Price: The Defendants offer in evidence as Exhibit

MM, column 5 page 1, Leesburg Commercial, Thursday,
July 28, 1949.

The Court: Same ruling.
Mr. Price: Same proffer.

[fol. 282] (Whereupon, the paper was received and so
marked.)

Q. All right. I hand you now a copy of the Leesburg
Commercial, which is dated, July 21, 1949. What is the
headline on that edition?

A. “ Futch Empanels Grand Jury.”
Q. What is the bold printing of the subheading?
A. “ Tampa Guard Patrols South Lake County to end

rioting. ’ ’
Q. That is the two riglithand columns of the paper?
A. That’s right.
Q. Then how is the righthand column headed?
A. “ Four Negroes Attack Young Bay Lake Girl.”

(Mr. Price:)
Q. All right. That article is continued on page 11?
A. Page 10.
Q. Column 2. That article is continued on column 2,

page 11.
A. That’s right.
Q. I would also like to ask you what you see in the—I

suppose it is 2nd, 3rd, 4th, and 5th columns between the
headline and on down in the page, there.

A. I see a picture of Willis McCall talking to some of
our Eustis Guards. These are two pictures of them.

Q. That picture to which you just referred covers 3
columns. There are also 2 pictures next to it on the right,
which cover 2 columns.

A. That’s a picture of a fire; that’s a picture down there
of some guards standing at attention.

Q. Mr. Grant, do you know what picture of what particu
lar fire that is?

The Court: Unless it could speak for itself, I think the'
[fol. 283] witness is incompetent to testify.

131

132

Mr. Price: All right. The Defendants offers as ex
hibit 0 0 the Leesburg Commercial, July 21, 1949; offering
the headlines as well as the pictures appearing in column
2-6, and also the full page heading appearing in the right-
hand column and next to the right hand column.

The Court: The same ruling.
Mr. Price: The same proffer.
(Whereupon, the paper referred to w’as received in evi

dence as Defendants Exhibit NN.)
Q. I have here a copy of the Leesburg Commercial,

which is dated, Thursday, August 25th, 1949. On page 2
of that paper, in the second and third columns, I hand you
the paper, would you read the heading of that article ?

A. “ Widely publicized rape case trial will begin Mon
day at Court House.”

Mr. Price: Defendants offer as Exhibit 0 0 , the second
and third columns of page 2, of the Leesburg Commercial,
the issue of Thursday, August 25th.

Same proffer.
The Court: Same ruling.

[fol. 284] (Whereupon, the paper referred to was received
and marked Defendants’ Exhibit 0 0 .)

Q. All of these articles in these papers which I have
handed you were covered, these Leesburg Commercials,
were covered by the circulation figures which you------ ”

A. As I stated before. Yes. With a fluctuation that
would depend upon the street sales.

Q. And which fluctuation has not been over—we’ll say,
if you could give me it roughly, the least number of the cir
culation ?

A. I told you it would have a fluctuation of 50, one way
or the other.

Cross-examination.

By Mr. Hunter:
Q. Did you make any investigation, as editor, of condi

tions in the county at that time?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Were you in Groveland?
A. Yes, sir.

133

Q. What were the conditions down there?
A. There was plenty of observers down there. Sitting in

their cars.
Q. See any rioting or unlawful acts going on?
A. No, sir.
Q. See any negroes around there?
A. No, sir.
Q. Did you go in the negro quarters?
A. Yes, sir. I did.
Q, None there?

* A. No, sir.
Q. Did you take any women or children down there with

you ?
A. Yes. I took my sister with me.

[fol. 285] Q. You didn’t feel that you ŵ ere in any danger
down there?

A. No, sir.
Q. Now in the other sections of the county, was there

any rioting ? Anything unusual going on between the white
and black?

A. No, sir.
Q. What, in your opinion, is the feeling that exists be

tween the white people and the colored people in this
county ?

A. Very g’ood.
Q. Was there anything other than normal during this

entire period between the colored people and the white
people in this county, other than that particular territory
down there around Groveland?

A. No, sir.
Q. Have you found any prejudice against the people of

the colored race in this county?
A. No, sir. I haven’t.
Q. Around Leesburg, don’t you have quite a number of

colored people in business?
A. Yes, sir. We do.
Q. Does anyone interfere with them in any way in their

business?
A. No, sir.
Q. Do they own homes?
A. Over one third of our negro population own homes in

Leesburg.
Q. In Leesburg?

134

A. Yes, sir.
Q. In the Pittsburgh Courier, on September 13th, a pur

ported interview with Franklin EL Williams, of the MAA CP,
who is one of the attorneys for the defendants in this case,
in which this language was used:
[fol. 286] “ All this disturbance down here is a part of
one great plot to intimidate the negroes in the community,
force them to work for little or no wages, and to stop them
from being so upity.” Have you ever run into anything
that kind?

A. No, sir. I certainly haven’t.
Q. It is stated that, “ When colored people become pros

perous and independent, that their homes are burned and
they are run out of the county.” Is that statement true
for Lake County?

A. It certainly is not.
Q. Is it a fact that the white people here collaborate with

and encourage the colored people to own their own homes
and other property?

A. I t ’s been my experience all the time I have lived in
Lake County.

Mr. Hunter: I think that’s all.

Redirect examination.
By Mr. Akerman:

Q. You say 30% of the negro citizens of Leesburg own
their own homes?

A. I have been given that information. Yes, sir.
Q. About what is the percent of colored population in

Leesburg of the total population?
A. I .don’t know what the total population is, but it is

around 3,000.
Q. 3,000 negroes?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. You don’t know what the total population is?

[fol. 287] A. I am not sure.
Q. I ’m not trying to pin you down, I ’m just trying to

get an estimate, of the population. You say it was a third
of 25% ?

A. We don’t know what your white population is over
there now. We are going through a city limits expansion.

Q. Could you give us any estimate at all on it?
A. Approximately a third.

135

Q. About 33%%, just an approximation?
A. That’s right.
Q. And of those, approximately one third own their

own homes?
A. That’s the information that I have been given. Yes,

sir.
Q. And they have businesses?
A. They have.
Q. AVhat would be considered, then substantial citizens?
A. That’s right.
Q. Now you stated there were no? homes burned in Lees

burg ?
A. No, sir.
Q. Are you aware of the fact that negro homes were

burned down in the Groveland area?
A. That’s what I have read.
Q. You weren’t down there at the time the burning was

going on?
A. I didn’t see any houses burning. No.
Q. Were you down at the time the shooting was done?
A. No, I was in Clermont.
Q. You know there was some shooting going on?
A. That’s what I was told.
Q. And you are familiar with the fact that all of the

[fol. 288] negroes were removed from the Groveland area?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Do you know whether this was done at the behest and

with the assistance of the better class of white people down
there?

A. That’s the information that I have. Yes, sir.
Q. That the better class of white people protected them

by getting them out of the community. Is that right?
A. I didn’t define them in classes.
Q. Let’s put it this way. Let’s leave the classes out.

That’s the wrong thing. The substantial proportion of
the white population. Let’s put it that way. I think it is
more in keeping with it, I think you are right on it, A sub
stantial proportion of the white population aided and as
sisted in getting away from there?

A. Yes, sir.
Mr. Akerman: No further questions. That’s all the

newspapers we have. We have subpoenas out for others,
but they are not here.

136

Mr. Hunter: You have some other witnesses that are
here?

Mr. Akerman: Yes, I have seen them.
The Court: Let’s proceed with what we have got for a

while longer.
[fol. 289] Mr. Akerman: I f the Court please, I under
stood you to say we would adjourn.

The Court: I meant you would continue with the news
papers and see what we are going to do.

Mr. Akerman: Will you give me about a three minute re
cess, then?

The Court: Yes, sir. Give you 5 minutes.
Mr. Akerman: If the Court please, at this time, it is

5 :45 PM. The defendants respectfully move for a recess
upon the following grounds:

1. That defense counsel are in Orlando, Florida, a dis
tance of some 30 miles from the court room, and must drive
back and forth every day, consuming a considerable por
tion of their time.

2. The defense counsel are working night and day in
the preparation of their defense in this case and have
made arrangements to have witnesses brought in to dis
cuss with them this case, tonight, in additional attempt on
their part to prepare the law.

3. That it is the usual custom to adjourn the Court at a
reasonable house and that the next witness to be called will
in all probability, take at least an hour and a half.
[fol. 290] Mr. Hunter: Your Honor, the State would like
to see this case go ahead. We have got a great many wit
nesses here, summonsed by the State. Just waiting on
these men, here while they introduce and read newspaper
articles, and we don’t want to keep them away from their
businesses other extra days.

The Court: Proceed with the next witness.

W alter I rvin , being first duly sworn, testified as follows:

Direct examination.
By Mr. Williams:

Q. What is your name?
A. Walter L. Irvin.

137

Q. Were you one of the defendants in this case!
A. I am.
Q. When were you first arrested!
A. I was arrested on the 16th of July.
Q. By whom!
A. By the officers of this county.
Q. Do you see any of them in this Courtroom!
A. Sure.
Q. Will you point them out for me and tell me who they

are?
A. They are not in here at the present. They was a

few minutes ago.
Q. Do you know Sheriff McCall!
A. I don’t know him, but I have learned him since I have

been here.
Q. After you were arrested, Walter, where were you

arrested?
A. At my house.

[fol. 291] Q. At your home?
A. That’s right.
Q. After you were arrested, were you at any time beaten

or abused?
A. I was.

Mr. Hunter: Wait a minute. We object to that as be
ing irrelevant and immaterial.

The Court: Objection sustained.
Mr. Williams: At this time, the defense counsel would

like to offer to prove to this Court by the testimony of
the witness on the stand, one of the defendants in this case,
to present testimony in support of the allegations of our
motions upon which we are having this hearing, to the
effect that this defendant, present witness, was subjected
to brutal, inhuman beatings. Beatings by the State officers,
in whose custody they were at one time and in whose cus
tody they are at present.

The Court: I consider that completely irrelevant and
immaterial and will not permit it.

Mr. Williams: You are excused, Walter.
Defense at this time calls Samuel Shepherd.

138

S am uel S h eph erd , b e in g first du ly sw orn, testified as
f o l lo w s :

[fol. 292] Direct examination.

By Mr. Williams:
Q. What is yonr name?
A. Samuel Shepherd.
Q. Are you one of the defendants in this case?
A. I am
Q. Where are your mother and father, Samuel?
A. I do not know.
Q. Do you have any objection to our bringing them

into this county to testify at your trial?
A. Yes, I do.
Q. What objection do you have?

Mr. Hunter: How I object to that. What connection
does that have with this case?

Mr. Williams: Are you objecting to this?
Mr. Hunter: Go ahead.
Mr. Williams: No objection?
Mr. Hunter: No. I don’t object to it.

A. Well the reason I wouldn’t, would be that I wouldn’t
think it would be safe for them here.
[fol. 293] Q. Were you at any time beaten or otherwise
physically abused by officers in whose custody you have
been since you have been under arrest?

The Court: Just a minute. I ruled on that same thing in
the other witness. I don’t want you to attempt it any
more.

Mr. Akerman: If the Court please,------
Mr. Williams: All right, at this time------
Mr. Akerman: (Continuing( Can we make a proffer on

behalf of this witness and also the other witness.
The Court: You can make the proffer. But I don’t want

you to call the witness up and try the same thing over again.
Mr. Akerman: That is the purpose of this so that the

record will show that they made this prof-er by this witness
and also that we are prepared to prove it by the other wit
nesses, but would stop the necessity of asking the questions.

Mr. Hunter: The prof-er, itself, would be immaterial

139

and irrelevant and open up a new, entirely different
matter.
[fol. 294] The Court: If it is prof-ered, I am going to
refuse it, of course.

Mr. Akerman: What we want is the prof-er.
The Court: All right. Let the record show the same

prof-er was made as to the other two defendants that was
made on the first one.

Mr. Akerman: That’s all the witnesses wre have at the
present time. We have subpoenas out on some others.

Mr. Hunter: You have Luther Thomas here.
Mr. Akerman: I haven’t had even an opportunity to talk

to him, Your Honor.
Mr. Hunter: You have other witnesses that you’re going

to use.
Mr. Akerman: We have subpoenas out. If they get here,

we ’re going to use them. I don’t even know what subpoenas
wTe have out at the present moment. We have had so many.
I intend to use the Clerk of the Court.

Mr. Hunter: H e’s right here. You don’t have to sub
poena him.
[fol. 295] Mr. Akerman: Subpoenas ducts tecum.

Mr. Hunter: Have you told him what you wTant ?
The Clerk: Yes, they told me.
Mr. Hunter: What was it?
The Clerk: A list of the grand jurors for the past 30

years. When I come up, they had the list up to ’43. I
don’t know whether they have any more than that or not.

Mr. Hunter: I am going to ask the Court to intervene
and not require the Clerk of this Court to furnish a list
of grand jurors up to 30 years at this time, unless it can be
shown that it is material to this case.

The Court: I think the request is entirely unreasonable
from the present viewpoint.

Mr. Akerman: It is my understanding that this hearing
is on all motions pending now before the Court.

The Court: Yes.
[fol. 296] Mr. Akerman: All right, sir. It is my under
standing that there is no need of subpoenaing the clerk of
the court if the Court is going to intervene.

The Court: I understood that you had asked the Clerk
to furnish you with a list of grand jurors for the last 30
years.

140

Mr. Akerman: No, sir. We are preparing a subpoena
ducis tecnm to ask the Clerk to bring into this Court the
grand jury list for the past 25 years. We are not asking
him to furnish it to us.

The Court: Unless you can make some showing that it
is necessary it will certainly be denied on the ground it is
unreasonable.

Mr. Akerman: If the Court please, I am at somewhat of
a loss to know just the proper way to proceed on this.

The Court: I have been at a loss on the proceeding, my
self, so I can’t help you.

Mr. Akerman: I would like to ask whether it is necessary
for us to issue the subpoena or, is the Court going to rule
on it on the motion of the State’s Attorney?
[fol. 297] The Court: I think, for us to get it in the record,
that I will rule at this time that the request is unreasonable,
unnecessary, an effort to put an undue burden upon the
Clerk of this Court. And instruct the Clerk not to issue any
such subpoena ducis tecum.

Mr. Akerman: My understand- is that the praecipe is
to be filed and the Clerk then instructed to refuse to file
the praecipe?

The Court: He is not instructed to refuse to file the
praecipe. I instructed to refuse to issue the summons.

Mr. Akerman: That’s what I say.
The Court: You have no more witnesses to offer at this

time?
Mr. Akerman: No more witnesses that are present in

Court.
The Court: How about you, Mr. Hunter?
Mr. Hunter: Yes. We have witnesses. We can either

go ahead or go to supper and come back. I would like to
have the men we have summonsed here heard.

The Court: How long will it take?
Mr. Hunter: Take two or three hours.

[fol. 298] The Court: Well, i t ’s just 6 o ’clock. Let’s go
ahead for a while.

Mr. Akerman: If the Court please, at the time the defense
counsel respectfully objects to the holding of a night ses
sion in the hearing of this case upon the grounds that
defense counsel has been working night and day in the
preparation of this case, with arrangements already made
for the meeting of a great number of prospective witnesses
for the trial in chief, in Orlando, tonight; that, if the

141

defense counsel is unable to meet the witnesses tonight, we
do not know when we will be able to get them again.

The trial is set for Thursday morning, which necessitates
the issuance of praecipe for witnesses’ subpoenas, which
will take considerable time on the part of defense counsel.

Further, it necessitates the preparation of a great deal
of law. We hoped that sometime during the night or the
early hours of the morning, we would be able to work some
on the law in this case.

Mr. Hunter: I would like to call to the attention of the
Court, again, the statement which I made this morning. A
member of counsel for the defense has stated that he intends
to dilly dally this case along.

Mr. Akerman: I ’ll ask Mr. Hunter, is that statement
made to him!
[fol. 299] Mr. Hunter: To me?

Mr. Akerman: Was it made to you?
Mr. Hunter: No. It wasn’t made to me.
Mr. Akerman: I object to Mr. Hunter testifying.
Mr. Hunter. I am not testifying. I am telling that the

statement was made to me.
Mr. Akerman: I made no such statement, and I am chief

defense counsel in this case.
Mr. Williams: I made no such statement.
Mr. Price: I made no such statement.
Mr. Hunter: To me?
Mr. Price: To you or to anyone else.
Mr. Hunter: That’s the information that I have and it

is borne out by the acts of the counsel here, today.
[fol. 300] The Court: I don’t think you can discuss that
part of it, Mr. Hunter, unless you heard the statement,
yourself.

Mr. Hunter: Well I can prove it. I don’t believe this
gentleman will deny it under oath.

Mr. Price: Would you like to put me on the witness
stand ?

Mr. Hunter: No.
Mr. Akerman: I think the statement is out of order, if

Your Honor please, for it is a known fact that defense
counsel have not had the many, many years experience that
the State Attorney has had and we may be inept and inapt
in our handling of this case and also it may be that some
of the evidence we put in is not necessary, but as an officer
of this Court, charged with defense of these defendants, I

142

am going to endeavor to put in every bit of lawful evidence
that I can in this case. And if, through ignorance, lack of
experience, inability, I do make some mistakes, I would
appreciate the advice of counsel of both the Court and the
State’s Attorney.

Mr. Hunter : I am not employed by anyone defending
the defendants in this case. Therefore, I decline to give
any advice.
[fob 301] We have witnesses here that are ready to tes
tify. If they are through. It isn’t yet night, and I would
appreciate it if the Court would permit us to begin our
testimony.

The Court: Call your first witness.
Mb. G-. G. W abe, being first du ly sw orn, testified as

fo l lo w s :

Direct examination.

By Mr. Hunter:
Q. Your name is George G. W are!
A. Yes, sir.
Q. What is your business, Mr. W are!
A. President of the First National Bank at Leesburg.
Q. Do you have other business interests!
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Tell the Court what they are.
A. I am in the stone quarrying business and the fire

insurance business and I own interests in other businesses.
A few others.

Q. How long have you lived in Lake County!
A. Since 1909.
Q. How long have you been connected with the banking

business in Lake County!
A. Since 1909.
Q. In your business capacity, are you familiar with men

and women throughout this county!
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Are you familiar with colored people!
A. Yes, sir.

[fol. 302] Q. Do you have business dealings with them!
A. Lots of them.
Q. Have you had those dealings over a period of years!
A. 40 years.

143

Q, In these dealings with white and colored, in Lake
County, Florida, have you found a degree of prejudice and
ill feeling between the two races?

A. I have not.
Q. What is the relation of the two races in this county?
A. I think it is excellent.
Q. In your city and in your territory, are there colored

people who own property?
A. Yes, sir. We have many valuable accounts with col

ored people. We make lots of loans to colored people. We
welcome them.

Q. Do they own their homes?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Have you known of any disposition on the part of the

white population to try to keep colored people from owning
property in this county?

A. I do not.
Q. Has there been, or is there, any disposition to deny

them the rights of citizenship that other people have?
A. I never heard of it.
Q. When this rape took place down here in Groveland,

near Groveland, Mascotte, you were in this part of the
country ?

A. I was in Leesburg.
Q. A statement has been made under oath in this case that

[fol. 303] at that time, that lawless mobs were roaming over
this county determined to seek vengeance on the defendants
and other colored people in this county. All over the county.
Is that statement true?

A. No, sir.
Q, Was there any lawlessness at all in the city of Lees

burg or in your banking territory?
A. I heard of no lawlessness except that there was some

excitement at Mascotte. But nothing occurred at Mascotte.
It was expected to occur but it didn’t.

Q. At that time, or at any time since, has there been a
wave of hysteria, prejudice and ill feeling in this county
toward the colored people?

A. No, sir.
Q. Is there, now?
A. No, sir.
Q. You know the citizenry of this county represent pretty

well almost every State. Don’t they?
A. That’s right.

144

Q. This is a cosmopolitan county, isn’t it?
A. There are citizens of almost every other State paying-

taxes in this county, now. Owning property here and living-
in other areas and there are many who live here who have
come from other states. In fact, the majority.

Q. Do you think that a jury could be found in this county
who would try these defendants on the evidence that would
be given them here?

A. I do.
Q. Do you think that there are a large body of men in this

county who would not be influenced by what had been pub
lished in the newspapers or anything else except what they
would hear from the witness stand, here?

A. I didn’t understand your question.
[fol. 304] Q. Do you believe there are large bodies of men
in this county who could try this or any other case on the
evidence that would be given them from the stand without
being inflenced by anything else outside?

A. I think the ones — would be influenced would be
a very small body. Minute body.

Q. Do you believe that there is any particular body of
men in this county or women, who would approve the mis
treatment of any colored man?

A. I do not think so.
Q. From your knowledge, and it is wide in this county,

I know, do you believe that these men can be given a fair
and impartial trial in Lake County?

A. I do.

Mr. Hunter: You may inquire.

Cross-examination.

By Mr. Akerman:
Q. Mr. Ware, you stated there was no trouble down

around Mascotte?
A. I said there was anticipated trouble. But it didn’t

occur. No one was killed.
Q. Are you familiar with the burning of the three negro

homes down there near Groveland?
A. I heard about that. Yes, sir.
Q. Do you believe it to be a fact that they were burned?
A. I do.

145

Q. Bid you know that one of the homes was the home
of one of the defendants where he lived and where his
father owned?

A. I have been told that.
Q. Doesn’t that show some ill feeling and illwill towards

that defendant and his family?
A. One of the worst crimes in the county had just

occurred and in the immediate area where it occurred,
[fol. 305] I don’t think that you could expect any other
situation than what occurred there.

Q. You think that general?
A. But that’s in, not in the whole county. That’s in

that area.
Q. How far would you consider that?
A. I think that the fact that it was limited to that was

proven by the fact that the peace officers of this county
kept the defendants away from trouble.

Q. By taking them out and taking them to Baiford?
A. They could have stayed here and stayed out of trou

ble, I think.
Q. You think they could have stayed here?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. You are familiar with the fact, of course, that a

group of men came to the jail, here?
A. I heard that.
Q. I wonder if you could give us just a rough idea of

what area you figure that ill feeling and ill will was in?
A. Well, I just haven’t thought of it in that term. I

wouldn’t know how to give it. Give an answer to it, sir,
because I didn’t go down there. I didn’t go around and
talk to people.

Q. You didn’t go down to the Groveland area at all?
A. That’s right. I passed through Groveland on my way

to Tampa and I saw no sign of any trouble.
Q. When was that?
A. It was during the time the trouble was in progress,

[fol. 306] Q. When the National Guard------ ?
A. I have forgotten what days it was there.
Q. When the National Guard was there?
A. No. The Guard was not there.
Q. The National Guard was not there at that time?
A. No, sir.

10—420

146

Q. You do know that the National Guard had been called
out?

A. I heard that.
Q. And that the 116th Field Artillery from Tampa was

called out?
A. That’s right.
Q. Now, you have served on many a jury, haven’t you?
A. No, sir.
Q. Never served on a jury?
A. Yes. I have been on, but not many a jury. Very few.
Q. This heinous crime received great publicity through

out the County, did it? I t ’s only natural that it should.
A. That’s right.
Q. Do you believe there are many citizens of Lake County

who haven’t heard something purported to be the facts
in this case?

A. I think they have heard about it. Yes.
Q. Don’t you think the great majority of the citizens

who are qualified for jury duty have either read in the news
paper or heard discussed things that purported to be the
facts in this case?

A. I think they have.
[fol. 307] Q. You are familiar, of course, with the an

nouncement that these defendants had confessed to this
brjme, aren’t you?

A. I just saw it in the paper.
Q. You saw that in the paper. Don’t you think that it

would be hard for a man to serve on a jury wTho, having
heard all of this, try as he might be able, to dismiss what
he has heard from his mind and go into the case just as if
he had never heard anything before about it?

A. No. I think that he would act on the evidence as pre
sented to him.

Q. Don’t you think that a great number of the people
have made up their minds? Have an opinion?

A. No, sir. I don’t think so.
Q. Do you think a great number of them have any opin

ion as to the guilt or innocence of these parties?
A. I know I haven’t.
Q. You have no opinion as to the guilt or innocence of

these parties charged with this crime?
A. That’s right.
Q. Have you heard any other people express an opinion

as to the guilt or innocence?

147

A. I haven’t heard an expression as to guilt or innocence.
I heard many expressions of delight or being glad that
nothing serious came of it and that it would be tried in the
regular way.

Mr. Akerman: No further questions.
Mr. Hunter: That’s all, Mr. Ware.

(Whereupon, the witness was excused and withdrew.)

[fo l. 308] Me Carlyle R ogers, being first duly swTorn,
testified as fo l lo w s :

Direct examination.

By Mr. Hunter:
Q. What is your name, please, sir!
A. Carlyle Rogers.
Q. What is your business, Mr. Rogers!
A. Vice-President, First National Bank of Leesburg.

And I am also interested in a cattle ranch of Okahumka and
Hroveland.

Q. How long have you lived in that territory!
A. Since 1919.
Q. Your business capacity, or otherwise, are you famil

iar with the relations between the colored people and white
people in Lake County, Florida!

A. Yes sir. I think so.
Q. What opportunity have you had to be familiar with

relations!
A. Well, I have been in the bank since 1922 and a bank

officer about 25 years during that period of time. We have
made lots of loans to colored people. I have assisted
them on some of their programs financially and helping
them work out some of their plans for a parade and other
things in the town. And also as a bank officer, I have made
numerous loans to the colored people of our community
to better themselves. In fact, we have three janitors in
our bank and we have assisted all of them to acquire homes.
One of them owns two homes and we feel that as we help
them better themselves they can take their part of the bur
den in the community and the tax laws.

148

Q. Is that your view of the relationship that should exist
between the colored people and white people in this county?
[fol. 309] A. I believe that I feel that it should and I feel
that it does. I feel that in Leesburg, I have talked to num
bers of colored people. I think it is unusual. My maid lives
in, I think they call it Halls Quarters, Halls Circle, and this
Hall owns a 2 story concrete block building. He owns his
own home and either 9 or 10 or 11— somewhere between 9
and 11 houses that he rents. I know have another man
named Pauley that owns two commercial buildings in the
quarters and about 13 or 15 houses. And I think it is fine
when they can get ahead.

Q. It is the policy of the white people in this county to
assist them to get ahead, isn’t it?

A. That has been my experience in my community. I
would like to further state that during this episode, you
might say, that my wife took my 2% year old boy down in
the quarters regularly every afternoon at 5 o ’clock and
from two to three times at night, per week. I mean, two
or three nights per week during that time. I had occasion
to use our maid for a baby sitter, and I was down in the
quarters and sometimes as late as 12 o ’clock.

Q. Anything unusual among the colored people there at
that time?

A. There never was any excitement or any reason to be
lieve there would be excitement in any of our quarters or
downtown.

I would like to say, on Monday following the rape, I was
down at my ranch at Okahumka and I stopped at the Post
Office and general store, and I was very interested to see
some of the trucks coming in from Grove caretakes that
[fol. 310] were loaded down with negroes and they came in,
went and purchased their goods and were milling around
in the store with the white people. And frankly, I just stood
out there and was just observing if there was any tension.
There was no tension. There was no discussion and they
felt just as safe as they had always felt.

Q. How far was that from Mascotte?
A. I think that Okahumka is 5 miles from Leesburg.

And Mascotte is 18 or 19 miles from Leesburg, I don’t
know. But it was about 13 miles from Mascotte.

Q. As a general thing, would the people of Leesburg
stand for mistreatment of their colored population?

149

A. I know they wouldn’t, and I will use this as an ex
ample.

One of my best friends, Jesse Beerbower, was on the
police force and was killed by a negro, on the edge of
Venetian Gardens in line of duty. It was during the war.
The negro was rapidly apprehended and was—I don’t
know where he was taken to jail. There was no trouble
in our quarters at the time. There were no riots. There
was no feeling of illwill. The negro, at that time, was
supposedly intoxicated and he had been causing trouble
all night and all that day when they found him.

But I felt that if Leesburg citizenry ever had a cause to
lose their head, they had it at that time. But as I say,
our relationship has been very good.
[fol. 311] Q. In times of that kind, what is the attitude
of the colored people, themselves, towards the criminal ele
ment in their class?

A. Well, I have heard the negroes say that they would
like to get hold of people that do things like that the same
as I have heard white people say they would like to get
hold of white people that do things that are wrong. They
don’t approve of anything that’s not right, morally right,
in that respect. Any more than white people. Because
they are human just like we are.

Q. I t ’s been stated in a paper, here, that at the time this
grand jury met in this county, that there was widespread
hysteria and rioting all over the county. Directed at the
colored people. Is that true?

A. Not in my opinion. Because I noticed that the next
banking day, Monday, in our bank, we had our usual line
of negro customers and that our relationship has been very
good. I feel that on a percent-wise basis that we have made
more loans to negroes than any bank in Florida, and that
day in the lobby when they were there, I noticed as many
as 7 or 8 sitting there. The traffic was going back and forth.
They didn’t have any tension and I know the white people
didn’t have. I mean they just didn’t think about it. The
three janitors servicing our building take turns on the ele
vator and they didn’t feel it.

Q. Do they, do the colored people over there own busi
nesses, stores, and things of that kind?

A. They do. I had hoped if I was testifying, to bring it
to your attention. But I cited those two illustrations. Our

150

three janitors own their homes. We have helped them buy
[fol. 312] them. I know a lot of my white friends that have
helped them buy them. And in discussing this with one
colored man------

Mr. Akerman: I ’m going to object to any hearsay testi
mony. Bring him in.

A. Well, he’ll testify.
The Court: Don’t tell what anybody told you; just what

you know.
A. I feel that we have an unusual percentage of homes

owned by colored people in Leesburg.

By Mr. Hunter:
Q. Do you believe that regardless of what’s been printed

in the newspapers that a jury can be found in this county
with ease?

A. I certainly do.
Q. To give these defendants a fair and impartial trial?
A. I certainly do. After working in a bank since 1922,

and working in organizations and church work and all over
this county, I feel that we have as fine a citizenry in this
county, both colored and white, as you will find anywhere
in the world.

Q. You think they could get a fair and impartial trial?
A. I certainly do.
Q. In reference to opinions, it is a general opinion that

someone is guilty of this crime, is it not?
A. That’s right.
Q. But as to who did it, it ’s a question that the people

[fol. 313] of this county want to hear from evidence?
A. They certainly do. And there’s one thing that I heard

the white people discuss. In my opinion. I ’ll put it, in
my opinion. That I was very thankful that they would have
an opportunity to have a fair trial because while the press,
as a whole, handled the case very well, there is so many
times that inflammatory remarks get in the press, and throw
back the relationship which has improved steadily and rap
idly in the last few years between the colored and white
people. It has a tendency to throw it back and I felt that
they certainly deserved a fair and impartial trial and then
we wouldn’t be crucified through the press in other sections
of the country.

Q. Now the facts in this case, as far as they refer to these
defendants, here, names of the witnesses, and things of
that kind, have never been published at all, have they!

A. I don’t know any of the witnesses. I don’t know that.
Q. You don’t know what anybody would testify to!
A. No. (Indicated by head.)
Q. Then it would be beyond anything you could imagine

in this county for people to convict these defendants by
newspaper talk until they hear the evidence. Isn’t that a
fact!

A. Well I hope that people are like I hope to be, that
try to be fair and impartial and let the evidence stand on its
own feet. And I feel that my friends are as fine a people
as anyone’s got and I think that the citizenry of Lake
County on a whole will do a fine job.

[fol. 314] Cross-examination
By Mr. Akerman:

Q. I believe you stated you went down to Okahumka!
A. That was Monday.
Q. And didn’t go down into Groveland?
A. I didn’t have any business down there. I had busi

ness at my ranch and I didn’t have any business in Grove-
land.

Q. You are familiar with the fact that down in Grove-
land, or near Groveland, three negro homes were burned to
the ground, aren’t you?

A. I heard it. I didn’t see it. I don’t know. I would
like to qualify that. I don’t know. I just, you are saying
it, and they might have been homes. They, one of them
might have been a barn. But I know there’s three some
thing.

Q. Buildings?
A. Buildings. Were burned, and I ’ll say that I heard

that.
Q. Did you know that one of the buildings was the home

where one of the defendants, Samuel Shepherd, lived?
A. I really don’t know that. Of my own knowledge, I

don’t know.
Q. That was an evincing of a hostility towards him and

his family when they burned that home, wasn’t it?
A. If that was his home, it might have been. But I

would like to make this statement. That I have recom-

152

mended to, publicly in a Kiwanis Club, to commend the
law enforcement officers of this county and I feel that
they have done an exceptionally good job. That when
the ffiw enforcement officers protect negroes or whites,
that they shouldn’t be criticized but should be commended,
[fol. 315] And they did a good job. And frankly, I made
the statement that I wasn’t worried any negro getting
scared as to what the white people might do. And I still
say that I didn’t think any negroes were going to get in
trouble.

Q. Were you familiar with the fact that all of the negroes
had been moved out of the area down there?

j , A. Well. Let’s say that I heard they left. I don’t know
- fwhether they were moved out. Because that would imply
' 1 something else.

Q. The information we have. I don’t know whether you
have it or not. Is that a group of the outstanding white
citizens of Groveland area assisteds them in being taken
away from there for their own protection. Had you heard
something very similar to that? We don’t say forcibly
removed.

Q. Well I did hear that. I don’t know it.
Q. You have served on juries, haven’t you, Mr. Rogers?
A. Yes.
Q. Quite a number of times?
A. Federal and State.
Q. Now this, you think there’s hardly any citizen in

Lake County who hasn’t either read or heard something
concerning this case ?

A. Well, I ’m surprised every day at people that don’t
read the papers and don’t hear the radio. So I say there’s
bound to be some.

Q. Most everybody you have talked to concerning this
case?

A. They have read about it. Yes.
[fol. 316] Q. And of course you are familiar with the fact
that it has been published in papers that confessions had
been obtained from all of the defendants, are you not?

A. Well I have heard two sides of that discussed and I
have heard there was and there wasn’t. So I don’t recall
just what I read. I heard that two of them confessed and
one didn’t. And I heard someone say that the three of
them did. So I have heard it both ways. So I ’ll just let
that go. I have heard it both ways.

153

Q. Now in serving on a jury, a man has quite a duty
to perform, doesn’t he?
- A, Yes. Well, it is his duty and privilege.

Q. That’s right. One of the privileges of our country.
And it is his duty. And generally, throughout Florida,
Lake, Orange, Volusia, Polk County, we have a high type
of citizens, don’t we?

A. I have already stated that I think it is equal to other
sections of the country, too.

Q. I know that throughout this area we have a high
type of citizens, but don’t you think that it is calling upon
a man to make a supreme effort to sit on a jury in a case
that he had read articles about, that he’s heard the de
fendants have confessed, assuming that the confession is
not introduced in evidence ? Don’t you think it is a hard job
to erase it from your mind and proceed into the case?

A. It is just a question of your moral. And I just, I ’ll
[fol. 317] just say that, myself, I would do the best I could
and I feel deeply that we should have the opportunity of
trying this case in this county where our name has been
besmirched and I feel that they will get just as fair trial
here as anywhere because a lot of people would like to
show some of the press that the negro has had his oppor
tunity-here in this county and will continue to have it,

Q. And you think we can proceed to trial here on Thurs
day in a calm, judicial manner? Everybody connected with
this trial, the witnesses, defendants, and the attorneys need
to fear no injury or insults to them?

A. I think the evidence here, today, and I came here a
little before ten, shows to me that we are living in a peace
ful, law abiding, God-fearing community where people can’t
say, can’t do things, without things happening.

Q. And do you think that, should a verdict if not guilty
be rendered by a jury in Lake County for one or all of
these defendants, do you think that that defendant could
then walk out of this courtroom a free man and be safe? j

A. I don’t think that you would have any trouble in this |
courtroom. But as far as my expressing opinion of some- •
body getting drunk and not going away off somewhere, I
can’t, but I think that he would get a fair trial and he could
walk out of this courtroom.

Q. What might happen to him, then?
A. Well, I still think he might keep on walking^

154

, jTfol. 318] Q. Or, he might not?
I I A. I think it might be a good idea to keep on walking.

Mr. Akerman: That’s all.

Re-direct examination.

By Mr. Hunter:
Q. In this modern time, if you were to exclude from jury

service all of that class of men who have read about cases
and heard them on the radio, wouldn’t you exclude most
of the intelligent people of the county?

A. If I was a lawyer for the defense or the prosecution,
and a man said that he hadn’t heard about the case or
didn’t know anything about it, I just don’t know whether
•I would question him very seriously or not. Because I
think they would get a fair trial. And it has been shown
here, today, that this has certainly been a peaceful and
quiet atmosphere, and I haven’t heard anything to the con
trary.

Q. Haven’t heard it anywhere else?
A. Never have.
Mr. Akerman: That’s all------ -

Recross-examination.
Q. What did you state your business was?
A. Vice-President of the First National Bank of Lees

burg and I own a cattle ranch.
Q. And Mr. Ware is president of the First National Bank

of Leesburg.
A. Yes.

Mr. Akerman: That’s all.

Re-direct examination.

[fol. 319] By Mr. Hunter:
Q. Are you President of the State Bankers Association?

Florida Bankers Association?
A. I am Vice-President of the Florida Banker’s Asso

ciation. Chairman of the Hayes Soil Conservation District
since its inception, and past President of the Leesburg
Chamber of Commerce several times; past Lt. Governor of

the Kiwanis; past two or three other things. I ’m nearly
about in the past. I ’m getting so old.

(There being no further questions, the witness was ex
cused and withdrew.)

155

M b . L ittheb M iller, being first, duly sw orn, testified as
fo l lo w s :

Direct examination.

By Mr. Hunter:
Q. Mr. Miller, what is your business?
A. Construction.
Q. Your home in Leesburg?
A. Bight, sir.
Q. How long have you lived there?
A. 49 years, October 21st.
Q. You hold any official position over there?
A. In Leesburg?
Q. Yes.
A. Mayor of the town.
Q. During your life in Leesburg, have you had any busi

ness or other affiliations or associations with colored peo
ple?

A. Very much so.
[fol. 320] Q. To what extent? Tell us about it.

A. Well, we average about 30 to 35 colored people on the
payroll each week. We have 100 acres of grove where we
work a lot of people. W'e have 68 colored houses that rent
from us. I guess, we are petty well known as the largest
individual worker of colored people around that section.

Q. What is the relation that exists between the colored
people and the white people over there in that territory?

A. As far as our part is concerned, it is very fine. I
could bring you 50 over here in the morning that would
testify to that effect.

Q. Colored people?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Have you ever known of any disposition over there to

keep them from getting property or become wealthy if they
could ?

A. Well, could I show you the records of several that

156

I have helped get property and homes and helped build
their homes? Churches, included.

Q. Did you ever, you and the other white people over
there, ever engage in any work with the colored people to
help them with their affairs ?

A. Well, I have been considered a friend of the colored
people for years? I have spoken before the American
Legion, colored American Legion, I have spoken in the
Church in Leesburg, colored church, different places. I
have been surrounded by and shaken hands with the negroes
the same as I do with the whites. I don’t have any prejudice,
whatsoever. Wouldn’t have in any way. I don’t believe
[fol. 321] in that. I don’t think anybody else in my par
ticular social strata does.

Q. Do you find any prejudice against the colored man
as a race?

A. I certainly do not. I don’t know of anybody surround
ing me that has. We are not that type.

Q. Are they encouraged to buy property and get along in
the world?

A. By all means.
Q. Any colored people own property in Leesburg?
A. Well, I would answer that, sir, by saying I believe

I could bring over 25 that have been helped to get their
homes by different people in Leesburg, buying their homes.
I can show you places that are just as nice as you live in
or better, owned by colored people in Leesburg. I say,
better than you live in.

Q. Did anyone ever interfere with them?
A. No sir. I credit them many a time in the lumber

business—I was in the retail lumber business for 18 years,
as you know, and we carried as high as 25 or 30 on our
books time and time again. And they never failed to pay us.

Q. Is that the general feeling among the class of people
that you associate with in this county for the colored people?

A. I associate with all classes in my work, mechanics,
mortar mixers, brick masons, we work colored brick masons.
I built at least 25 schools in Georgia, had nothing but
colored foreman and everything else. As far as holding any
prejudice against the negro in any way, shape or fashion,
any of the men who work for us, (don’t want to be associated
with them socially and live with them), but they have ab
solutely—I ’ll bring you over my whole crew in the morning.

157

[fol. 322] They are working at the present in Orlando
for Dr. Orr. We have our colored crew over there. No
prejudice. Never has been. And they will make an aver
age of about $40 a week. Our payrolls will show that.

Q. Another one of the charges made in this, since this
cropped up, here, in this thing, is that white people here
want colored people down in this county. If they find one
prospering, they run him out. Run him out of the County.

A. That is not a fact, sir.
Q. And that the purpose is to keep him down where they

can make him work for low wages. Is that correct?
A. I would like to say that the Ku Klux Ivlan asked per

mission to come through Leesburg. I was Mayor of the
town. We had a meeting and we invited the colored people
to come up to the meeting. And they did come. They
came before the City Commission; We refused the Ku
Klux Klan permission to go down and intimidate any
negroes. And I would do the same thing over again.J
The Ku Klux have their place. If they want to have it
there, it is perfectly all right. I might even join it myself,
sometime.

Q. These men were not Lake County men, were they?
That came and wanted permission?

A. No. They came out of Orlando. They came to me,
personally. I talked to the head of the Ku Klux. He
came out of Orlando. And we refused to let them go
through there. Of course, wTe told them they would have to
stay on certain streets and I, personally, I think this can
be verified, went down in the colored quarters when they
[fol. 323] burned the cross and helped take it down, my
self. I don’t think the negroes, any negro, can tell you
that I, as a citizen, have ever in any way, done anything but
to help them in every way, shape, form or fashion. That’s a
general concensus of opinion and every-’s associated in our
business. And we have been in business for so long’ I would
hate to tell you.

Q. Do they have any athletic activities in your town?
A. At the present time the City Commission is getting

ready to build for them a place to swim and a recreation
facility in Leesburg. That can also be proven. You can
talk to the colored preachers and also to a fellow by the
name of Hampton. I believe he’ll verify that. The
Superintendent of school over there.

158

Q. Is he a colored man?
A. H e’s a professor over there in the schools. Superin

tendent of schools. That’s been talked about. And we, at
the present time—and I believe the City Manager will
verify that—we are getting ready to give them these
recreation facilities. We feel like—if I may say this on
the side—that the colored race is entitled to everything
we can do for them. And if people would just leave us
alone. That includes anybody who wants to take it. Any
body, white or colored. Doesn’t make any difference. We
can work out our own solution and help them. The time is
coming when they will take their respective places in the
community. But you can’t do that, sir, by law. You can’t
do it by coercion and you can’t do it by persuasion or pass
ing anything in Washington. I ’ll help the colored race in
'any possible way. I stand ready to do it tomorrow^ or any
other time. I don’t want it rammed down my throat any
[fol. 324] more than I want anything else rammed down
my throat. But at the present time there is a movement
on foot, not only in Leesburg, but several other places, to
help the colored race obtain better churches. We would

l like to see them bettered in every respect. It can’t be done
tin Washington. I, personally, won’t stand for it being

rammed down my throat, but I would be willing to get with
you and work for them to be helped. That’s the way I feel
about it.

Q. Don’t the colored people feel the same way about it?
A. I have spoken at the churches and schools and every

thing else they got up there, and I help them in any way
to get to the point where they can get to where we can both
go up together.

Q. Now there’s been a lot of sensational stuff published
in the newspapers and a lot of it has referred to Lake
County, as a whole. Some of the affidavits in this thing,
these papers, here, refer to the conditions referring to what
ever took place down near Mascotte as being all over Lake
County. Is that true?

A. Well they had 348 murders in Chicago. I f that ques
tion come up, there is this Paul Robeson business. You’re
going to have feuds and fights in your own home, sir. I
think it would be a terrible calamity if Lake County was
made to think, in the eyes of the world that they were run
ning a bunch of hoodlums over the colored people or any
body else. It does not exist. I have lived in Leesburg for

159

49 years and I don’t know of any time, any case where I
have entered into any lynching or any type of that line or
any of my other friends. I think that it speaks for itself.
I have gotten many a colored man out of trouble. I can
bring you over 25 that I have ba-led out of jail. I have
[fol. 325] helped—Eight at the present time I have got a
hundred up with the Sheriff on a colored woman, Mary
Miller. Don’t happen to be any kin of mine. But never
theless not a week goes by that I don’t help some of them.

Q. Do you think there is sufficient prejudice in Lake
County as a whole to keep these defendants from having a
fair trial?

A. No. I think they would fare better here than in any
other County in the State of Florida. I wouldn’t sit on a
jury if I couldn’t be fair and square and I wouldn’t be in
a jury. I think there’s planty of men in Lake County the
same w7ay. W e’ve got plenty of men in Lake County to
serve on a jury with no prejudice.

Mr. Hunter: You may inquire.

Cross-examination.

By Mr. Akerman:
Q. Mr. Miller, you made a statement, something about

‘ leaving us alone.’ You didn’t mean to state by that there
was anything wrong with me coming over here and doing
my best to defend these people?

A. No sir. I think they should be defended the very
best you know how7.

Q. You think it’s my duty to do everything possible in
the world within the law?

A. I think that they ’re entitled to that.
[fol. 326] Q. And you think we can have a calm, judicial
atmosphere?

A. I don’t see anybody raising hell out here. Do you?
Mr. Akerman, if you had a nasty situation in Lake County,
you would have a bunch of hoodlums sitting back there.
You don’t have it in this Court, Take it in some Courts
up there, in Illinois. I sat in Courts up there in gang trials.
My brother used to be U. S. District Attorney under
Wilson. And the cops had to search the gangsters and they
would take their guns off them at the door. Now if you
think this thing is creating very much interest, which it

160

is not, I think you are going to be disappointed. I don’t
see anybody here but what’s been subpoenaed here and I
think that’s a pretty good answer.

Q. You think it is perfectly proper for these men to come
over here on the defense?

A. I think it would be a very poor lawyer sworn to
uphold the right if you didn’t take what you thought was
right.

Mr. Akerman: No further questions.

Mb. W h it e , being first duly sworn, testified as follows:

Direct examination.

By Mr. Hunter:
Q. What is you business, Mr. White.
A. President of the First National Bank in Mt. Dora.
Q. How long have you lived in Florida?
A. Born in Florida.

[fol. 327] Q. Have you had other activities?
A. I have served on the board of directors of the Federal

Reserve Bank of Atlanta since 1936, as director represent
ing the small country banks in the 6 Southern States that
comprise the Federal Reserve 6th District, and I served
on a number of boards of directors, groups, in Mt. Dora.

Q. You live in Mt. Dora, don’t you?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Is Mt. Dora kind of a cosmopolitan place?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Have people there from everywhere?
A. We have people from all over the country.
Q. In your business capacity and otherwise, have you

had an opportunity to observe the relation between the
colored people and white people over there?

A. Yes, sir. Every day.
Q. What is it?
A. It is very fine. Could I give some personal experi

ences I have had? If you would like to have them?
Q. All right.
A. I have personally, myself, on various occasions,

spoken to the colored people in the church, school, even on
the streets of the colored section of Mt. Dora. I made

161

contacts with them constantly in my business. I also,
had the pleasure of helping a great many of them to obtain
homes, to build homes and to buy property. Helped to
finance their business.

Q. They are usually pretty good customers, too, aren’t
they?

A. Yes.
ffol. 328] Q. Any prejudice against them just because
they are colored people?

A. No, sir. Not in Mt. Dora. I think the relationship
there is fine.

Q. They have their own homes there?
A. A great many of them have their homes.
Q. Churches?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Anyone ever object to them because they have gotten

a home and getting ahead a little?
A. No, sir. We find a great many people ready to help

them to get ahead. Live better and have better.
Q. Any rioting over there, or burning of their homes or

anything of that kind?
A. No, sir. Very peaceful and pleasant.
Q. While this trouble was going on down there, was

there any hysteria over there or anything noticeable among
your colored people or white people, either?

A. No, sir. They just moved right along just the same
as usual. Nothing unusual over there. No incidents of
any kind. Just as many colored people on the street; just
as many colored people in the banks and stores as usual.

Q. Just judge now—you know every man, woman and
child in that community—just judge by your own com
munity. You think these men here could get a fair and
impartial trial in Lake County?

A. Yes, sir.
Q. Did you go down to Groveland while that stuff was

going on?
A. No, sir.

[fols. 329-333] Q. Do you know anything about it except
what you read in the newspapers?

A. That’s all I know about it is what I read in the
newspapers.

Q. You don’t know whether that’s true or not?
A. No, sir.

11—420

162

Q. You don’t know whether these particular defendants
are guilty or not?

A. No, sir.
Q. And wouldn’t say until you heard all of the evidence

in that case, would you ?
A. No, sir.
Q. And there are hundreds of other men in Lake County

of the same mind, would you say?
A. Yes, sir.
Mr. Hunter: You may inquire.

By Mr. Akerman:
Q. You are not summoned on the jury in this case, are

you?
A. No, sir.
Mr. Akerman: No further questions.

, (Whereupon, the witness was excused and the Court took
a recess until 9 :20 AM, August 31, 1949, at which time, the
following proceedings were had:)
[fol. 334] The Court:

Let the record show that the defendants and their counsel
are present in the Courtroom.

M e . I rving B ttruey, b e in g first du ly sw orn, testified as
fo l lo w s :

Direct Examination
By Mr. Hunter:

Q. Mr. Burley, how long have you lived in Lake County?
A. All my life. Borne right here in Tavares.
Q. Parents were from Maine?
A. Maine and New Hampshire.
Q. Where is your wife from?
A. From Ohio and New York State.
Q. Do you hold any official position in this county, in

this town?
A. Mayor of the town of Tavares.
Q. Have you had much knowledge or infortnation with

reference to the relations between colored people and white
people in Tavares?

A. I would say so. Yes.

163

Q. What is it?
A. It is a very satisfactory and, I would say, to the benefit

of the colored people. They are protected and given en
couragement.

Q. Is there any animosity or prejudice against them in
this town?

A. None that I know about.
Q. Do you know of any person trying to keep them from

trying to get ahead and have property?
A. Absolutely not.

[fol. 335] Q. Do you remember a man by the name of
Herndon that lived here?

A. Yes. I was acquainted with him.
Q. He owned a great deal of property here, didn’t he?
A. Yes. Purported sale price of the property that he

sold when he sold to C. A. Marsh, as I remember, was around
$125,000.

Q. How was he received in the community of Tavares ?
A. As any other citizen.
Q. Lived here for many years, didn’t he?
A. Yes. And I understand, I think his wife is—still

owns the property out near Lake Park. Comes in during
the winter.

Q. Was he a colored man?
A. Yes.
Q. What kind of a car did he drive around Tavares?
A. Cadillac, I think. Either a Cadillac or a Lincoln.
Q. No feeling against him at all, was there?
A. None, whatever.
Q. From your knowledge of both races, here, do you

think these defendants could get a fair and impartial trial
in this county?

A. I think they can. We have had other instances of
similar nature and I think that the Court record will show
that they have been given a fair trial. It is also possible
to get a good jury.

Mr. Hunter: You may inquire.

Cross examination

By Mr. Akerman:
Q. What is your full name, Mr. Burleigh?
A. Edward Irving.

164

[fol. 336] Q. You are summonsed on that jury?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. You are Ma-or of Tavares?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Were you present in Tavares shortly after the arrest

of these defendants when an effort was made to remove
them from the county jail?

A. I was not in Tavares the night it happened, no. I
was over to New Smyrna Beach on that weekend. Satur
day and Sunday. I was here Monday morning.

Q. You were out of the county on Saturday and Sunday
of that week?

A. Saturday and Sunday of that weekend, yes, sir.
Q. You heard this case discussed or read it in the news

paper?
A. Yes. I would say that I had.
Q. What have you heard about it?
A. Nothing authentic. I have never talked with any of

the officials. Only what we have seen in the paper that
you would hear in evidence.

Q. You read practically all those papers, I guess?
A. Only the Sentinal and the Citizen. I hadn’t seen

these others.
Q. You only take your local papers. You don’t take the

Clermont?
A. Haven’t taken any of the other papers or read any

of the articles.
Q. You, of course, have read that, the statement that all

these defendants are supposed to have confessed to the
crime, haven’t you?

A. I heard that as hearsay. I don’t remember to have
read it. May he that I did, but it slipped my mind if I did.
[fol. 337] I remember hearing as a hearsay that they had
confessed.

Q. You served on juries in Lake County quite often,
haven’t you?

A. I have. Yes, sir.
Q. Criminal cases?
A. Yes.
Q. Now, in addition to the privilege of serving on the

jurv, you know what a duty it is?
A. I do.
Q. And I assume that you feel it is the duty that every

man should do?

165

A. It is the duty that every man should do. Absolutely.
Q. And of course you realize the pressure a jury is under

to carefully weigh the evidence and decide the case solely
upon the evidence that’s presented in the courtroom?

A. Yes.
Q. What is your business, Mr. Burleigh?
A. The Lake Abstract and Guaranty Company. Ab

stract and title insurance.
Q. How long have you been in it?
A. The business was started by my father when the com

pany was started. I have been actively engaged in it since
1925 with an interval out during the war years.

Q. And do you believe that if accepted in this jury that
you can completely erase from your mind anything you
have heard and read in connection with this case?

A. I am not sure whether I should answer that question
or not. As a witness, ask what I should do as a juror.
[fol. 338] Mr. Hunter: I think the objection is well taken.
I object to the question. •

Mr. Akerman: If the Court please------
The Court: Go ahead and answer the question.
A. Yes. I think that I can do without prejudice because

I have been in a similar situation before on juries right
here in this courtroom.

Q. The question that I asked was, do you think you can j
completely erase from your mind what you have read orj |
heard of this case? !

A. No. Cannot.
Mr. Akerman: No further questions.

Re-direct examination.

By Mr. Hunter:
Q. Now since he’s asked you that question, would you

disregard it and try it solely on the evidence?
A. I don’t think it is possible to erase anything that

you have read or heard. Those things go into the human
mind and they stay there. You don’t erase them. It could
be disregarded.

Q. And try the case solely on the evidence?
A. Yes.

[fol. 339] Q. And try the case solely on the evidencef
A. Yes.

166

Q. Without any prejudice toward anybody?
A. That’s right.
Q. Isn’t it frequently the case that cases that you have

sat in in this county, that you have read about it in the
newspaper?

A. I have.
Q. And disregarded what you have read? You didn’t

know whether it was true or not?
A. Based the opinion entirely upon the evidence as it

was given in Court. We have always been charged that
way by the Judge and I think on every jury that I have
ever served on that has been held.

Recross-examination.

By Mr. Akerman:
Q. Mr. Burleigh, in making abstracts, you say you and

your father have been in the business since Lake County
was formed?

A. Right.
Q. Isn’t it true on occasions, that your company has

made an abstract, you have checked it through before sign
ing your certificate to it, and, from your own knowledge
of Lake County records, that you have picked up instru
ments, judgments, or something of that character that
wouldn’t be shown on the abstract and sent the abstract
back to show those?

A. I don’t quite get your point there.
The Court: I don’t see that that’s got a thing in the world

to do with this. You needn’t answer the question.
[fob 340] Q. Do you know a Mr. Arthur Polk, of Eustis?

A. Yes, sir.
Q. Do you know Mr. J. A. McRainy, of Leesburg?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Do you know Mr. J. G. Rae of Mt. Dora?
A. Yes.
Q. Mr. C. C. Holley of Okahumka?
A. No.
Q. Mr. Arthur H. Bentley of Howie ?
A. Yes.
Q. Mr. H. M. Me------ of Altoona?
A. I know of him. I don’t know him personally. No.
Q. Mr. Phillip Airey, of Mt. Yerde?

167

A. Yes.
Q. P. M. Cates, of Leesburg!
A. No.
Q. Mr. Burton Brown, of Leesburg!
A. Yes.
Q. Mr. Boss H. Bowen, of Clermont!
A. No.
Q. Mr. John W. Jones, of Paisley!
A. No.
Q. Mr. Percy Hawkins, Grand Island!
A. No. I don’t know him personally. I know who he is.
Q. Mr. Simon Pasbare, of Fruitland Park!
A. No.
Q. Mr. Dwight A. Gaines, of Clermont?
A. Yes.
Q. Mr. Gilbert Cartwright, of Umatilla?
A. No.
The Court: Mr. Akerman, what’s that got to do with

this? It hasn’t got a thing in the world to do with it that
I can see.

Mr. Akerman: Does the Court rule that I can’t ask?
The Court: I do rule. Yes.

[fol. 341] Mr. Akerman: No further questions.

Mr. F. L. H am pton , being first duly sworn, testified as
fo l lo w s :

Direct examination.
By Mr. Hunter:

Q. What is your name?
A. Frank Leo Hampton, full name.
Q. Where do you live?
A. Leesburg.
Q. What is your business and profession?
A. I am a life insurance agent. Represent the Central

Life Insurance Company of Tampa.
Q. You are a colored man?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. How long have you been in business in this county?
A. I have been living in Leesburg for 18 years the 14th

of this month.

168

Q. You take any part in the activities of the colored race
over there?

A. Yes, sir. Practically everything that they start
around there, I ’m one of the members of it. If it ’s worth
while.

Q. Tell us some of the things that you do ?
A. Well, the first place, I might state that I have been

very instrumental in the elections such as helping to place
various men we thought would be of the best choice for
the county. Of the Judge, here, I was one of the stump
men that worked for him. I guess I was working against
you at the same time. I have been instrumental direct-
ffol. 342] ing my people, showing them how to vote and in
Leesburg, we votes in everything that they have around
there. There is no discrimination, whatever, in the city
of Leesburg. I can only speak for that.

_ Q. What about your athletic activities and things of that
kind? Do you take any part in those things?

A. Well, no more than a sightseer. But we have the
privilege of using the Venetian Gardens at any time that
we request when there is no other dates on there. The
City has granted us the privilege, whether it ’s night or day.
I might say that because it ’s quite an expense using the
lights at night. They have given us a privilege of using
the parks on football games, baseball games, and on our
musical festivities for the colored Civic Club, which is the
only club that we have in that particular section that’s
instrumental and working with the Bed Cross and city
movements and such as that. I happen to be the manager
of that particular organization and I have been instru
mental in all the civic movements around there.

Q. What is the relation between the colored people and
white people in Leesburg?

A. I found it the best in the State of Florida. I have
traveled from Key West to Pensacola. I have only missed
two towns. That is Lake Wales and Apalachicola, that
I haven’t got into, and as State representative for the com
pany I represent, and I found Leesburg to be the best town
[fob 343] that I have ever lived in for relationship. Even
better than my home town, Jacksonville.

Q. You heard about this rape case down here at Grove-
land, didn’t you?

A. Yes, sir. I have heard about it.

169

Q. Were you in Leesburg while that was going on?
A. I was in Leesburg from the time I heard it, which I

heard it on a Saturday evening, late Saturday evening,
before I heard about it. And I was there until the fol
lowing Wednesday morning, I left on my vacation.

Q. Was there any excitement or any prejudice shown
against the colored people in Leesburg by whites?

A. Not in Leesburg. In Leesburg, we housed quite a
few of the refugees coming out of Groveland and Mascotte,
and there Was'ho disturbance. No one interfered. And
even they stayed right across the street from my house
and would have been in my home. Some of the refugees.
I f it weren’t I had planned my vacation. My wife was
already away and I was leaving in just a couple days, and
I didn’t know how long they would be there and I couldn’t
afford to leave strangers in my home.

Q. Wasn’t any rioting in Leesburg?
A. No, sir.
Q. Colored people went about their business as usual?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Colored people tending to their affairs and white

tending to their regular routine as usual?
[fol. 344] A. Nothing out of ordinary as I noticed. And
I ’m around town because I ’m an insurance man.

Cross-examination.

By Mr. Akerman:
Q. You didn’t go down to Groveland?
A. No, sir. I had no reason to go to Groveland. Fact,

I doubt if I would have gone there if I had an opportunity
to go, at the time of the uprising.

Q. You mentioned something about some refugees from
down in that area? Who were they?

A. Well, they were colored persons who lived. We called
them refugees because they were, came away from there
on account of the excitement. I understand that a per
son who leave one place because of a disturbance and if
they go to another section, we understood it was a refugee
coming from the place of disturbance. So we was there
and we assisted in housing. The Club that I mentioned
was instrumental in getting housing for them for a few
days.

170

Q. Might call them displaced persons?
A. Well, we can use that term, I suppose. It would be

all right.
Q. What club was that?
A. The Nightingale Civic Club.
Q. How many refugees did you have?
A. I ’m afraid to say because I taken no count of them,

but I do know there was 5 or 6 homes that’s near right
around me that opened their doors for them without any
sense of charging of anything. Just throwed the door
open so that they might have a place to rest.

Q. Do you know the Irvin family down in Groveland?
[fol. 345] A. I am not personally acquainted with them.
No sir. I am afraid I don’t know them.

Q. You don’t know where they are?
A. I do not know.
Q. Did you know the Shepard family down there ? Lived

out from Groveland?
A. No sir.
Q. Did you hear about the burning of the homes down

in Groveland?
A. I heard of it. Yes sir.
Q. You are a life insurance, not fire insurance, man?
A. Life insurance. There you are.
Q. You weren’t called on to act? ,
A. No sir.
Q. Do you know a Will Brunson that lives down around

Groveland ?
A. No sir. I am not acquainted with Will Brunson,

either.
Q. You don’t know where he is now?
A. I do not know.
Mr. Akerman: No further questions.
Mr. Hunter: That’s all.
(Whereupon, the witness was excused and withdrew.)

171

Mr. P revatt, being first duly sworn, testified as follows:

Direct examination.

By Mr. Hunter:
Q. You live at Tavares, Mr. Prevatt?
A. Yes sir.

[fol. 346] Q. How long have you been here?
A. 24 years.
Q. What is your business?
A. Executive President of the Lake Region Packing As

sociation.
Q. Do you employ many colored people?
A. Well we have on the payroll, today, I expect, in the

neighborhood of a hundred. In the winter, we run from
250 to 300, 350.

Q. I t ’s been charged in these affidavits made by counsel
that charges were trumped up against the colored people
in this county for the purpose of keeping them down and
making them work for starvation wages.

Mr. Akerman: To which the defendants object because
there is no charge in any affidavit or any pleading to that
effect.

Mr. Hunter: I ’ll just call to the attention of the Court
that he read a purported interview with defendants’ coun
sel with him, in which the charge was made, and which he
said he believed.

The Court: Objection overruled. Go ahead.

Q. Is that statement true?
A. It is not, sir. Not to my knowledge.
Q. What wages do you pay these colored people?
A. Our men, our minimum wage is 60 ̂an hour.
Q. Is that the same as white people?
A. Yes sir.

ffol. 347] Q. No difference, is there?
A. No. They run from that up to 90 .̂ The highest paid

people that we have, laborers, I ’ll say, in our organization,
happen to be colored people. Two men that dump fruit
for us, we pay them 90 ̂ an hour. There isn’t another
employee in the association that earns that much money as
a laborer.

Q. You say you pay common labor 60 ̂ an hour?

172

A. Yes sir. We pay our pickers and loaders by the piece.
Q. What will their wages run?
A. Are you talking about piece workers?
Q. Yes. Pickers.
A. Well it depends on whether they want to woi'k or not.

We run an average, I would say, an average of $40 to $45
a week. We pay, have some pickers that get out and goes
to work, that make a hundred dollars a week. I was looking
at one a few days ago that made $150 one week this past
season.

Q. Is that the same scale of wages along that line about
this county? Packing houses? Pickers?

A. Not only within the county, but over the state in the
citrus belt. Yes sir.

Q. They have been making more wages than we fellows
that own the groves?

A. They have been making more wages than the growers
made up until last year, or, during the war years. Yes
sir. Last year after the freeze, the growers come out
better. But for the 3 years—2 years previous to that, the
laborers got more money out of it—at the end of the day
or end of the month than the citrus growers that had their
money in the groves got. Yes sir.
[fol. 348] Q. Any colored people here own their homes?

A. Yes sir. We have several that work for us that own
their homes.

Q. When this trouble was going on down at Mascotte,
through that territory, were there any mobs up here roam
ing around burning their homes and running them out of*
town?

A. Not in Tavares.
Q. Know of it in any other part of this county except

down around Groveland?
A. I haven’t heard of any.
Q. Everything was just as peaceful as any other time?
A. Our men here that was working for us was just as

peaceful as they was before anything happened at Grove-
land. Yes sir.

Q. White people were the same way?
A. Yes sir. There was no difference in them.
Q. You have had a wide experience in this county. Have

you ever found any such prejudice that would not allow
the colored race to live a normal life in Tavares around
this territory?

173

A. I didn’t understand your question.
Q. Is there any prejudice against the colored people in

this section!
A. No sir. No. sir. Not that I know anything about, sir.

I have never heard of it.
Q. Do you know something of the character of the people

of this county? Do you believe these men here could get
a fair and impartial trial in Lake County?

A. I do. Certainly do.
[fol. 349] Q. I remember one occasion that you asked
somebody to parole a good worker, here. Did you do that?
Out of the penitentiary?

A. I have 8 or 10 parolees in my organization. I think
I taken 8 out last year.

Q. Did you keep them here and work them on starvation
wages ?

A. They get exactly what the rest of the employes get,
sir. Fact, I have two of them, today, that wanted to go off
in the potatoes, thought they could make more money than
our scale of wages and we arranged with the parole officer
to permit them to go. He still reports to us and we make
the report through.

Q. Do you remember of the wages that was paid any
of those men last year for picking?

A. Any wages that was paid them?
Q. Yes.
A. Yes. One of the highest paid pickers was a parolee.
Q. These men are parolled out of the penitentiary?
A. Yes sir. Raiford.
Q. Now do you do everything that you can to rehabili

tate those men, assist them after they get out?
A. I have. Yes sir.
Q. You have no feeling against them at all. Come and

go as they please?
A. Come and go as we please. We treat them just like

we do any other colored men, and the white people that
works for us. No difference in them. We take care of
our people. Some of the homes, we have several colored
[fol. 350] men here, as well as whites, that have come to
us for help to build homes and we have financed them.
Helped them buy the material and paid the labor and let
them pay us on a weekly or monthly basis, to own their
own homes.

174

Q. Do you consider tliat this is a Ku Klux Klan ridden
county?

A. No sir.
Q. Do you know of any Ku Klux organization in this

county ?
A. I do not. No sir. I do not.
Q. Did you ever hear of any?
A. No sir. I have not.
Q. An organization of that kind wouldn’t meet with much

favor in Lake County, would it?
A. I don’t think so.
Mr. Hunter: You may inquire.

Cross-examination.

By Mr. Akerman.
Q. You live here in Tavares, Mr. Prevatt?
A. Yes sir.
Q. You are familiar with the Ku Klux Klan parade into

Leesburg the latter part of 1948, aren’t you?
A. Why, I heard about it. That’s all I know about it.

Yes sir.
Q. Now you heard about the burning of the homes down

in G-roveland?
A. I did. Yes sir. Heard about it.
Q. And the shooting down there?
A. Yes sir. Through the papers.
Q. Do you know the family of the defendant, Walter

Irvin here?
A. I do not.

[fol. 351] You don’t know where they are?
A. No, I do not.
Q. Do you know the family of the defendant, Samuel

Shepherd?
A. No sir. I can’t say that I know any colored people in

Grroveland.
Q. And the same would be true as to Will Brunson?
A. I don’t know him. No sir.
Q. Did you know a colored man by the name of Mack

Fryer?
A. No sir.

175

Mr. Akerman: No further questions.
Mr. Hunter: That’s all.
(Whereupon, the witness was excused and withdrew.)

M b.. W. L. S tory, being first du ly sw orn, testified as
fo l lo w s :

Direct examination.

By Mr. Hunter:
Q. Mr. Story, do you hold any official position in this

county ?
A. Yes, sir. Supervisor of Registration.
Q. How many white registered voters do you have in this

county ?
A. 14,182, grand total. Colored voters, 802, leaving

13,380 white registered voters, men and women.
[fol. 352] Mr. Hunter: You may inquire.

Cross examination:
Q. Do you have the breakdown on political parties there?
A. No. I haven’t got it here.
Mr. Akerman: No questions.
Mr. Story: We got right around 1200 some-odd Repub

licans.
Mr. Akerman: Out of the 802 negroes, do you know how

many are registered as Republicans and Democrats?
- A. 180 Republicans and 2 Independent.

Q. The balance Democrats?
A. Democrats.
Q. No Peoples Progressive?
A. No sir. Don’t have one in the county.
Mr. Hunter: White or black?
A. White or black.

Mr. Akerman: That’s all.

(Whereupon, the witness was excused and withdrew.)

176

M r . F ran k E. O w en s , being first du ly sw orn, testified as
fo l lo w s :

Direct examination.

By Mr. Hunter:
[fol. 353] Q. What is your name?

A. Owens. Frank E. Owens.
Q. What official position, if any, do you hold in Lake

County ?
A. Chairman of the Board of County Commissioners.
Q. As Chairman of the Board of County Commissioners,

I ’ll ask you if it is the duty of the county commissioners to
place the names of jurors in the box?

A. It is.
Q. Where you present when the regular box was prepared

in January, 1949?
A. I was.

I Q. In what proportion were the colored people and the
white people put in that box?

A. In proportion as the colored people were to the total
registration in the county.

Q. You mean the registered colored voters to the regis
tered white voters ?

A. Bight. We select the jurors from the registered
voters in the county as we feel that those who are not regis
tered would not have a sufficient interest in our county to
serve on the jury.

Q. Is that made fairly and in proportion of those two
numbers ?

A. It is.
Q. Was that done in the box in January, 1949?
A. It was.
Q. Was it also done in the box, the special box that you

recently made?
A. It was.

[fol. 354] Q. Was there any discrimination, whatsoever,
against the colored people in drawing jurors?

A. None.
Mr. Hunter: You may inquire.

Cross-examination.

By Mr. Akerman:
Q. The registration list shows the race of the people.

Is that correct?
A. Yes, it does.—Not the list. Does not. No. BuLihe

books show it, downstairs.
Q. Well, 1 mean by that, from what you selected the

jurors.
A. It does not. Doesn’t show whether they are colored or

white.
Q. Didn’t yon put them in in proportion to that?
A. We do, because we know the colored folks and the

white folks.
Q. Now, explain just how the setup of selecting the jury

list in Lake County is.
A. We select approximately 400 jurors in the circuit

duty in January of each year. The board, as a whole, sits
around a table and selects the jury. Allocating to each
district, in other words, giving each Commissioner the
approximate privilege of selecting the number and as it
bears on the total registration in the county.

Q. In other words, the first is the list of registered voters?
A. That’s right.
Q. That’s a rule that has been adopted by the County

Commissioners here? That’s not the State law?
A. That’s the rule that we have followed for years. Yes,

[fol. 355] Q. The State law, as I recall it, requires the
county commissioners to select people qualified to serve,
good standing in the community.

A. That’s right.
Q. And that is the test that you have place. Never call

anybody other than a registered voter?
A. That ’s right. We don’t feel that the others are quali

fied to serve on jury if they do not have sufficient interest
to register and participate in our government affairs.
That’s true both of white and colored.

Q. And I believe you said that—what I mean when I say
‘ you’, I ’m speaking of the commission as a wdiole—selected
approximately 400 the first of January?

A. That is right.
Q. And what’s that about a special list?

12—420

178

A. We had a special commissioners meeting. It was
called, I don’t recall the date, now, in, I believe in August.
Either July or August. To select additional names to put
in so that they might be put in the box as they were afraid
that the list would be exhausted and would not be suffi
cient jurors to serve.

Q. How many did you select at that time!
A. I think somewhere around a hundred. I f I remember

rightly.
Q. So there should be approximately 500 names in the

box?
A. Somewhere close to 500. Yes.
Q. With the usual some having died since you selected

and some having moved away. When I say that, I am not
trying to pin you down.

A. That’s right.
Q. I)o you know the number of negroes on the jury list?
A. I do not know the exact number, no.

[fol. 356] Mr. Akerman: That’s all.
Mr. Hunter: Now Your Honor, I hate to call the next

witness but it is necessary for me to do so because it has
been placed in these papers what I consider a serious
reflection not only on this Court but on every court in the
State of Florida. I refer to section 5 of a document filed
here called a motion to quash the indictment. It says that
the presence of one negro on the grand jury which returned
the indictment against your defendants herein did not
result from a fair, impartial or lawful summons, empanel
ling or drawing of said grand jury. But that State officials
who, for over a period of 25 years or more, have syste
matically excluded members of your defendants ’ race from
grand jury service in the County of Lake, purposely and
deliberately placed a negro upon the grand jury for the
sole and only purpose of creating an appearance of com
pliance with the requirements of the Clause of the 14th
amendment to the United States Constitution and the Con
stitution of the State of Florida.

Of course there have been exhibits here. Considerable
wild talk. I realize that these gentlemen are doing, as Mr.
Akerman said, trying to defend their clients and sometimes,
they have been misinformed. But since it is well known that
these jurors are summonsed under the supervision of
the Court, itself, I think that that is a reflection upon the

179

ffol. 357] Court and we should meet it with testimony. They
made no effort to prove it. Therefore we will have to meet
it negatively and I am. going to call the Clerk of the Court.

Mr. Akerman: At this time, before the taking of the tes
timony, I move to strike the remarks of counsel from the
record. He has the privilege of calling the witness. I don’t
think he has the privilege of getting into the record a speech,
what is commonly called a jury speech.

The Court: Well both of you have been talking to the
wind so the motion is denied.

M r G eorge J. D ykes, being first duly sworn, testified as
follows:

Direct examination.

By Mr. Hunter:
Q. Mr. Dykes, what is your official position in the county?
A. Clerk of the Circuit Court.
Q. Do you remember the drawing of the jury, grand

jury, which indicted the defendants in this case?
A. Pardon me. May I ask a question?
Q. You may.
A. The drawing of the men that served on the grand

jury after this jury was called here and sworn?
Q. Yes sir.
A. Just the calling of the grand jury?
Q. Yes. That’s right.
A. I do.
Q. Did you participate in it?
A. I did.
Q. Who else did?
A. The Judge. Circuit Judge. Judge Futch, present

here.
[fol. 358] Q. What member of the Sheriff’s office?

A. I don’t recall whether the Sheriff, himself, or whether
he had one of the deputies.

Q. Just how was that drawing done?
A. To go back to the first, there was the general venire

that was drawn. When that general venire was drawn and
those men were brought here.

A. I believe it was 36.

180

Q. How many were drawn?
A. I wouldn’t be positive. They were drawn from the

jury box.
Q. How?
A. By the Clerk. Took the box. The Sheriff brought the

key and we came into the Court. The Judge, himself drew
those slips out. Till he got the number that he had that was
on that venire.

Q. Were their names recorded?
A. Their names were recorded.
Q. What was done with those slips?
A. The slips were put in an envelope and sealed and are

in the Clerk’s office now.
Q. Now, what was done with that envelope?
A. It is filed in the Clerk’s office.
Q. Now on the day that the grand jury was drawn, were

you present?
A. I was.
Q. How was it drawn?
A. The men that constituted that venire were called

here in Court. They were tested under the voire dire.
Sworn and tested by the Judge. Then after they were
tested, these names were put in a box.
[fol.359] Q. All of them? The 36?

A. All the whole 36.
Then that box was put on the Judge’s desk and the

Judge drew from that box the names of the 18 men which
constituted the grand jury.

Q. The first 18 men constituted the grand jury?
A. Yes. They were drawn out.
Q. Were the names recorded?
A. They were noted as called when he drew out the 18

that constituted the grand jury.
Q. Were their names recorded?
A. They were.
Q. And the drawing was made by Judge Futch, himself,

from the box?
A. Absolutely.
Q. Not from the box now, the list of these names?
A. No, they were not. This was from these slips that

were prepared. They were drawn.
Q. Put in an envelope?

181

A. Well, no. That was when the original jury was drawn.
Q. Now that 36 names were put in that box and Judge

Futch drew out of that box?
A. When we prepared the list of the jury, that was

qualified, and the ones that were qualified, and the ones that
were not qualified were excused because they were sick,
some possibly excused because they were over age, and
claimed that exemption, and so forth. Then those that were
qualified, those names were put in the box and the grand
jury was drawn from that list.
[fob 360] Q. Was one colored man drawn on that?

A. He was.
Q.. Was there any way for anyone to know until the

name was read out that there was a colored man, or any
other race, on there?

A. There was absolutely no way for him to have known it.
Mr. Hunter: All right. You may inquire.

Cross-examination.

By Mr. Akerman:
Q. How many years have you been Clerk of the Court,

Mr. Dykes?
A. This is 21 years. That is, 21 years and so much on

this is 21.
Q. Have you ever heard of a negro serving on a grand

jury in Lake County before?
A. I don’t recall any having been.
Q. Are you familiar with the rumor that is prevalent in

Lake County that they ask to be excused from jury duty?
A. I know that we have had a great many that did.

That is, I paid them off because they come and said the
Judge excused them. Now I don’t know what their reasons
were. I do that with a lot of men. They come and say
the Judge has excused them for various reasons. And of
course, I don’t ask him what his reasons are.

Q. Do you know how many negroes there are in the jury
list .now?

A. I do not.
Q. You don’t know what proportion they are?
A. I do not.
Q. And do you know, you say 36 were summonsed for

ffol. 361] jury duty?

182

A. I wouldn’t give that as a definite number, I said.
Probably was more that were called there at that time.
I don’t recall without looking at the list because we drew
various numbers at various times. Possibly more than
that because this was knowing that this was a capital case
coming and they usually draw a larger number. I do not
give that as a definite number.

Q. Do you recall the number of negroes that were drawn
in the 36?

A. No. I don’t know whether there was any at all.
I didn’t know whether there was any in it at all until
this one was called and he walked up there. I didn’t know
it when his name was called. He come up there and he
was black.

Q. You were present in the courtroom?
A. Yes.
Q. Were there any other negroes in the prospective

venire ?
A. I don’t know whether there were or not. No.
Q. You didn’t look around the courtroom?
A. Oh, yes. I looked at them. Then, I can’t tell you

who the men were back there. There’s been too many of
these juries.

Mr. Akerman: That’s all. No further questions.
(Whereupon, the witness was excused.)

[ fo b 362] Mr. G. E. P ortland, b e in g first du ly sw orn,
testified as fo llo w s :

Direct examination.

By Mr. Hunter:
Q. What is your name, sir?
A. G. E. Portland.
Q. What is your business?
A. President and General Manager, Citrus Culture Cor

poration in Mt. Dora. President and General Manager,
Grove Management and Fertilizer Manufactures.

Q. Do you hold any official position there?
A. Mayor of Mt. Dora.
Q. Do you employ colored men?

183

A. Yes sir,
Q. Is there any discrimination against the colored peo

ple in your employment?
A. None, whatever, sir. I employ both white and col

ored labor and work them in mixed crews and there is no
trouble, whatever. They get along fine.

Q. Do you recall while this rape trouble was going on!
A. Yes sir.
Q. Any trouble between them!
A. None, whatever, no sir.
Q. Mr. Fortland, was there any rioting or disorder of

any kind in Mt. Dora at that time between the colored
people and the white people!

A. No sir.
Q. Is there any prejudice against colored people over

there that you know about?
A. No sir.
Q. Are they encouraged to have their homes and other

property?
A. Yes sir. They are. I have just financed a home for

[fol. 363] our maid. I have helped several to build their
homes. Our maid has been with us a good many years and
she just build a home and I helped her finance it.

Q. Do you try to discourage them from becoming inde
pendent so you can employ them for starvation wages?

A. No sir. I pay them just the same as I do the white
labor. In fact, I have one colored man who,—our lowest
rate of pay is 65 ̂ an hour for labor—and I have one col
ored man that I pay more than that. Because he operates
a machine and can do any kind of work better than some
of my white laborers. I pay him extra for it.

Q. Has there been any hysteria over there against the
colored race?

A. No sir. None at all.
Q. Well has there ever been any there that you know of?
A. Not that I know of. I have been there 16 years and

I haven’t ever heard of any trouble.
Q. Wasn’t any mobs running around there burning any

of their homes?
A. No sir.
Q. Did the colored people, while this trouble was going

on, go about their avocations normally as they usually do ?
A. There was absolutely no difference. They went as

184

they always do. My labor came out just the same as they
always did and the white and colored worked together just
the same as they always have.
[fol. 364] Q. Do you believe that there is any such preju
dice in Lake County against the colored race that would
prevent these defendants, because they are colored men,
from getting a fair and impartial trial?

A. No sir. I don’t believe there is.
Mr. Hunter: All right. You may inquire.

Cross-examination.

By Mr. Akerman:
Q. You are familiar with the occurrence down at Grove-

land following this affair, are you not?
A. Yes sir. I heard of it.
Q. You are familiar with the fact that three buildings

were burned down there?
A. I have never seen them. I have read that they were.
Q. Did you hear that one of them was the home of the

defendant, Samuel Shepherd, where he lived, owned by
his father?

A. I have heard that. Yes.
Q. Are you familiar with the shooting up of honky tonks

down there?
A. All I know about it is what I have heard. I didn’t go

down there. Was any of the refugees from down there
brought to Mt. Dora?

A. I don’t know of any.
Q. You are familiar with the fact that the entire colored

population of that area down there was removed from the
area?

A. I heard that they were removed, yes. Most of them
to Orlando. I understand.
[fol. 365] Q. Well we have had testimony, this morning,
that there were some in Leesburg.

A. Yes. I didn’t know that until I heard it in testimony.
Mr. Akerman: No further questions.
(Whereupon, the Court took a five minute recess, at the

end of which time, the following proceedings were had:)

S h eriff W illis M cCall , being first duly sworn, testified
as follows:

Direct examination.

By Mr. Hunter:
Q. Your name is Willis V. McCall?
A. That’s right, sir.
Q. You are Sheriff of Lake County?
A. Yes sir.
Q. Where were you on the 15th and 16th of July, 1949?
A. I was en route from Cleveland, Ohio, to Tavares.
Q. When you got back here, had these three defendants

all been arrested?
A. Yes sir.
Q. In paragraph 12 in the application for removal of

cause, I find this charge:
“ Officials of the County of Lake, in whose custody

the defendants are, said law enforcement officials did
ask the defendants, “ What are those nigger lawyers
putting you up to now?’ ’ And when informedtby
said law enforcement officials that ‘ those nigger law
yers better watch their step or they would be in jail
along with those defendants’ ”

Did you or any other officials that you know of make any
[fol. 366] such statement as that to these men?

A. I didn’t make such a statement as that. I read an
account where they had made some unjust accusations
against me and my men and it was pretty much disgusting
and disheartening after having stuck my neck out like I
had for the protection of them, to have such statements
and I asked them if they were putting that stuff in their
heads, too.

Q. All you said to them wTas that?
A. Yes sir.
Mr. Hunter: You can inquire.

Cross-examination.

By Mr. Akerman:
Q. You made no statements about lawyers being put in

jail?

185

A. Not that I recall.
Q. You recall the conversation following the hearing on

the pleadings here!
A. I recall when that statement was made. I made it,

myself. The statement I said I made. Not the statement
that was referred to there.

Q. What statement did you say you made?
A. I told them to the best that I can recall, I asked them

if these nigger lawyers were putting the stuff in their head
that they were trying to—the same poison that they were
putting in the northern newspapers. That’s what I asked
them.

Q. Now when was this, Sheriff?
A. It was either on the way back or, at the cell, from

the hearing.
[fol. 367] Q. These prisoners were in your custody?

A. Yes sir.
Q. The trial is set for them tomorrow, is it not?
A. Yes sir.
Q. You knew, of course, they were represented by coun

sel, including me?
A. Yes sir.
Q. And you have questioned and talked to them without

their counsel being present?
A. I made that statement to them.
Q. Did you question them after you knew they were

represented by me?
A. I think I have a right to question any prisoner I have

in jail.
Q. About what he’s putting up for his defense ?
A. I have a right to question any prisoner that I have

in jail regarding the crime that was committed.
Q. Is this regarding the crime that was committed?
A. Everything that I have questioned has been regard

ing the crime that was committed.
Q. And you asked them if their lawyers were putting

them up to something?
A. I asked them if their lawyers were trying to poison

their minds the same as they were trying to poison the
northern people through the sources of the newspapers.
Yes sir.

Mr. Akerman: No further questions.
Mr. Hunter: That’s all.

187

[fol. 368] Mr. Ackerman: I f the Court please, at this
time, the defendants request in the future the sheriff be
instructed not to question or threaten or talk to these pris
oners unless their counsel are notified and are present.

The Court: There is no evidence that anything has been
said or done to the defendants that was in any way harm
ful. If the motion was carried out he wouldn’t even be
allowed to ask them if they wanted a drink of water. Mo
tion denied.

Mr. Akerman: The motion is in connection with the
case. I don’t think it is fa-r and proper for the Sheriff
to inquire as to the confidential relationship of attorney
and client and I ask------

The Court: Mr. Ackerman, I have already ruled and I
don’t care to hear any more from you about it.

Mas. M abel N orris R eese, being first duly sw orn, was
recalled fo r fu rth er exam ination.

Re-direct examination.

By Mr. Hunter:
Q. Mrs. Reese, in one of your papers that was introduced

here, yesterday, reference was made to a purported story
[fol. 369] that was published in Life, I believe.

A. Yes sir.
Q. Now, what was your information on that that caused

you to write that in your paper!
A. It was on a Friday, Mr. Hunter, following that inci

dent in Gfroveland, that I took a trip with a photographer
of Life magazine, Wallace Kirkland, who had been called
in to Florida by the New York office, and we went with
Sheriff McCall, Deputy Yates and yourself, as officials of
the County, and took a complete tour of the entire scene
of the so-called Groveland story.

Q. How long did it take?
A. Well I think we left here about 10 in the morning,

maybe a little before that. I know that Mr. Kirkland had
to get breakfast before we started, it was that early. And
we got through, I got back to my office about 5 :30 in the
evening.

C
>

188

Q. They were furnished transportation to go wherever
they wished to go?

A. That’s right.
Q. They took pictures and interviewed people?
A. Yes sir.
Q. Made no comment about what they heard?
A. Well, yes. I would.say they did. I was riding in

the------
Mr. Akerman: I ’m going to object to anything that any

Life photographer or reporter may have said. It was
through hearsay.
[fol. 370] Mr. Hunter: H e’s already introduced that and
I am asking what it was.

The Court: At the same time, I don’t think she should
testify as to anything that somebody else said.

Q. Now, what justification did you have for publishing,
as you did in your paper, that that story would come out
in Life on a certain date, here?

A. The fact that about 1 o ’clock in the afternoon, Mr.
Kirkland called the New York office and came back to
where we were all gathered and said that he had been
ordered to get back to New York.

Mr. Ackerman: I object to anything that Mr. Kirkland
(said as incompetent to this hearing, to this line of testi
mony. Irrelevant. Immaterial. And an attempt on the
part of the State to delay the cause and keep defense
counsel here when they should be preparing for the trial.

Mr. Hunter: You brought it in the case and introduced
the question.

The Court: I think I have already ruled that she couldn’t
testify to any conversation. That s-e had there, with him.
[fol. 371] Q. You had information, however, that that
story would be published for a certain date and you pub
lished that in your paper?

A. Very definite information.
Q. Was it ever published?
A. No sir. It was not.
Mr. Hunter: You may inquire.
Mr. Akerman: No questions.
Mr. Hunter: Your Honor, we have many other witnesses

here but they will only be accumulative of what has already
been testified in this Court and I don’t think we would be

189

justified in going ahead in that class of testimony.
Mr. Akerman: I move that the remark be stricken. The

State attorney doesn’t have to give the Court any reason.
Mr. Hunter: Well, I ’m giving it, though. I think the

Court will hear it.
The Court: Go ahead. Objection overruled.
Mr. Hunter: This is a Court of reason.
I am going to call the balance of the State’s witnesses

and ask the Court to discharge them and let them get their
[fol. 372] pay. I don’t think it is necessary, as I said, to
go any further. Will the following witnesses please come
forward:

Mr. Akerman: I object to this going into the record.
It is not part of that because the number of witnesses
called has nothing to do with it.

The Court: Objection overruled.
Mr. Hunter: J. Iv. Muselle; Phil Fisher, W. F. Law,

W. J. Rogers, 0. M. Simpson, R. G. Shipes, Jimmie Dick
erson, B. Pope, J. C. Trowel, C. J. Turner, G. T. Matti.se,
Ted Williams,

The Sheriff: Mr. Turner was not served. He is out
of the State.

Mr. Hunter (Continuing:) Jim Wade.
Now I would like to have the Court discharge ehose wit

nesses and tell them to get their pay.
The Court: Witnesses whose names have been called

are discharged. Call on the Clerk for your per diem
and mileage.

Me. R. G. Cassidy, being first duly sw orn, testified as
fo l lo w s :

Direct examination.

By Mr. Hunter:
[fol. 373] Q. What is your name!

A. R. G. Cassidy.
Q. Do you now hold any official position in this county?
A. I do.
Q. What is it?
A. Lake County Tax Assessor.
Q. Is it part of your duty as Lake County Tax Assessor

190

to allow under the law the granting of homestead exemp
tions ?

A. It is.
Q. Is there any discrimination against the colored people

in that respect in your office?
A. None, whatever.
Q. Mr. Cassidy, do you know how many homestead

exemptions are allowed colored people in this county?
A. No sir. I don’t. For the reason that our printed

forms make no distinction and we make no distinction in
receiving them or filing them, filling them out or sending
them out.

Q. You do not know the exact amount?
A. No sir. I don’t know the exact amount.
Q. How many do you know to be colored people who are

exempt in this county?
A. We went through our files and from personal knowl

edge of the individual, and other ways that we could tell,
I am positive that there were 435. I am also positive that
there are many more but I don’t know how many.

Mr. Hunter: You may inquire.

Cross-examination.

By Mr. Akerman:
[fol. 374] Q. Hid you examine to see whether Henry
Shepherd was allowed a homestead exemption?

A. No sir. I think that he was, but I could check in a
few minutes and tell you.

Q. Down near Groveland?
A. Yes sir.
Q. Would your records show what that consisted of?
A. You mean description of his property? Or just what

do you mean?
Q. Yes.
A. The card would indicate what was on the property.
Q. In other words, would indicate the number of acres in

his farm?
A. Yes sir.
Q. And what improvements, if any, were on there?
A. That’s right. Unless it was a subdivision. Then it

would be lots and blocks.
Q. You don’t know whether your records indicate now

whether or not that you had to re-assess this property be
cause the buildings had been burned down on it?

A. It would not be re-assessed because it is as of the
first of the year. If it had been burned. It wrns burned
since the first of the year, it would show up next year.

Q. Have to be re-assessed next year and you haven’t
got around to next year’s work?

A. That’s right.
Q. Do your records show whether Cleveland Irvin owns

property?
A. Yes sir.
Q. Andi f Cleveland Irvin is not residing on that prop

erty as his home on January 1st, next year, he will not get
a homestead exemption. Is that right?

A. That’s right. You want to know now, if Henry
[fol. 375] Shepherd and Cleveland Irvin are exempt?

Mr. Akerman: I ’m satisfied.
Mr. Hunter: Bring your card up here. I want to see

about this big farm that Shepherd is supposed to have.
Mr. Cassidy: We are to bring Henry Shepherd and

Cleveland Irvin. Is that right?
Mr. Akerman: That’s right.
Mr. Hunter: Yes.
(Whereupon, the witness was excused and withdrew.)

191

Mr. R. E. N orris, being first duly sworn, testified as fol
lows :

Direct examination.

By Mr. Hunter:
Q. What is your name?
A. R. E. Norris.
Q. Do you have a job or position in this county?
A. Yes sir. County Agricultural Agent.
Q. How long have you been in that position?
A. 13 years.
Q. In that capacity, did you work with the colored farm-

[fol. 376] ers of the County?
A. Yes, I do.
Q. What is your relation with them?

192

A. Very good.
Q. Any discrimination shown them!
A. No. .None, whatever.
Q. Do they participate in your county fairs?
A. I don’t know that we have had any entries in county

fairs.
Q. Haven’t they had a colored building in evei'y fair we

ever had in the county ?
A. That’s correct.
Q. Participated in those?
A. I ’m thinking of livestock. Yes. They have a building

of their own.
Q. And they have exhibits there?
A. They have exhibits there.
Q. Do you know of any prejudice against these colored

farmers?
A. I don’t know of any, Mr. Hunter. For example, last

year, the IT. S. Department of Agriculture released a new
long staple cotton. There were only 12 bushels released in
Lake County. In an effort to determine wTho should get
the cotton, we turned it over to the veterans. G. I. Vet
erans training classes. Colored boys had the same oppor
tunity as the others and they took it. Planted the seed and
grew the cotton.

Q. Has anybody, to your own knowledge, ever disturbed
these farmer- and tried to keep them from getting ahead?

A. I have no knowledge of it at all. The farmer popu
lation in the county, colored, between the years 1940 and
’45, jumped 50%. Approximately 50%. A little over 50%.
And the record of the U. S. Bureau of census shows that
75% plus, a little over 75% of all the colored farmers in
the county are full owners.
[fol. 377] Q. Of their own farms?

A. They own their own farms and are not sharecroppers.
Q. Did you know this man, Henry Shepherd?
A. No, sir. I did not.
Q. Was he a farmer in this county under your bureau?
A. I couldn’t say whether he was or was not. I just

don’t know.
Q. If he was, you never had any call?
A. Never had a call to go to the place.
Q. You are frequently called by colored farmers?
A. Oh, yes. Part of the job.
Q. And always went?

193

A. Colored farmers are eligible of course, to full mem
bership in the Lake County Farm Bureau where they are
eligible to receive the Blue Cross hospitalization program
on the same basis as the white people and they are eligible,
too for the automobile insurance program which is avail
able to members of the Farm Bureau.

Q. Have you ever heard of a single instance of discrimi
nation against a farmer because he was a colored man?

A. No. In a great many instances, white folks, including
myself, go around seeing them once in a while about getting
some ideas on how to grow crops that they are especially
good at growing. Such as melons, sugar cane. They are
born knowing how to grow those crops and we get infor
mation from them quite often.
[fol. 378] Mr. Hunter: No questions.

Mr. Akerman: No questions.
(Whereupon, the witness was excused and withdrew.)

M e . Cassidy, recalled testified as fo llo w s :

Redirect examination.

By Mr. Hunter:
Q. Mr. Cassidy, do you have Henry Shepherd’s card with

you?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Please tell the Court what it shows?
A. Henry Shepherd’s card shows that he owns tracts 8,

and tract 24 and 25, section 35 Tp. 22 Range 24, in Grove-
land Farms.

Q. What improvements are shown on it?
A. He has a house, is the only improvements that are

shown.
Q. Any farm?
A. Well he, the land doesn’t indicate whether it is a

farm or not.
Q. What’s the assessed valuation?
A. Total assessed valuation is $500.00.
Q. And that is totally exempt from taxes?
A.. Let me correct that just a minute. He gets an exemp

tion which cuts off of that assessed value. The assessed
value that he pays taxes on is $400.00. The total assessed

13—420

194

[fol. 379] value is $900.00. He gets a $500 disability exemp
tion, which the law entitles him too, also.

Q. Hid you know Henry Shepherd?
A. No. I don’t know him personally.
Q. You don’t know what he does?
A. No sir.
Q. All right. Now, the other you have got there?
A. Cleveland Irvin. Receives homestead exemption on

North 185' of lot 7, and north 185' of West half of lot 8,
block 3, Bressler’s Subdivision, in Groveland.

Q. What is this value?
A. The total value is $900.00. He receives homestead

exemption.
Q. All right.
A. I have another one, here. Will Brunson. Receives

homestead exemption on the SE corner of the SE1̂ of the
NW!4 run West 902.58 ft, North 417.42, West 17.42 ft,
North 374.58 ft, East 330 ft, North 264 ft, West 330 ft,
North 264 ft, East 1320 ft., South 1320 ft, to point of
beginning. That is in Section 16, Township 22, Range 24,
in Lake County.

Q. How many acres?
A. That’s 34 acres. On that he has a house and the 34

acres of total valuation of $900.00.
Q. Hoes he get homestead exemption?
A. He gets homestead exemption. H e’s got homestead

exemption, this card would indicate, since 1945. Maybe
before that. On another card.
[fol. 380] Q. Bo you know how far that Shepherd’s place
is from the town of Groveland, proper?

A. No. I could look in the plats and tell you, but I don’t
know offhand.

Q. It is not in the town of Groveland?
A. No sir. It is not inside of the town of Groveland.

The only one that’s inside of the town of Groveland is
Cleveland Irvin, in Bressler’s Subdivision. The others
are outside of the city limits.

Mr. Hunter: You may inquire.

Recross examination.
By Mr. Akerman:

Q. In that Henry Shepherd card, do you have it broken
down between the real estate and the improvements?

195

A. Yes, sir.
Q. Give the breakdown, please?
A. House is valued at $450.00. And he lias 25 acres of

land—30 acres of land. Total valuation of $457.00. We
go to even dollars. However, the $117 is a hundred.

Q. What is your assessment as compared to the actual
market value!

A. Well, we take a long range view of it. We assess a
full value. But it is not the present inflated value at the
present time.

Q. How much! I mean, what difference would you say?
A. Well, that, I don’t know. It sells for two or three

times as much.

Mr. Akerman: No further questions.

[fol. 381] Redirect examination.

By Mr. Hunter:
Q. Mr. Cassidy, I understood you to testify that Irvin

had homestead exemption but if his house was burned, he
couldn’t get homestead exemption after the 1st of January.
Is that right?

A. It would be for the year, because our records are as
of the first of the year. The house was there at that time.
If there’s no house there the first of next year, he won’t
get homestead exemption. Unless he builds another house.

Q. Which ones are you referring to?
A. Any of them.
Q. Have you ever heard anything about Irvin’s house

not being there?
A. No sir.
Mr. Akerman: I f the Court please, the testimony was as

to Shepherd.

Q. But now under the law, if he can show it was burned
and not his fault, the 1st of January, he can still get his
homestead exemption?

A. He has to be living on the property and making it
his home.

By Mr. Buoy:
Q. You mean you can’t get homestead exemption unless

you are actually living on the property?

196

A. That’s right. Must be making it your home. You
can leave it periodically but it must be your home.

Q. But if his home was burned through no fault of his,
and if there was a homestead exemption on it, if it was
burned and he hasn’t been able to get the material and
[fol. 382] supplies to build another or the money necessary
to build another, wouldn’t he be entitled to homestead
exemption for the coming year ? For the coming year, 1950 ?

A. Yes sir. He must be living on the property.
(Whereupon, the witness was excused and withdrew.)

S h eriff M cCall , recalled, testified as fo l lo w s :

Redirect examination.

By Mr. Hunter:
Q. Are you familiar with the Henry Shepherd place?
A. Yes sir.
Q. How far is that from Groveland, proper?
A. Somewhere in the neighborhood of 2% or 3 miles.
Q. What were the improvements on the place?
A. There was a house, kind of a little smoke house, and

garage shelter with no sides except on the ends.
Q. Any farm?
A. There was a little piece of ground cleared up back

there. I was called down there one time about some corn
that had been eaten with cows, and evidently hadn’t ferti
lized the corn and it was about that high and yellow and
had little nubbins about that big around and about that long
once in a while, here and there. Not a very good stand
of it.
[fol. 383] Q. How much land was under cultivation?

A. I don’t just recall the exact amount but it was a
small plot of ground. I would say 3 to 5 acres, maybe.

Q. Do you know what Henry Shepherd did?
A. He worked somewhere in Clermont, I understand.

Cooked or something for a bar over there.
Q. Price’s place?
A. Yes sir.
Q. He was not a farmer?
A. No sir. He was not a farmer. He had about a dozen

chickens.
Mr. Hunter: You may inquire.

197

Recross examination.

By Mr. Akerman:
Q. What’s down there now!
A. There’s this barn.—Not a barn, well, it is a shelter.

And this smoke house. The house is not there.
Q. What happened to the house?
A. The house was burned.
Q. When?
A. I ’ll have to stop and think of the day. It was Monday

night, after the 16th.
Q. Do you know who burned it?
A. No sir. I do not know.
Q. Did you investigate to find out?
A. Yes sir.
Q. Are you now investigating?
A. Well not right now. But I will further investigate it

if I have anything further to work on. If you have any
thing I ’ll be glad to welcome it.
[fol. 384] Q. Were you down there at the time it was j:!
burned.

A. I went by there while it was burning. Yes sir. But / I
at the time I got there, the spectators were there, so many / jj
till I couldn’t even get any tire prints or footprints or any- j
thing. There must have been a hundred people milling i
around there at the time I come there. Because soon as
the fire lit up people begin to swarm there from every
direction.

Mr. Akerman: No further questions.

Redirect examination.
By Mr. Hunter:

Q. Sheriff, there was another house burned down near
that place, wasn’t it? Two of them?

A. Yes sir. There was two more across the road from
there.

Q. Do you know whose house that was?
A. It was George Valaree’s.
Q. What business is he in?
A. H e’s a crystal gazer. He would tell your fortune and

tell what number is going to fall on Cuba. He didn’t deal
in the Cuba numbers like I have heard about, but he would
tell you the number if you would pay him the price.

198

Q. What kind of a clientele did he have!
A. He had both white and colored, that didn’t have any

better sense than to listen to that kind of stuff.
ffol. 385] Mr. Hunter: That’s all.

Eecross examination.

By Mr. Akerman:
Q. He wasn’t a Boleta?
A. He didn’t sell. He would tell you what number was

going to fall. That’s the information I got. He may have
sold, but I don’t believe he did.

Q. There is some antipathy toward boleta peddlers down
there?

A. There is everywhere, I guess.
Q. Tim Singleton a peddler?
A. He has been.
Q. Any antipathy towards him?
A. What do you mean, ‘ antipathy’ ?
Q. Ill feeling.
A. Well, there’s not particularly that I have heard about

except occasionally you hear. He runs a negro jook down
there and he might sell a little moonshine down there.
As far as I know, most of them do.

Mr. Akerman: No further questions.
Did you call Willie Padget?
The Sheriff: I called Willie Padget and he is not on the

premises.
Mr. Hunter: Is he under summons by defense?
Mr. Akerman: He is.
The Court: He was yesterday. He was on the stand,

here. At the conclusion of his testimony he was asked
[fol. 386] as to certain other information. And also told
that if he found any to let you know. And also asked to be
back here.

Mr. Akerman: Call Emmett Peter.
The Sheriff: I haven’t seen him this morning.
Mr. Akerman: You say you did talk to Mm on the phone?
The Sheriff: I talked to him on the phone after 11 o ’clock

last night and he was out of town at the time he contacted
the office yesterday and got the message just about 30
minutes before he contacted me. And told me that Mr.
Newton was out of town, would not be available but that

199

he would bring the information necessary up here and act
in Mr. Newton’s stead and bring the copies of the papers.

("Thereupon, the following witnesses w7ere called by
counsel for defense:

B. M. Newton, John Doe, agent of the FBI, subpoenaed
by the defendants on or about August 7th.

The Sheriff: I contacted Mr. Carson, in Miami by tele
phone and told him that we had a summons for John Doe
and Richard Roe, who had investigated this matter in
[fol. 387] Raiford?

(The name of Richard Roe was then called.)
Mr. Hunter: Who is Mr. Carson?
The Sheriff: Mr. Carson is the Chief Investigator of the

FBI in the State of Florida, in Miami.
Mr. Hunter: Did he tell you whether Richard Roe or

John Doe were working for him?
The Sheriff: He said they were not.
Mr. Akerman: If Your Honor please, those are the wit

nesses we would like to present. We attempted to get them
here by subpoena.

The Court: Well, did you post any per diem and mileage?
Mr. Akerman: No sir.
Mr. Buoy: I would like to inquire when the praecipe for

summons was issued.
The Sheriff: About noon, yesterday. I had them handed

[fol. 388] to me just before recess for lunch. They called
for their appearance here at 10 o ’clock, yesterday morning.

Mr. Hunter: You were unable to locate John Doe and
Richard Roe?

The Sheriff: Yes sir.
Mr. Hunter: Does Emett Peter live in this County?
The Sheriff: No sir. He lives in Hillsboro County.

Q. What information did you find out about this other
fellow? What was his name?—Newton.

A. He was out of town and would not be available but
Mr. Peter agreed to bring the necessary information and
be here this morning and he is evidently on his way here
because I know his intentions were good.

Mr. Hunter: Do you have any other witnesses?
Mr. Akerman: No other witnesses.

200

The Court: Mr. Wood reports that Mr. Peter called at
10:30 and said he was having car trouble and was leaving
Tampa at that time. That would put him here about 12:30,
maybe a little more. I don’t think he can make it any
quicker than that, the way he drives usually.
[fol. 389] We will adjourn this hearing until 1 o ’clock, if
there is no objection.

The Sheriff: Judge, while I ’m on the stand, I would like
to make a statement I forgot about a while ago about this
George Valeree.

Mr. Hunter: OK. Go ahead.
The Sheriff: There was quite a resentment against

George Valaree among the colored people as well as the
whites in Groveland area. He had them all believe he could
cast a spell over them and had them worried and of course
the white people didn’t — him worrying the help and didn’t
like anybody like that and you’ll find that there is about
as much resentment among the colored people there as well
as the whites against George Valaree. And when he left
here, he called mack one of the citizens in Groveland and
told them that he had left.

Mr. Akerman: Hid you hear the call?
The Sheriff: It was delivered to me to investigate.

By Mr. Akerman:

Q. He didn’t call you?
[fol. 390] A. I had information that he left a little girl
there, 7 years old, in one of those houses. The highway
patrol and city policeman and one of my deputies made a
trip out there and searched the houses. They wanted the
child put on the bus and sent to them. They searched the
houses and searched the outbuildings and searched the
woods surrounding the houses for this kid, thinking that
she had wandered into the woods. And on several occa
sions, the patrol car went back out there and shined lights
around, looking for this child and this was when there
was no crowds in that vicinity that night. The crowd, at
that time was all in Mascotte. This is merely my opinion,
but it has been working on my mind in the back of my mind,
and I am just still believing that there is some subversive
activity.

Mr. Akerman: Object to any opinion on the part of this,
witness.

201

The Court: Objection sustained.
The Sheriff: I ’ll still welcome any information you find

as to who burned the houses.
(At this point, the Court took a recess until 1 :30 PM, at

which time, the following proceedings were had:)

Mr. Akerman: Call Mr. Peters.
(The name of Emmett Peter was called by the Sheriff.)

[fol. 391] (The Sheriff announced the witness called not
present.)

Mr. Akerman: Willie Padget!
(Whereupon the name was called by the Sheriff and

announced not present.)
Mr. Buoy: John Doe and Richard Roe.
(Whereupon, the names were called by the Sheriff and

announced not present.)
Mr. Akerman: What is the pleasure of the Court!
The Court: Defendants’ additional witnesses having-

been called and not appearing to be present; no motion
having been made to the contrary, hearing on the motions
now under consideration will be closed.

Mr. Akerman: Does the Court desire argument on the
motions ?

The Court: You may argue if you like.
Mr. Akerman: Pleasure of the Court. We have some

authorities that we’ll present if the Court wants them.
The Court: Well if you have any authorities, I would like

to have your references to them.
[fol. 392] Do you gentlemen want to argue!

Mr. Hunter: I don’t.
(Whereupon, counsel then argued the motions to the

Court.)
The Court: Both the State and the defendants having-

give- the Court certain authorities that they wish con
sidered, we will recess Court until 3 o ’clock, at which time
I hope to be in a position to announce a ruling on the mo- /
tions as presented.

(The Court then stood at recess until 3 o ’clock PM, at
which time, the following proceedings were had.)

202

Mr. Akerman: If the Court please, before announcing
your decision, Mr. Peter, the witness who was absent when
called, is now present. We would like to reopen the case
for the purpose of introducing the testimony by him, and
state at this time, in an effort to expedite the case, if we are
allowed to reopen, we’ll only prove the circulation figures
and offer the papers of the Tampa Tribune. It will only
take a short period of time.

The Court: The request is granted.

Mr. E m m ett B. P eter, b e in g first duly sw orn, testified as
follows:

Direct examination.

By Mr. Akerman:
[fol. 393] Q. State your name, please, sir?

A. Emmett B. Peter, Jr.
Q. Are you connected with the Tampa Tribune?
A. Yes sir.
Q. A newspaper published in Tampa, Hillsboro County,

Florida ?
A. That’s correct.
Q. Do you have the circulation figures of the Tampa

Tribune in Lake County?
A. I do.
Q. Give us those figures, please, sir?

| A. Our daily circulation for July was 1,667 copies on
weekdays, and 1,826 copies on Sunday.

Q. Do you have with you the papers from July 15th until
today.

A. I do.
Mr. Akerman: Defendants offer in evidence as a group,

exhibit, the articles appearing in those papers pertaining
to this trial.

The Court: No objection?
Mr. Hunter: No sir.
Mr. Buoy: Do you want the same ruling?

By the Court:
Q. Do you want those papers back?
A. I would like those back.

[fol. 394] The Court : That will be admitted under the
same ruling.

Mr. Hunter: I would like to have this reopened again for
just one purpose, to get into the record a circular signed
by the NAACP, 20 West 40th Street, New York 18, New
York, and circulated in this county, a statement in refer
ence to this case which I think is material.

(Whereupon, the extract was read by counsel) (Head
ings)

“ Violence Flares in Groveland. Automobiles from
Georgia, Alabama, and neighboring Florida Counties
move surreptitiously into the area.”

Mr. Hunter: I would like to introduce that as part of
this record.

Mr. Akerman: No objection.

R uling on A pplication for R emoval

The Court: We will take up, first, the application for
removal of cause.

Being a regular subscriber to four daily papers that are
circulated in Lake County and having access to practically
all the county papers, I am thoroughly familiar with the
handling of this matter by the Press and was relieved of
the necessity of perusing all the various newspaper items
that have been introduced. The motion for removal of
[fob 395] cause does not comply with what I understand the
requirements of such motions to be in the laws of Florida,
but the State saw fit to join issue on the relevant portions
of the application.

A great deal of time has been spent in the introduction
in evidence of certain newspaper articles. Very little evi
dence of any other nature has been introduced and nothing
has been introduced to show the slightest necessity for the
removal of this cause to another county. So far as the
defendants are concerned, no evidence has been introduced
to support their allegations of prejudice, of violence, or
threatened violence and it is ordered that the motion for
removal of cause be and the same is denied.

R u lin g on M otion for Continuance

The motion for continuance likewise does not meet the
requirements. It states on its face no cause for continu-

203

204

ance. But the State treated it as it did the motion for re
moval of cause and it was agreed that the testimony taken
should be applicable and considered under both motions.
One of the attorneys of record in this case has been con
nected with it in one capacity or another, according to his
statements, since the 31st day of July. And, according to
his statements made a sufficient investigation to convince
him of the absolute innocence of the defendants. And I
can’t imagine a lawyer coming to that conclusion without
making a pretty thorough investigation. Enough time has
been spent on motions to have thoroughly prepared this
or most any other case and there is no showing of any wit
nesses desired or any testimony that’s desired that can’t
be obtained.

The motion nor the evidence meet the requirement of
the rule.
[fol. 396] It is therefore ordered that the motion for con
tinuance be and the same is denied.

Trial is set, I believe, 10 o ’clock, tomorrow morning.
You of course have your exceptions to those rulings.
(The Court then stood at recess until 10 o ’clock AM, Sep

tember 1st, 1949.)
rfol. 397] (The Court opened at 10 AM, September 1,
1949.)

(State announced ready for trial)
The Court: What says the defendant?
Mr. Akerman: Not ready, if Your Honor please.—Do

you mean all three cases?
Mr. Hunter: There’s only one case.
Mr. Akerman: I know, but all three defendants.
At this time, the defendants wish to file their challenge to

the panel.
The Court: Go ahead.
(Whereupon, the instrument was read aloud by counsel.)
(During the course of the reading the following oc

curred :)
Mr. Hunter: Just a minute, Your Honor, the defendants

are not in the Courtroom.
(Whereupon, the proceedings were halted until the de

fendants were brought into Court, at which time, the Court
proceeded as follows.)

205

[fol. 398] The Court: You say you have a motion to pre
sent in behalf of the defendants ?

Mr. Akerman: Yes sir.
The Court: Proceed.

(Whereupon Challenge to the Panel was read aloud by
Counsel.)

Mr. Akerman: And that is sworn to by the defendants.
Mr. Hunter: To this challenge the State denies each

and every material allegation therein contained and we
move and request the Court to permit the use of the evi
dence heretofore taken on other motions in this cause to
be used and applied to this particular motion.

Mr. Akerman: We join in the request of the State’s at
torney that the evidence heretofore taken in connection with
other motions be considered as evidence in connection with
this motion.

The Court: The evidence as taken before the Court with
reference to other motions interposed by the defendants,
i.e., motions for change of venue and motions for continu
ance, will be taken and considered as evidence applicable
to this motion.
[fol. 399] And this motion is denied.

Mr. Hunter: Your Honor, I would now like to state that
the State will be represented by the State Attorney, J. W.
Hunter, Assistant State Attorney, A. B. Buoy, and Mr.
W. B. Hunter. Mr. Hunter was sworn my assistant in the
hearing of these motions. If it is necessary for him to be
re-sworn in this case, I would like to have that done at the
present time.

Mr. Akerman: If the Court please, the defendants were
present when Mr. Hunter was sworn in connection with the
motions and it is our belief that is the requirement of the
law and if it does not, we waive any objection to Mr.
Walter Hunter being assistant to the State Attorney.

Mr. Hunter: The State now inquires who represents the
defendants.

Mr. Akerman: The defendants in this trial are repre
sented by Alex Akerman, Jr., Joseph E. Price, Franklin
Williams, upon special permission given by this Court as
the said attorney is not a member of the Bar of Florida,
and Horace E. Hill, a member of the Bar of the State of
Florida.

206

Mr. Hunter: Let me interpose there, the State is willing
that the same permission be granted to W. D. Hunter in the
preparation and trial of the motions apply to Williams in
the trial of this case.

The Court: So ordered.

[fol. 400] R en ew al of M otion fob C ontinuance

Mr. Akerman: If the Court please, at this time, the
defendants, Charles Greenlee, Samuel Shepherd, and Walter
Irvin move the Court for a continuance in this case upon
all of the grounds heretofore set out in their motion for
continuance and amendment thereto and request that the
same be considered as a part of this motion and upon the
further ground that said defendants’ counsel have, since
the employment of said defendants’ counsel, Alex Aker
man, Jr., been busily engaged in the preparation of motions
and hearings on motions in this case to the extent that they
have not had time to prepare for the defense of this trial
upon its actual trial and are not ready to proceed to trial.

Mr. Hunter: The State opposes that motion. The same
questions were raised in the motions for continuance in
this Court and we ask that the evidence taken heretofore
on those motions apply to this particular motion and that
the motion be denied.

The Court: The same questions were presented by the
written motion for comtinuance that was denied by the
Court on yesterday and the Court now denies the renewal
of said motion and the amendment thereto.

Mr. Hunter: We are ready to proceed in selecting the
jury, Your Honor.
[fol. 401] Mr. Akerman: Defense has no further motions
at this time and if required to go to trial, we will proceed.

The Court: It is the order of the Court that the trial do
now proceed.

Mr. Hunter: Now, Your Honor, I would like to ask—I
don’t know whether it ’s been done or not—that the record
show that during these entire proceedings the defendants
and their counsel are present.

The Court: Let the record so show, Mr. Reporter.
(Whereupon, the names of Arthur Polk, T. K. Bennett,

Gordon Richardson, were called by the Clerk as jurymen.)
The Court: These gentlemen were not in the Courtroom

the other morning when the panel was qualified in general.

Are there any other members of that jury that were not
here when the jury was qualified Monday morning!

I think these are the only three.
(Whereupon, the said three men were sworn and quali

fied on voir dire.)
Mr. Hunter: The State is ready.

[fol. 402] The Court: What do you say, Mr. Akerman?
Mr. Akerman: Proceed.
(Whereupon, the following jurors were called to the

box:)
J. P. Driver, Gilbert S. Crow, Ralph Burns, 0. G. Cal

houn, B. K. Fergeson, J. E. Dykes, Edward A. Wineman,
Troy R. Beasley, Reed Holinger, Bernard Griffis, B. B.
Green, Andrew Postella.

Mr. Hunter: Your Honor, I would like to ask permission
to have Mrs. Blackman, who is a State employed stenog
rapher in my office, sit with me during the empaneling* of
the jury.

The Court: Be no objection to that.
Mr. Akerman; No objection, Your Honor.
Mr. Hunter: Gentlemen, as a body, this is a case of the

State of Florida vs. Samuel Shepherd, Walter L. Irvin,
Charles Greenlee, and in the indictment, Ernest R. Thomas,
[fol. 403] Ernest R. Thomas is now deceased. And the
defendants, Shepherd, Irvin, and Greenlee, are placed on
trial. They are charged with raping* a woman by the
name of Norma Padget, who lives in the south end of this
county, Bay Lake, near Mascotte.

What is your name!
A. B. B. Green.

By Mr. Hunter:
Q. Where do you live, Mr. Green!
A. Tavares.
Q. How long have you lived here!
A. 35 years.
Q. What business or profession are you in!
A. Citrus grower.
Q. Citrus grower!
A. That’s right.
Q. You have heard the statement of this case. Have

207

208

you heard any of the facts of circumstances in connection
with the case discussed?

A. I have not.
Q. Have you read about the case in the newspapers?
A. Yes. I read about it in the paper.
Q. Ho you know anything about it? What evidence will

be produced here, today?
A. I do not.
Q. Did the reading of these newspaper articles cause you

to form or express an opinion as to the guilt or innocence
of these particular defendants prior to hearing the evi
dence in the case?
[fol. 404] A. Not at all.

Q. Do you feel that you could try this case fairly and
impartially between the State or Florida and those men?

A. Yes sir.
Q. Have you any such prejudice against the colored race

or against these defendants that would, in any way, hamper
you in the trial of this case and give them a fair trial?

A. Not at all.
Q. What is your name, sir?
A. Reed Holinger.
Q. Where do you live, Mr. Hollinger?
A. Paisley.
Q. What is your business?
A. Farming. Have a little citrus.
Q. Are you a citrus grower and a farmer?
A. Yes.
Q. Now what part of this county is Paisley?
A. I guess you would call it the northern end. Between

Umatilla and Deland.
Q. You have heard the general statement of the charge

in this case read just a minute ago, did you not?
A. Yes sir.
Q. Do you know any of the facts or circumstances in con

nection with that case?
A. No sir.
Q. Have you ever heard the facts in the case discussed?
A. No sir. I don’t believe I have.
Q. Did you read about this matter in the newspaper?
A. Yes sir. I read a little of it in the papers.

[fol. 405] Q. Did you read enough of the actual facts in
the case to form or express an opinion as to whether or
not these particular defendants are guilty or innocent?

209

A. (Indicating no by bead.)
Q. Do you have any prejudice against the colored race

which would embarrass you in any way in rendering a
verdict of guilty or not guilty in this case after hearing the
facts ?

A. None, whatsoever.
Q. Do you feel that you could give these defendants a fair

and impartial trial?
A. I do.
Q. And you will do that if you are chosen as a juror?
A. Yes sir.
Q. What is your name, sir?
A. Roy Beasley.
Q. Mr. Beasley, where do you live?
A. Mr. Dora.
Q. What’s your business?
A. Grocery.
Q. Mr. Hollinger, how long have you been in this county ?
A. Right around 10 or 11 years.
Q. Where are you from?
A. Born in the corner of Marion County.
Q. You are a native Floridian?
A. Yes sir.
Q. Where are you from, Mr. Beasley?
A. Mt. Dora.
Q. How long have you lived there?
A. About 20 years.
Q. What kind of business did you say you were in?
A. Grocer.

[fol. 406] Q. You heard the statement of this case?
A. Yes sir.
Q. Have you ever heard the facts in this case discussed?
A. Well I wouldn’t say they were facts. I read the

papers.
Q. Don’t know whether they were facts or not?
A. No sir.
Q. After hearing these facts or reading these newspaper

reports,—it ’s common now that all intelligent men now read
the newspapers, isn’t it?

A. Well, most of them.
Q. Do you feel that what you read in the newspaper would

affect you in the least bit in the reception of the actual evi
dence in this case?

14—420

210

A. No sir. I don’t think it would.
Q. Do you have any fixed prejudice against the colored

race which would impair you in any degree in the trial
of these men because they are colored men?

A. No sir.
Q. If you are taken as a juror in this case, will you give

both sides, the State of Florida, and the defendants, a fair
and impartial trial on what you hear from the witness
stand, here?

A. Yes sir.
Q. What is your name, sir?
A. J. E. Dykes.
Q. Where do you live, Mr. Dykes?
A. I live about 6 miles from Umatilla.
Q. What do you do ?
A. Farming. Have a very small scale.
Q. You lived here a long time?
A. Yes sir.
Q. Have you ever heard the facts or circumstances in

connection with this case discussed?
A. No sir.
Q. You have read about it in the paperr, have you?
A. Yes.

[fol. 407] Did you form or express an opinion as to the
guilt or innocence of the defendants from those facts?

A. No sir.
Q. Could you totally disregard what you read? And

try this case on the sworn testimony that will be presented
here to you?

A. Yes.
Q. You will do that if you are taken as a juror?
A. Yes sir.
Q. Do you have any prejudice against the colored race

as a race that would embarrass you in any way in the trial
of this case?

A. No sir.
Q. You believe in giving a colored man the same fair

and impartial trial you would a white man, do you not?
A. Yes sir.
Q. What is your name, sir?
A. Calhoun.
Q. Where do you live, Mr. Calhoun?
A. Mt. Dora.
Q. How long have you lived down there?

211

A. 3 years.
Q. Where are yon from, originally?
A. South Carolina, originally.
Q. What business are you in?
A. Farmer.
Q. You have heard the statement of this ease. Have

you ever had any of the facts or circumstances, known to
be such, discussed in regard to this case?

A. I am just in the position of the other gentlemen. I
have read the papers. I have not heard anyone discuss it
who had any firsthand information.

Q. Could you after reading those papers, hear the sworn
[fol. 408] testimony in this case and give a fair and impar
tial verdict?

A. I feel that I could.
Q. Do you have any such prejudice or any prejudice

against the colored race that would in any way embarrass
you in the trial of this case any more than it would in a trial
of a white man?

A. None, whatsoever.
Q. I f taken as a juror will you give both sides a fair

and impartial trial?
A. Yes.
Q. From the evidence?
A. Yes sir.
Q. What is your name?
A. Driver.
Q. Where do you live, Mr. Driver?
A. Sorrento.
Q. How long have you lived out there?
A. About 5 years.
Q. What is your business or profession?
A. Machinist.
Q. Have you heard any of the actual facts in regard to

this case discussed?
A. No sir.
Q. Have you read about it in the newspapers?
A. I have.
Q. Could you, in your—is your mind in such condition

that you could hear the testimony and give a fair and
impartial verdict regardless of what you read in the news
papers?

A. Yes sir.

212

Q. Do you have any prejudice against the colored race
that in any way would embarrass you in the trial of this
case?

A. No sir.
[fol. 409] Q. If taken on a jury will you give both sides
a fair and impartial trial?

A. I will.
Q. From the evidence and the charge of the Court?
A. Yes.
Q. What is your name, sir?
A. Gilbert Crow.
Q. Where do you live?
A. About halfway between Umatilla and Eustis.
Q. Iiow long have you lived there?
A. 2 years.
Q. Have you heard any of the facts in regard to this

case discussed?
A. Not to know them as facts, I didn’t. I have heard it

discussed.
Q. You have not talked to any of the witnesses that you

know of?
A. No sir.
Q. Read the newspapers?
A. No sir.
Q. You didn’t read anything in the newspapers about it?
A. No. I heard it on the radio.
Q. Now would the fact that you heard this discussed,

heard it on the radio, in any way hinder you or embarrass
you in the reception of the sworn testimony in this case?

A. No.
Q. Do you have any such prejudice against the colored

race?
A. No.
Q. That would prevent you or embarrass you in giving

these men a fair and impartial trial?
A. No.

[fol. 410] Q. Certainly as a juror, you will do that, won’t
you?

A. Yes sir.
Q. What is your name, sir?
A. Ralph Burns.
Q. Where do you live?
A. Bay Lake.

213

Mr. Hunter: Now, for a moment, I would like a confer
ence with the attorneys for the defense here.

(Discussion out of hearing of the Reporter.)
Q. You say you live at Bay Lake?
A. That’s right.
Q. That’s where the Padgets live. Were you kin to

any of them?
A. Yes sir.
Mr. Hunter: Your Honor, by agreement, not because

either one of us want to reflect on Mr. Burns, but he was
right there in that community and, by agreement of counsel,
we would like for the Court to excuse Mr. Burns.

The Court: Is that the agreement ?
Mr. Akerman: Yes sir.
The Court: You are excused.

[ fo b 411] Mb. R oss H. B owen was called and sworn.

By Mr. Hunter:
Q. Mr. Bowen, where are you from?
A. Clermont.
Q. Mr. Bowen, you heard the statement of that case,

did you not?
A. Yes sir.
Q. Have you heard any of the actual facts or circum

stances known to be such discussed in this case?
A. No sir.
Q. Have you read articles about it in the newspapers?
A. Yes sir.
The Court: I ’ll ask you gentlemen of the jury to speak

up so that the Court Reporter can hear you and so counsel
for defense may hear you.

Q. Would what you heard about this case, what you
have read about the case, those things, have they caused
you to form or express a fixed opinion in this case before
hearing the evidence in the case?

A. No sir.
Q. Do you feel that you could try this case solely on

the evidence as given you here by the witnesses?

214

A. Yes sir.
Q. Do you have any fixed prejudice against the colored

race that would in any way embarrass you in the trial of
this case or cause you any trouble?

A. No sir.
Q. If you are taken as a juror in this case, would you

give both sides a fair and impartial trial on the evidence
[fol. 412] and the law?

A. Yes sir.
Q. What is your name, sir?
A. Fergeson.
Q. Where do you live, Mr. Fergeson.
A. Clermont.
Q. I ’ll ask you the same questions. Have you heard the

facts, circumstances, known to be the facts in this case, dis
cussed?

A. I haven’t heard the facts. I have read it in the
papers.

Q. Bead it in the papers?
A. Yes.
Q. Did you form or express any opinion, fixed opinion,

from what you read in the newspapers before hearing the
evidence in this case?

A. Yes sir.
Q. You have formed and expressed an opinion?
A. I haven’t expressed it.
Q. Beg pardon?
A. I haven’t expressed it. I have formed one.
Q. Don’t tell us what your opinion is. Is that opinion

formed from what you read in the newspapers?
A. Yes sir.
Q. And would that opinion which you have formed from

what you read in the newspapers, which is only a natural
thing for any person to form some kind of an opinion,
would that yield readily to the sworn testimony in this case?

A. No sir.
Q. It would not? You think you have already tried

these men and convicted them, have you?
A. I wouldn’t say that.

[fol. 413] Q. Do you feel like you could give them a fair
and impartial trial on the evidence you would hear here?

A. I think so.
Q. Well, do you know so?

215

A. Yes sir.
Q. It is only a natural thing for an intelligent man to

read the newspaper and he usually forms some sort of an
opinion about it, doesn’t he?

A. Bight.
Q. But those opinions, what you see in the newspapers

may not be true, may they not?
A. (Indicating* by head) Yes.
Q. Now what I want to ask you is, that you read this

in the newspapers, you just lay that aside? While we
are trying that case and try this case on the evidence you
hear from these witnesses?

A. Yes.
Q. You can do that?
A. Yes.
Q. Do you have any prejudice against the colored race?
A. No sir.
Q. That would prevent you from doing that?
A. No.
Q. If taken as a juror could you give both sides a fair

and impartial trial?
A. Yes sir.
Q. What is your name, sir?
A. Wineman.
Q. Where do you live?
A. Sorrento.
Q. Have you heard any of the facts and circumstances

in this case discussed?
A. Yes sir.

[fol. 414] Q. Have you read it in the newspapers?
A. No sir.
Q. Formed or expressed an opinion from what you read?
A. No sir.
Q. Do you have any prejudice toward the colored race?
A. No sir.
Q- If taken as a juror, would you give both sides a fair

and impartial trial?
Q. What is your name?
A. Griffis.
Q. Where do you live?
A. (Answer out of hearing of Reporter.)
Q. Do you know anything about this case?
A. Only what I see in the papers.

216

Q. Did you form or express an opinion from what you
saw in the papers?

A. No. (Indicated by head.)
Q. You have not?
Mr. Akerman: If the Court please, can we ask the jurors

to speak up? I t ’s very hard for us to hear. Because it ’s
going to mean repeating the same questions. If we can
catch it now, we won’t have to be asking the same questions
over again.

The Court: Speak out distinctly so the gentlemen can
hear you.

Q. Do you have any prejudice against the colored race?
A. No.
Q. Do you think you could give both sides a fair and

impartial trial?
A. Yes sir.
Q. What is your name?
A. Postella.

[fo l.415] Q. Where do you live?
A. (Answer out of hearing of the Reporter.)
Q. Have you heard any of the facts in this case discussed?
A. (Indicating by head) No.
Q. Have you read it in the newspapers ?
A q. Yes sir.
Q. Would what you read preclude you from hearing the

testimony in this case and forming a fair and impartial
verdict ?

A. Not a bit.
Q. I f taken as a juror, you would give both sides a fair

and impartial trial?
A. That’s right.
The Court: Mr. Hunter, you want to ask the jury------•
Mr. Hunter: Yes, I ’ll ask them that question now.

Just as well do it.

Q. Are you conscientiously opposed to the infliction of
capital punishment in cases where the law authorizes it?

Mr. Green: Am I opposed to it?

Q. Yes.
A. No sir.

217

Q. How about you?
A. (Hollinger) No sir.
Q. Are you conscientiously opposed to the infliction of

capital punishment in cases where the law authorizes it?
A. (Mr. Beasley) No sir. (Mr. Calhoun) No sir.

(All jurors replied in the negative.)

Mr. Hunter: Let the record so show that counsel found
they are not opposed to the infliction of capital punishment
where the law authorizes.

[fol. 416] By Mr. Akerman:

Q. Mr. Fergeson, you say you live in Clermont?
A. Yes sir.
Q. You say you have heard the case discussed?
A. Yes. And read it in the papers.
Q. Do you recall, not the issue, but what papers? Cler

mont paper?
A. Clermont paper. Orlando paper.
Q. And, from what you have read, you formed an opinion

as to the guilt or innocence if the defendants?
A. Yes.
Q. And you have that opinion, now?
A. Yes sir.
Q. The thing I am trying to get over is, I am not in any

of these questions, trying to ask you or in any way infer as
to whether it is either an opinion of guilt or innocence.
When I ask you these questions, if you will keep that in mind,
that that’s not what,—we have no right to inquire into
that, and I am not attempting to, inquire as to what your
opinion is. But I want to inquire about the nature of the
opinion. If you get what I mean?

You say you have that opinion at the present time?
A. Yes.
Q. You have served on juries before, have you, Mr.

Fergeson?
A. Yes sir.
Q. And, of course, you are familiar with how the trial

proceeds, how the evidence comes in in the case. And, you
[fol. 417] have heard the facts of the case discussed—I
mean you have read newspaper reports purporting to be

218

the facts in the case and, from that yon have formed an
opinion ?

A. Yes.
Mr. Akerman: The juror is challenged for cause.

By the Court:
Mr. Juror, you say that opinion is fixed in your mind?
A. Yes sir.
Q. And you couldn’t go into the jury box with your

mind free and open for the purpose of trying this case?
A. No sir.
The Court: Challenge sustained.
Mr. Bouy: No objection.

(Whereupon, the juror was excused.)

Me. E rnest T. B. G reen , b e in g called, w as sw orn and
entered the box.

By Mr. Hunter:
Q. Mr. Green, where do you live?
A. Mt. Dora.
Q. Are you any kin to this other Green that’s on this

panel?
A. Not that I know of.
Q. What do you do?
A. Mechanic.
Q. You work in Mt. Dora?
A. Yes sir.

[fob 418] Q. How long have you been there?
A. 26 years.
Q. You heard the statement of this case, did you not?
A. I have heard it. Yes.
Q. From what I read here in the indictment?
A. I heard that.
Q. And then you heard about the case?
A. Right in the paper. Is all I know.
Q. Have you ever talked to any person that purported to

know anything about the facts?
A. No sir.

219

Q. Mt. Dora is in the north part of the central part of
the county!

A. Easterly direction from here.
Q. And this trouble occurred in the far southwest corner

of the county!
A. So they say.
Q. You read about it in the newspaper?
A. Yes sir.
Q. From what you have read and heard, did you form or

express any fixed opinion about this case?
A. No sir.
Q. Could you try it from the evidence you hear from the

witnesses here!
A. Yes sir.
Q. Give both sides a fair and impartial trial?
A. Yes sir.
Q. Do you have any prejudice against the colored race?
A. No sir.
Q. Can you give those colored boys there the same fair

and impartial trial you would a white man, here ?
A. Yes sir.

[fol. 419] Q. Try their cases on the evidence?
A. Yes sir.
Q. And you would do that if you were taken as a juror?
A. (Indicating by head.) Yes.
Q. Are you conscientiously opposed to the infliction of

capital punishment in those cases where the law authorizes
it?

A. No sir.
Mr. Hunter: OK. You may inquire.

By Mr. Akerman:
Q. You are Air. B. B. Green. Is that right?
A. That’s right.
Q. I didn’t catch where you live.
A. Near Tavares.
Q. Do you know Norma Padget?
A. No sir.
Q. And, so far as you know, you are not kin to Norma

Padget by blood or marriage?
A. No sir.
Q. Do you know any of the defendants in the case, three

of them?

220

A. No sir.
Q. Know nothing of them at all?
A. No sir.
Q. Do you know a Howard Crowell?
A. Repeat that, please?
A. Howard Crowell?
A. No sir.
Q. Sam Dotto?
A. No sir.
Q. Harry McDonald?
A. No sir.
Q. Wesley W. Evans?
A. No sir.

[fol. 420] Q. Martha Anderson?
A. No sir.
Q. C. W. Story?
A. No.
Q. Gene Holly?
A. No.
Mr. Hunter: Colored men in the southern end of the

County?

A. No sir.

By Mr. Akerman:
Q. Hester Smith?
A. No sir.
Q. Tom Wilson?
A. No sir.
Q. Jeff Daniels?
A. No sir.
Q. Henry Singleton?
A. No sir.
Q. Lt. Angel?
A. No sir.
Mr. Akerman. Is he connected with the highway patrol?
Mr. Hunter: No. I think he’s connected with the Gaines

ville Police Force. Something like that.
Q. Ruby Lee Thomas?
A. No sir.
Q. G. T. Bass?
A. No sir.

221

Q. I have asked you about Norma Padget. Do you know
her husband, Willie Padget?

A. No sir.
Q. G. 8. Carroll?
A. No sir.
Q. Curtis Howard?
A. No sir.
Q. James L. Yates? I believe he is the deputy sheriff,

[fol. 421] A. Yes sir.
Q. How long have you known Mr. Yates?
A. Oh, it ’s been about 2 years, I guess. I have noticed

him on the force here. That’s all. I know he’s a deputy.
Q. You know he is a deputy sheriff?
A. Yes sir.
Q. Mr. Yates, is listed as one of the State witnesses in

this case. Of course, at the present time, neither you nor
I have any idea of what his testimony is going to be and
we can only look in and see. But assuming for example that
Mr. Yates testified in this case and one of the defendants
or one of the defendants’ witnesses testified and their
statements were in conflict; in other words, Mr. Yates
testified as to certain facts, one of the defendants’ witnesses,
or even one of the State witnesses, might testify as to
something that’s in conflict. Now you know Mr. Yates and
you know he’s a law enforcement officer in Lake County,
Florida. Would your knowledge of Mr. Yates and of his
official position lead you to give more credence to what Mr.
Yates would say that what some other witness that you
didn’t know, who testified in conflict with the State?

A. It would not.

Mr. Hunter: I think, if your Honor please, that’s an
unfair question anyway. Trying to get a juror now to state
how he would pass on the credibility of witnesses. Now
[fol. 422] that’s a question that’s entirely for the juror to
determine, himself, after he hears the testimony. No
hypothetical question can be asked not could be answered
by the juror.

The Court: What he’s getting at, would the fact he is
acquainted with him cause him to believe him any quicker
than he would the other.

Mr. Hunter: If that’s what he intended to say, it was a
long way to get around it.

222

Mr. Akerman: Can I have the question read and see if
it is proper?

The Court: Read the question.
(Whereupon, the question was read back by the Reporter.)
The Court: I think that the fact that he knows Mr.

Yates could cause him to give greater weight to his testi
mony would be proper.

Mr. Hunter: I have no objection to the question as pro
pounded by the Court.

By Mr. Akerman:
Q. Ho you know Leroy Campbell?
A. I don’t think so. No sir.

[fol. 423] Q. Do you know Sgt. Bill Norris of the High
way Patrol?

A. I know the one in Tavares. I don’t know his name
but I know him when I see him.

Q. Do you know a T. J. Baggs of Madison, Florida?
A. No sir.
Q. Dr. Julian Durant of Madison, Florida?
A. No sir.
Q. James Shepherd, whose brother is one of these de

fendants?
A. No sir.
Q. Luther Thomas?
A. No sir.
Q. Charlie Staats?
A. No sir. I don’t know that name.
Q. How long did you say you have lived in Lake County,

Florida?
A. About 25 years.
Q. Do you have a family?
A. Yes sir. Wife and one son.
Q. How old is your son?
A. 30 years old.
Q. Now as you see in this case, the defendants have, as

some of their counsel, two negro attorneys. Under the rule
of the Court, one of them is a member of the Bar of Florida
and another one is not a member of the Bar of Florida
but has been admitted for the purpose of this case. These
counsel will participate in this case. Do you think that—
what effect, if any, would it have on you for a negro counsel
to participate in the case and cross examine?

223

A. Well if it ’s under the direction of the court, it ’s OK.
[fol. 424] Q. And you wouldn’t get any more mad with
them for vigorously cross examining a witness than you
would with white counsel ?

A. I don’t think so.
Q. The jury has a perfect right to have its feelings

toward counsel and the way they conduct themselves in the
case. But you, would the fact that they are colored and
might be cross examining a white witness, that wouldn’t
affect you any more than if a white attorney was cross
examining them?

A. If it was questions pertaining to the Court and this
case, OK.

Q. In other words, as far as you are concerned, it would
make no difference whether the attorney was white or
colored?

A. No.
Q. And you feel the same way about the defendants?

I believe you answered Mr. Hunter to that effect, that you
have no prejudice towards the negro race and the mere fact
that a negro is charged with crime has no difference with
you than if it was a white person charged?

A. No. I can say that I worked with them for years and
worked them, and I have had no trouble. Like I stated once
before.

Q. Now, you stated that you had read something as to
what was alleged to be the facts in the newspapers?

A. Yes. At different times I would read parts in the
paper. Especially when it first happened.

Q. Did you form any opinion from what you read in
there as to the guilt or innocence of these accused?

A. I have not.
[fol. 425] Q. Now, it may be in the trial of this case that
what you read in the newspaper will develop to be the
evidence in this case. Or it may well be that the evidence
you receive from the witness stand will be entirely foreign
to what you read in the newspapers. Or you may have read
something in the papers that will not come before you as
evidence." Now I am asking you this question. Do you
think that you can give, sit on this jury and give the State
of Florida on one hand, and the three negro defendants
over there on the other hand, the same fair and impartial
trial that you would have if you had not heard anything
about this case before you came in the courtroom?

224

A. That’s right.
Q. Are you Mr. Hollinger?
A. That’s right.
Q. Where did you say you lived?
A. In a little settlement called Paisley, between Umatilla

and Deland.
Q. That’s over in the eastern end of the county?
A. Yes. Northeast.
Q. Excuse me just a second.— One more question I

wanted to ask Mr. Green and I ’ll be right back to you. You
are not represented by Mr. Hunter or any of the State’s
counsel are you?

A. No sir. I have never needed a lawyer so far.
Q. You are not now represented by Mr. Hunter or any

of the State’s counsel or any of the defense now, are you,
Mr. Hollinger?

A. No sir.
Q. Have you ever been?
A. No sir.
Q. Do you know any of the counsel in this case?
A. I know Mr. Hunter. Yes sir.

[fol. 426] Q. And the fact that you know Mr. Hunter,
would that in any way embarrass you in the trial of this
case?

A. No sir.
Q. In other words, you could go out and decide between

the State of Florida and the defendants and not pay any
attention to Mr. Hunter or me or any of the rest of these
lawyers up here, couldn’t you?

A. Yes sir. I would go by the witnesses.
Q. Do you have a family?
A. Yes sir.
Q. What does your family consist of?
A. Wife and one child and I have a boy there, considered

one of the family. He was a homeless boy. We took him
in. Just keeping him.

Q. Foster son?
A. Yes sir.
Q. How old is he?
A. 13.
Q. How old is your child?
A. 15.
Q. Boy or girl?
A. Girl.

225

Q. Now did you read or hear anything purporting or
alleged to be the facts in this case?

A. I have read the papers, yes sir. But far as hearing
anything, I am out where I don’t hear much.

Q. Mr. Hollinger, what papers did you read?
A. Well, I guess the Eustis Lake Region and the Times

Union. They are the papers I take.
Q. You take the Eustis Lake Region and the Times

Union?
A. Yes sir.
Q. Did you, from what you read in those papers, did you

form any opinion as to the guilt or innocence of the defend
ants in this case ?

A. No sir. I have an open mind.
[fol. 427] Q. And you believe that if accepted on this
jury you could go into the jury room and be the same fair
and impartial juror as if you had never heard of this case
before until you came here this morning?

A. That’s right.
Q. You heard me explain to Mr. Green about the two of

the defense counsel being negroes in the case?
A. Yes sir.
Q. Would that effect you in any way?
A. No sir. I don’t think it would.
Q. And you wouldn’t get madder at them than you would

at any other lawyer for cross examining a witness, what
you might consider too vigorously or anything like that?

A. No sir.
Q. Do you feel that it is perfectly all right, lawful and

right, that if they are qualified under the law to serve as
lawyers, that they can come into this courtroom and act
just as any other defense counsel?

A. Yes sir.
Q. Do you know Norma Padget?
A. No sir. Never heard of her.
Q. Down in the Bay Lake area. Then as far as you

know, you are not related to her by blood or marriage?
A. No sir.
Q. Do you know any of the defendants, Charlie Green

lee, in the middle, there, Samuel Shepherd and Walter Lee
Irvin ?

A. Never heard tell of them before.
15-420

226

[fol. 428] Q. Do you know anything about the family of
Irvin and Shepherd? Who live down there?

A. No sir. Never heard tell of them.
Q. Do you know Howard Crowell?
A. No sir.
Q. Sam Dotto?
A. No sir.
Q. Harry McDonald?
A. No sir.
Q. Wesley W. Evans?
A. No sir.
Q. Martha Anderson?
A. No sir.
Q. Are you acquainted with any of the negroes down in

the Groveland area?
A. Not a one.
Q. Skip those, then. Do you know Curtis Howard?
A. No sir.
Q. I believe he operates a filling station in Leesburg.
A. No sir.
Q. Do you know Mr. Yates, the deputy sheriff?
A. No sir. I don’t know him.
Q. Leroy Campbell?
A q. Not that I know of.
Q. And, should it develop that in connection with the

introduction of the testimony that a witness for either side
should be presented, either the State or the defense, that
you knew, you wouldn’t let any mere knowledge of this
person give you any—lend any more credence either in
fairness of his testimony or against it, would you?

A. No sir. I would try and be fair minded.
Q. Do you know of any reason why, if accepted on this

[fol. 429] jury, that you cannot sit there and calmly and care
fully weigh the evidence as given to you by the Juege—I
mean by the witnesses and the law given to you by the
Judge, and base your decision solely upon that evidence
and law?

A. No sir. No reason at all.
Mr. Akerman: Thank you, sir.
Q. Mr. Beasley, yon live in Mt. Dora, don’t you?
A. Yes sir.
Q. Stated you were a store keeper over in Mt. Dora,

did you?

227

A. Yes sir.
Q. How long have you lived there 1
A. Oh, about 20 years, I guess.
Q. Spent most of your life, then, in Lake County,

Florida!
A. Yes sir.
Q. Have you heard anything- concerning this ease!
A. Just in the newspaper. That’s all.
Q. You didn’t hear it discussed; all you know about it is

what you have read in the newspapers, which were alleged
to be the facts?

A. Yes sir.
Q. What newspapers did you read?
A. Orlando. Tampa. Mr. Dora Topic.
Q. Orlando Sentinel?
A. Yes sir.
Q. How about the Orlando Star? Do you take that?
A. No sir.

[fol. 430] Q. Mt. Dora Topic?
A. Yes sir.
Q. Tampa Tribu-e?
A. Yes sir.
Q. You subscribe to all three of those papers and get the

daily issues?
A. No sir. I read them.
Q. From what you read, did you form any opinion as to

the guilt or innocense of Charles Greenlee, Samuel Shep
herd or Walter Irvin?

A. No sir. I haven’t.
Q. And you believe that, if accepted on this jury that

you can dismiss from your mind anything you have read
and base your verdict solely on the evidence as given in
the case?

A. I think so.
Q. And if you had read something that didn’t come out

int he evidence you wouldn’t, that wouldn’t conscient-ously
influence you at all?

A. I don’t think it would. No sir.
Q. How do you feel about negro attorneys participating

in the trial of a case?
A. Well, it ’s all right.
Q. Think they have got just as much right to be attorneys

as anybody; don’t feel any stronger about them than you

228

would any other attorney if they engaged in a vigorous
cross examination of the witnesses?

A. No. I don’t think I would.
Q. Now, Mr. Beasley, have you ever served on a jury

before?
A. No sir.
Q. I believe that the Court will instruct you that merely

because a man is charged with a crime and brought to
trial therefor is no evidence of guilt. But that, on the
other hand, every person is presumed to be innocent and
that presumption remains with him throughout the trial
unless and until overcome by competent- evidence convinc-
[fol. 431] ing you beyond a reasonable doubt of the defend
ant’s guilt.

Do you think you would have any trouble applying that
presumption in this case?

A. Well no. I don’t think I would.
Q. In other words, you, if accepted on this jury now,

there would then be a presumption which you would follow
that Charles Greenlee, Samuel Shepherd and Walter Irvin
are innocent of this crime. Is that correct?

A. Well I don’t know I could say that, no.
Q. Well, could you explain? I mean I don’t know of any

way I could reword my question.
A. Well I don’t know as I could consider them innocent.

Just right now. I don’t know. Right at the present time I
guess I should.

Mr. Akerman: Challenge the juror for cause.
The Court: Challenge sustained.

Mr. Hunter. I don’t know whether the juror, Your Honor,
understands the question.

The Court. He answered it as though he did.

By Mr. Hunter:
Q. Did you understand it?
A. Yes sir.
Q. You understand the law to be that every defendant

is presumed to be innocent?
A. Unless he’s proven otherwise. Yes sir.

[fol. 432] Q. Now with that in view, could you meet that
requirement of the law?

A q. I guess I could. Yes sir.

229

Q. Well, do you know whether you could or not?
A. Yes sir.
Q. Will you do that?
A. Yes sir.
Q. You will presume them to be innocent until the State

proves beyond a reasonable doubt that they are guilty?
A q. Yes sir.
Q. You won’t bring that verdict in against them until

the State has proved beyond and to the exclusion of every
reasonable doubt that they are guilty.

Mr. Hunter: I think, Your Honor, the juror is qualified.
The Court: Let him be excused.

Mr. George P. L ovell, was called to the box and sworn.

By Mr. Hunter:
Q. What is your name?
A. G. P. Lovell.
Q. Where do you live, Mr. Lovell?
A. Leesburg.
Q. How long have you lived over there?
A. About 50 years.
Q. You heard the statement of this case, haven’t you?
A. Yes sir.

[fol. 433] Q. Do you know anything about the facts or
circumstances in connection with it?

A. I do not.
Q. Have you read anything about it?
A. I read it in the papers. I haven’t formed any opinion.
Q. Do you have any prejudice against the colored race?
A. I have not.
Q. Will you follow the law if it is given you by the

Court that these defendants are presumed to be innocent
until proven by competent evidence beyond and to the ex
clusion of every reasonable doubt that they are guilty?

A. Yes sir.
Mr. Hunter: You may inquire.

By Mr. Akennan:
Q. Mr. Lovell, you said you lived in Leesburg?
A. Bight.

230

Q. About 60 years?
A. About 50. Leesburg. And 12 years in Tampa.
Q. What is your business over there, Mr. Lovell?
A. Accountant.
Q. Do you have a family?
A. Yes sir.
Q. What does your family consist of?
A. Two daughters and a son.
Q. Do you know Norma Padget?
A. I do not.
Q. Do you know the Tyson family down in the south end

of the Bay Lake area?
A. N o /

[fol. 434] Q. Then insofar as you know, you are not kin
to Norma Padget either by blood or marriage?

A. No sir.
Q. Do you know any of the defendants in this case,

Charles Greenlee, Samuel Shepherd, or Walter Irvin, seated
over there?

A. I do not.
Q. Do you know any of their families down in the Grove-

land area?
A. No.
Q. Could you hear this list of witnesses I read off asking

the other jurors, from where you were seated back there?
A. Yes sir.
Q. Do you know any of these witnesses?
A. No, I do not.
Q. And if it should develop in the trial of this case that

some witnesses would be placed on the stand, either for
the State or for the defense, you knew of his reputation,
that wouldn’t have you give either more or less credence
to their testimony than any other witness?

A. No. It would not.
Q. As I explained to the other jurors, two of the defense

counsel in this case are negro attorneys. Do you feel that
you can sit on this jury in which negro attorneys are par
ticipating and be no difference between them and any other
attorney?

A. No. It would not.
Q. Did you read or hear anything purporting to be the

facts of this case?
A. Other than what I have read in the newspapers,

231

[fol. 435] Q. What newspapers did you read?
A. Orlando Sentinal. Leesburg Commercial.
Q. From what you read, did you form an opinion of the

guilt or innocence of the defendants or either of them?
A. I have heard no evidence.
Q. And you feel that you can come into this Court and,

if selected on the jury, render a, just the same fair and
impartial trial that you would have rendered if you were
coming in and never heard anything about it until this
morning?

A. Yes.
Q. I believe you stated you were familiar with the rule

of law that a man was presumed to be innocent until found
guilty.

A. Yes sir.
Q. And I believe the Court will so instruct you in this

case. And that the mere charging and bringing a person
to trial is no evidence of their guilt, whatsoever, that they
come into this Courtroom clothed with the presumption of
innocence and that that presumption remains with them
throughout this trial unless and until overcome by compe
tent evidence convincing you beyond a reasonable doubt of
their innocence. Is that right?—Of their guilt.

A. That’s right.
Q. So then, so far as you are concerned, at the present

moment, you are willing to adopt a presumption that these
three defendants are innocent of this crime?

A. I am.
Q. And you will retain that presumption all the way

through unless and until the State gives you, from the wit
ness stand, evidence proving their guilt beyond a reason
able doubt?

A. That’s right.
[fol. 436] Q. You have served on juries before, haven’t
you?

A. Been sometime ago.
Q. Served on criminal juries, haven’t you?
A. Yes sir.
Q. And are familiar with the rule that if there is a rea

sonable doubt as to the guilt of the defendant, either from
the evidence as produced or from the lack of evidence, that
it is your duty to adopt that reasonable doubt and acquit
the defendant?

232

A. That’s right.
Q. And if you are accepted on this jury, will you do that?
A. I will.
Q. If there is any reasonable doubt in your mind at all

as to the guilt, either from what evidence has been pro
duced or from the failure to produce certain evidence, you
will then vote to acquit the defendants, or the defendant
about which you have that reasonable doubt?

A. I will.
Q. And if it is your opinion, after the conclusion of the

case that the defendants are innocent or if you have a
reasonable doubt as to their guilt, would you remain with
that opinion and continue to vote?

A. I would have to be convinced one way or the other.
Q. And would vote for a verdict of not guilty, irrespec

tive of what the other 11 men on the jury?
A. Yes.
Q. In other words, when you bring in the verdict, it is

going to be your verdict and not somebody else’s verdict?
A. That’s right.

[fol. 437] Q. I believe you stated you had no prejudice
against members of the colored race?

A. No.
Q. Do you feel that they are citizens under our Constitu

tion just like anybody else?
A. That’s right.
Q. That they are entitled to a fair and impartial trial

just like any other citizen in the United States of America?
You feel that?

A. Yes.
Q. And would require the same amount of evidence be

fore you would convict a member of the colored race that
you would require before you convicted a member of the
white race?

A. Yes sir.
Q. Now as to the particular crime of rape. Of course

every law abiding citizen has strong feelings against any
violation, violation of any law. But do you have any—as
compared to other crimes, do you have any stronger feel
ing that would in any way prejudice you because the de
fendants are charged with rape?

A. (No answer.)
Q. Mr. Dykes, you live over at Umatilla?

233

A. 6 miles east.
Q. How long have you lived in Lake County, Mr. Dykes?
A. Oh, about 68 years.
Q. You are not represented by Mr. Hunter or the other

State’s Attorney, are you?
A. No sir.
Q. Never been represented by any of the defense counsel?
A. No.

[fol. 438] Q. Do you know Norma Padget, who lives down
in the Bay Lake area?

A. No sir.
Q. Or the Tyson family down there?
A. No.
Q. And, so far as you know, you are not related by blood

or marriage?
A. No.
Q. Did you hear me read over the list of State witnesses

to the other jurors ?
A. Yes sir.
Q. Do you know any of them, Mr. Dykes?
A. Well, I knowT the deputy sheriff. Just know him and

know that he’s a deputy sheriff. I am not personally ac
quainted.

Q. And the fact that you know the deputy Sheriff, would
that cause you to give more or less credence to his testi
mony than it would to any other witness?

A. Would not.
Q. You have served on juries before, haven’t you, Mr.

Dykes?
A. Yes sir.
Q. Both criminal and civil?
A. Yes sir.
Q. And you are familiar with the rule of law which I

believe the Judge will instruct you at the conclusion of
this case, that merely because a person is charged with a
crime and brought to trial for it is not evidence at all of
his guilt of that crime. In fact, the law is to the other effect,
that every person is presumed to be innocent and that
presumption remains with the defendant throughout the
trial until and unless the State proves to you by competent
evidence, proved beyond a reasonable doubt, of their guilt,
that presumption of innocence remains with them. And,
do you feel that if accepted on this jury, that you would

234

have any trouble applying that presumption of innocence?
[fol. 439] In other words, if right now, Charles Greenlee,
Samuel Shepherd, and Walter Irvin, the three negroes over
there, are presumed to be innocent of this crime, and you
have no hesitancy in accepting that presumption?

A. No. No, I wouldn’t.
Q. And you would sit and, before you would make any

change of your opinion at all, you would wait and see
what the evidence of the State was and what evidence the
defense brought in?

A. Yes.
Q. And then you would make up your mind as to the

guilt or innocence of these defendants?
A. Yes I would.
Q. And you are of course familiar with the rule of law

that even though the preponderance of the evidence might
point to their guilt, if there was a reasonable doubt in your
mind as to their innocence, then under the law, you should
give the defendant, or defendants, the benefit of that rea
sonable doubt and vote to acquit him?

A. Yes.
Q. And you would do that, would you not, Mr. Dykes?
A. Yes sir.
Q. And if, after hearing all the evidence from the wit

ness stand, listening to the Charge of the Court, you are
of the opinion that the defendants or one of them" or two
of the defendants, are innocent, or, if you had a reasonable
doubt in your mind as to the guilt of all three of them, or
one or two of them, and if you had come to that opinion,
would you remain for that opinion regardless of the way
the other 11 jurors might feel about it?

A. Yes sir.
[fol. 440] Q. And would stay there right on that opinion
as long as you are of that opinion, and when the verdict
was returned it would be your verdict?

A. Yes.
Q. That you came to?
A. Yes sir.
Q. You heard me talking to the other jurors concerning

the fact that there are two Negro defense counsel in this
case. Would the fact that they are members of the negro
race in any way affect you in the trial of this case?

A. No.

235

Q. In the course of the trial, in examination or cross
examination of white witnesses, that wouldn’t in any way
embarrass you or prejudice you in the trial of the case?

A. No.
Q. Mr. Calhoun, are you from Mt. Dora?
A. Yes sir.
Q. How long have you lived down there!
A. 3 years.
Q. Do you have a family, Mr. Calhoun?
A. Yes.
Q. What does your family consist of?
A. Wife and three children.
Q. Girls or boys?
A. Two girls, one boy.
Q. Have you read or heard of anything concerning this

case?
A. I have read the papers. Daily.
Q. AVhat papers?
A. Orlando.
Q. You subscribe to that?
A. Yes.
Q. Did you read the daily reports of this case?
A. Yes.’
Q. From what you read, did you come to any opinion

as to the guilt or innocence of the defendants?
[fol. 441] A. No. I have not come to no fixed opinion.

Q. And from what you have read concerning this case,
do you feel that if accepted on the jury that you could
give these defendants the same fair and impartial trial
just as if you had come into the case this morning and
never heard anything further?

A. I think I could.
Q. Well now, Mr. Calhoun, you are the only person that

can tell us on that. I mean I know that any juror would
make a strong effort to do so. Anybody accepted on the
jury will make a strong effort to do so, but you are the
only person that knowTs your own state of feelings about
it. So you stated you think you could. Now?

A. I believe you asked me if I thought I could.
Q. You think you could?
A. I, yes, I think I could.

' Q. And it would have no effect on you. Do you know
Norma Padget, down in the Bay Lake area?

236

A. I don’t know any of the witnesses except possibly
the deputy. I think I know him.

Q. And yon wouldn’t lend any more credence or any
less credence to his?

A. No.
Q. You heard me explaining to the other jurors that two

of the defense counsel in this case are members of the
negro race ?

A. Yes.
Q. Would that in any way affect you?
A. Not at all. Be glad to see them do the work.
Q. Bo you know of any reason at all why you cannot

[fol. 442] serve on this jury and give a fair and impartial
trial in the case?

A. None at all.
Q. Mr. Driver, you live at Sorrento?
A. Yes.
Q. Do you have a family, Air. Driver?
A. Yes sir.
Q. What does that family consist of?
A. Boy and 5 girls.
Q. What is your business, Mr. Driver?
A. Machinist.
Q. There in Sorrento?
A. Pre-cooling Company.
Q. How long have you lived in Lake County?
A. This time, 5 years. 9 years once before.
Q. Are you now represented by Air. Hunter or any of

the other counsel here?
A. No.
Q. Do you know Norma Padget?
A. No, I don’t.
Q. Do you know the Tyson family down in the Bay Lake

area?
A. No sir.
Q. You heard me read the list of State’s witnesses. Do

you know any of them?
A. No.
Q. Have you ever served on a jury before?
A. Yes sir.
Q. Criminal?
A. Yes sir.
Q. Then you are familiar with the rule of lawT I believe

237

the Judge will instruct you, that merely because a person
is charged with crime and brought to trial for it is no evi
dence of their guilt. On the other hand, the law is to the
]fol. 443 [ contrary. That every person is presumed to
be innocent unless and until competent evidence is intro
duced proving their guilt beyond a reasonable doubt?
Would you have any trouble in applying that presumption?

A. Not at all.
Q. And then you feel that, is a presumption?
A. Right.
Q. Right now, that Charles Greenlee, Samuel Shepherd,

and Walter Irvin are innocent of this crime?
A. Until I hear the case tried.
Q. That’s right. And you have heard no evidence; just

the reading of the indictment?
A. No, sir.
Q. You think there is a presumption that they are inno

cent?
A. That’s right.
Q. And of course, you, having served on juries, are

familiar wTith the rule of law that even though the prepon
derance of the evidence should point to their guilt, if there
is any reasonable doubt of their guilt you should resolve
that doubt in favor of the defendant or defendants, and
vote to acquit them?

A. That’s right.
Q. And you would so do in this case?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. And that, after hearing the evidence and being in

structed in the law by the Judge, if you were of the opinion
that all the defendants, or one or two of them were innocent,
and/or there was a reasonable doubt in your mind about
[fol. 444] their guilt, you would then vote to acquit them?

A. Yes.
Q. And would so continue to do regardless of the vote or

feeling of the other 11 members of the jury?
A. That’s right.
Q. In other words when you brought your verdict in in

this case, it would be your verdict?
A. That’s right.
Q. How do you feel about the two negro defense attor

neys in this case ?
A. I t ’s all right.

238

Q. You think they have a perfect right to conduct them
selves just as you would expect any other attorney to do?

A, That’s right.
Q. And if necessary, to vigorously cross examine a white

witness? That they have got just as much right to do
that as any other attorney?

A. Yes.''
Q. Have you read or heard anything about this case?
A. Eead the Orlando paper.
Q. The Orlando paper. Is that the Sentinul?
A. Morning Sentinul.
Q. And the Mt. Dora Topic?
A. Yes.
Q. From what you have read, did you form any opinion

as to the guilt or innocence?
A. No, sir.
Q. And you feel that you could serve on this jury and

give the defendants the same fair and impartial trial as if
you had never read or heard anything about it before? In
other words, just come in fresh and heard nothing of it?

A. That’s right.
Q. You heard me read over the list of the State witnesses.

Do you know any of them?
A. No, sir.

[fol. 445] Q. Mr. Postella?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. You live at Mt. Dora?
A. That’s right.
Q. How long have you lived in Lake County, Florida?
A. 29 years.
Q. Are you represented by Mr. Hunter or any of the

other counsel here ?
A. No.
Q. What is your business, sir?
A. Automobile mechanic.
Q. Do you have a family, sir?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. What does your family consist of?
A. Wife and 3 boys.
Q. Have you read or have you heard anything concern

ing this case, Mr. Postella?
A. I read more about it than I have heard about it.
Q. Read it in the newspapers?

239

A. I don’t believe half I read in the newspapers nohow.
Q. What newspapers did yon read about it?
A. Mt. Dora Topic and Orlando Sentinal.
Q. And I gather from your remarks that what the news

papers had to sav about this doesn’t affect you in any way
at all?

A. Not a bit.
Q. And you could give the defendants the same fair and

impartial trial if you had come in here, today, and never
heard of the case before?

A. That’s right.
Q. How do you feel about the two of the defense coun

sel being negroes?
A. I am glad to see them trying to make something out

of theirselves.
[fol. 446] Q. You feel that they have the same right to
conduct themselves the same as any other attorney would?

A. That’s right.
Q. You have served on juries before, haven’t you?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Criminal juries?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. And of course, you are familiar with the rule of law

which, I believe Judge Futch will give you, that merely
because a person is charged with crime and brought to
trial, that that’s no evidence of his guilt?

A. Yes.
Q. On the contrary, that a man is presumed to be inno

cent and that presumption stays with him throughout the
trial until and unless competent evidence is proved beyond
a reasonable doubt of his guilt?

A. Yes.
Q. You would have no trouble applying that presumption

now?
A. No.
Q. In other words, you feel that that’s a presumption

at the present time, that Charles Greenlee, Samuel Shep
herd, and Walter Irvin are innocent of the crime for which
they are charged?

A. Until they are proven guilty.
Q. And that after hearing all the evidence, if you be

lieve after hearing all the evidence and receiving the law
from the Court, if you believe that all of the defendants or

one or two of them are innocent or, if you have a reasonable
doubt as to their guilt, you would vote to acquit them, would
you, sir?

A. After they proved theirselves innocent?
Q. I didn’t get that last.
A. They would have to prove they’re innocent before

I ’ll acquit them.
[fob 447] Mr. Akerman: Challenge the juror for cause.

The Court: I don’t think he got the question. Try him
again.

Q. My question was, I think the only thing that we are
in any doubt about at all, my question was, if you believe
they are innocent, or if you had a reasonable doubt as to
their guilt, would you vote to acquit them and, I under
stand your answer to be that they would have to prove
themselves innocent?

A. Well, they are innocent until they are proved guilty.
Q. Then you wouldn’t expect any proof on their part

of their innocence?
A. No, sir.
Q. You are not going to place any burden on them to

do that?
A. That’s right.

By Mr. Hunter:
Q. You gentlemen understand that the rule of law is that

the State must prove the defendant guilty beyond a reason
able doubt; they don’t have to say anything?

Mr. Akerman: I withdraw my challenge to Mr. Postella.

By Mr. Akerman:
Q. Mr. Griffis, where do you live, sir?
A. Leesburg.
Q. How long have you lived in Lake County, Florida,

Mr. Griffis?
A. About 8 years.

[fol. 448] Q. Do you know Nonna Padget?
A. No, sir.
Q. Know the Tyson family down in the Bay Lake area?
A. I don’t know any of them.
Q. How about the list of witnesses I read off?
A. I don’t know any of them.

240

241

Q. Have you read or heard anything about this case!
A. Just in the papers.
Q. What papers, please sir?
A. Sentinol and the Times Union.
Q. Sentinnl and the Times Union. From what you read,

did you form any opinion of the guilt or innocence of the
defendants ?

A. No, sir.
Q. And you feel like that you could come into this case

and if accepted on the jury, give the same fair and im
partial trial that you could have if you had never heard
anything before about the facts in this case?

A. Yes, sir.
Q. Do you know either one of the defendants?
A. No, sir.
Q. Do you know their families down there?
A. No, sir.
Q. What is your business, Mr. Griffis?
A. Work for the State Eoad Department.
Q. State Road Department?
A- Yes, sir.
Mr. Akerman: That’s not a disqualification, is it?
The Court: H e’s an employee.

[fol. 449] Q. Do you have a family, Mr. Griffis?
A. Just my wife and myself.
Q. Have you ever served on a jury before, sir?
A. No, sir.
Q. I believe that Judge Futch will instruct you that

merely because a person is charged with a crime and brought
to trial that that is no evidence of their guilt of the crime.
But that, on the contrary, every person is presumed to be
innocent until and unless this presumption is overcome by
competent evidence proving their guilt beyond a reason
able doubt. Now with that in mind, do you knowq are you
now willing to follow the presumption that Charles Green
lee, Samuel Shepherd, and Walter Irvin, are innocent of
this crime?

A. Yes.
Q. And that that presumption will remain with you all

the way through this trial unless and until it is overcome
by competent evidence proving their guilt beyond a reason
able doubt ?

16—420

242

A. Yes, sir.
Q. And if, at the conclusion of all the evidence, you are

either convinced of their innocence or you have doubt as to
their guilt, of all three or one or two of them, you will then
vote to acquit those about which you have the reasonable
doubt as to their guilt ?

A. Yes, sir.
Q. And that, having reached that conclusion, based upon

either the evidence presented or the failure of the State
to prove certain things, that if you are convinced of their
innocence or have a reasonable doubt as to their guilt, you
will remain of that opinion and vote for acquittal regard
less of how the other 11 men on the jury may stand?
[fol. 450] A. Yes, sir.

Q. And if accepted on this jury, the verdict brought out
is going to be your verdict. Is that correct?

A. Yes, sir.
Q. How do you feel about two negroes serving as de

fense counsel in this case?
A. I t ’s all right.
Q. And you feel that if they are the defense counsel in

this case, that they must discharge their duty?
A. Yes.
Q. And if it was necessary to vigorously cross examine

white witnesses, you think they have got just as much right
to do that as any white lawyer?

A. Yes, sir.
Q. Mr. Wineman, you live at Sorrento?
A. That’s right.
Q. How long have you lived down there, sir?
A. 6 years.
Q. Do you know Norma Padget?

■ A. No, sir.
Q. Do you know the Tyson family down in the Bay Lake

area ?
A. I don’t know anybody down that way.
Q. You don’t know anybody down that way?
A. That’s right.
Q. Well, most of these witnesses, I believe are from down

there. You heard me read the list of witnesses?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Do you know any of those?
A. No, sir.

243

Q. And if it should develop in this case that some wit
nesses, either for the State or for the defendant, or any
one one of them turned out to be somebody you knew, you
wouldn’t give any more or less credence to what they said?

A. No, sir.
Q. How do you feel about two of the defense attorneys

being negro attorneys?
A. I t ’s all right by me.

[fol. 451] Q. And you think that if they are going to serve
in this case, that they will have to do their duty and that
even in the vigorous cross examinations of white witnesses,
and you will judge them by the same standard you would
white counsel?

A. That’s right.
Q. Have you heard or read anything pertaining to this

case purported to be the facts?
A. I am like Mr. Postella, what I read in the papers, I j

don’t believe only a third, maybe. I
Q. And you didn’t make any opinion on it?
A. That’s right.
Q. Do you feel, Mr. Wineman, that you could come in

here and disregard whatever you read and listen to what
comes from the witness stand and the instructions given you
by the Court?

A. That’s right.
Q. Have you ever served on juries before, sir?
A. Yes sir.
Q. You heard my questions to the other members of the

jury concerning the fact it is my opinion, and I believe
Judge Futch will so instruct you, that merely because a
person is charged with crime and brought to trial is no
evidence of his guilt. The fact is, the law is to the contrary.
That there is a presumption of innocence and that presump
tion remains with the defendant throughout the trial unless
and until overcome by evidence proving to you beyond a
reasonable doubt of his guilt.

A. Yes sir.
[fol. 452] Q. I believe that to be the law and I believe
that’s what the Court will instruct you as to the law.

Then you feel now, then, that there is a presumption that
Charles Greenlee, Samuel Shepherd, and Walter Irvin,
those three sitting there, are innocent of this crime?

A. Until proven guilty.

244

Q. That’s right. And that if, at the conclusion of the
evidence, the law given to you by the Court, you feel of
the opinion that they are innocent, or, one or two of them
are innocent, or, you have a reasonable doubt as to their
guilt, then when you retire to the jury room, your verdict
will be not guilty? Your vote will be not guilty. Is that
correct?

A. Yes.
Q. And you will abide by that conviction and vote for

not guilty, regardless of what the other 11 members, how
they stand?

A. Yes.
Q. That any verdict brought out of that jury box, if you

are serving on it, is going to be your verdict?
A. That’s right.
Q. You are Mr. Ernest B. Green?
A. That’s right.
Q. Are you from Mt. Dora, Mr. Green?
A. That’s right.
Q. What is your business down there?
A. Mechanic.
Q. Do you have a famliy?
A. Yes sir.
Q. What does your family consist of, sir?
A. Daughter and stepdaughter.

[fol. 453] Q. How long have you lived down at Mt. Dora?
A. 26 years.
Q. Do you know Norma Padget?
A. No. I don’t know anybody on that list except the

sheriff. Mr. Yates.
Q. You know Mr. Yates, do vou?
A. Yes.
Q. How well do you know Mr. Yates?
A. Well, pretty good.
Q-_ Well, would your knowledge of Mr. Yates lead you

to give either more or less credence to any testimony he
might give than some witness you don’t know?

A. Not any.
Q. And if he testified one way and another witness, an

other, you would judge their demeanor and try to decide
which one was telling the truth and your past knowledge
of Mr. Yates wouldn’t enter into it at all?

A. No.

Q. Have you read or heard anything about this case?
A. I read the papers.
Q. Which papers?
A. Times Union. Tampa. And the Topic.
Q. Prom what you read, did you form any opinion as

to the guilt or innocence of these defendants?
A. No sir.
Q. And do you feel that if accepted on this jury, that you

could come into the courtroom and give the same type of
fair and impartial trial that you would as if you had never
read anything about it or heard anything about it?

A. Yes sir.
Q. Have you ever served on a jury before, sir?
A. Yes. 3 or 4 times.

[fol. 454] Q. Criminal?
A. Yes sir.
Q. Well then, you are familiar, or have heard the judge

instruct you that merely because a person is charged with
a crime and brought to trial, that’s no evidence of their
guilt in the case? There is a presumption of innocence
and that presumption remains with them until overcome
by competent evidence?

A. That’s right.
Q. And you have no trouble applying that rule of law?
A. No.
Q. Then you feel at the present moment, that Charles

Greenlee, Samuel Shepherd and Walter Irven, three de
fendants over here, are presumed to be innocent of the crime
for which they are charged?

A. That’s right.
Q. And that you will follow that presumption and keep

it and have it remain with you until it is overcome by
competent evidence ?

A. That’s right.
Q. And if at the conclusion of the evidence, and after

the instructions by the Court, if you are of the opinion
that the defendants, or any one or two of them, are inno
cent, or if you have a reasonable doubt in your mind as
to their guilt, then your vote will be not guilty. Is that
correct?

A. Yes sir.
Q. And that you will, having arrived at that opinion,

245

246

stand by it, regardless of bow the other 11 members of the
jury may see fit to vote?

A. Yes sir.
[fol. 455] Q. So that any verdict that comes out of the
jury room in this case, if you are serving on the jury,
will be your verdict?

A. That’s right.
Q. How do you feel------
The Court: Mr. Akerman, are you finished with that

juror?
Mr. Akerman: I ’ll try to finish with him in a couple ques

tions.
Q. How do you feel about two negro defense counsel in

this case?
A. I t ’s all right.
Q. And you think they have a right to conduct, themselves

just like any white attorney?
A. That’s right.
Q. And if they had to vigorously cross examine some

white witness, you feel toward them just like you would if
it was white counsel?

A. That’s right, sir.
Mr. Akerman: No further questions.
The Court: Gentlemen of the jury and members of the

bar, the hour of 12 has arrived and eating facilities are
none too good here in Tavares. It will be necessary to
take a little extra time, I expect. You don’t expect the jury
to be kept together until they are sworn, do you?

Mr. Akerman: No sir.
[fol. 456] The Court: We will recess then, until 1:15. We
will expect you gentlemen to be back in the jury box at
1 :15; the rest of the jury to be in the courtroom at that
time.

(Whereupon, the Court stood at recess until 1:15 PM,
at which time, the following proceedings were had.:)

By Mr. Akerman:
Mr. Mostella, you saw Mr. Hunter and I out in the hall

and you wanted to make an addition?
A. I am an automobile mechanic by trade but at the

present, I am running a liquor store.

247

Q. All right, sir. Thank you.
Q. Mr. Bolen, you live down at Clermont?
A. Yes sir.
Q. How long* have you lived down there?
A. 20 years.
Q. Do you know Sam Dotto?
A. Yes sir.
Q. Any kin to you?
A. Yes sir.
Q. What kin?
A. Brother-in-law.
Q. Do you know Mary McDonald?
A. No sir.
Q. Do you—did you hear me read the list of State’s

witnesses ?
A. Yes sir.
Q. Do you know any of them besides Dotto?
A. I know this James Shepherd.
Q. You know James Shepherd?
A. Yes sir.

[fol. 457] Q. Brother of one of the defendants, here?
A. Yes sir.
Q. Do you know Willie Padget?
A. No sir.
Q. Do you know* Norma Padget?
A. No sir.
Q. Do you know the Tyson family over in the Bay Lake

area?
A. No.
Q. What is your business down there in Clermont?
A. Assistant Accountant, Orange State Oil Company.
Q. Do you have a family?
A. Wife.
Q. No children?
A. No.
Q. Have you read anything in the newspapers or heard

this case discussed?
A. I have read the newspapers.
Q. Did you ever hear it discussed?
A. Street. Just street talk.
Q. Did you discuss it any with Sam Dotto?
A. Yes sir. I have.
Q. Prom what you have heard or—excuse me just a sec-

248

ond. Did you say whether you read anything in the news
papers about it?

A. I have. Yes sir.
Q. What newspapers, please?
A. Tampa Tribune.
Q. From what you have heard or discussed, have you

formed any opinion in this case?
A. No sir. I haven’t.

[fol. 458] Q. And do you think, if accepted on this jury,
you could make the same fair and impartial juror and give a
fair and impartial trial just as though you walked in here
this morning and never heard anything from the beginning
about the case?

A. Yes sir.
Q. Have you served on juries before?
A. No sir.
Q. You have heard me talking with the other jurors about

presumption in law, of the innocence of a person charged
with crime. > The mere fact that they are charged with
crime and brought in to stand trial is no evidence of their
guilt but the law is, in fact, contrary; the law being that
every person is presumed to be innocent of a crime and
that presumption remains wTith them throughout the trial
unless and until it is overcome by competent evidence
proving their guilt beyond any reasonable doubt. Do you
think you could apply that presumption in this case?

A. I believe they are innocent till they are proved guilty.
Q. Then you feel right now that Charles Greenlee and

Samuel Shepherd and Walter Irvin, there is a presumption
of their innocence in this case?

A. Until they prove to me that they are guilty.
Q. And if, after you hear all the evidence in this case,

you are instructed as to the law from Judge Futch, it is
your belief that the defendants, or any one of them are
innocent, or, there is a reasonable doubt in your mind as
to their guilt, then you would vote for a verdict of not
[fol. 459] guilty?

A. Yes sir.
Q. And if, having so arrived at that conclusion, that your

verdict should be not guilty, you would maintain and abide
by that conclusion regardless of whatever vote any of the
other 11 men on this jury?

A. That’s right.

249

Q, Did you get over into Gtroveland immediately following
this crime?

A. Well, 4 or 5 days afterwards, yes sir, I delivered gas
to one of our stations there.

Q. But you weren’t over there right immediately follow
ing?

A. No.
Q. And the only ones of the parties that you know any

thing about is Samuel Shepherd—James Shepherd, the
brother of Samuel Shepherd?

A. No.
Q. You don’t know Irven or his family down there?
A. No.
Q. How do you feel about these, two of the defense

counsel being negroes?
A. That’s all right.
Q. And that, if, in the course of the trial, they should

have to vigorously cross examine white witnesses, you
wouldn’t have—in other words, it would make no difference
to you if they were colored. You would have the same
feelings you would have toward a white attorney doing that?

A. That’s right.
Q. Now, you say you are a brother-in-law of Sam Dotto?
A. Yes sir.

[fob 460] Q. If he should testify in this case, as a witness,
the fact of your family relationship, would it cause you to
lend any more or less credence to Dotto’s testimony?

A. No sir.
Q. You wouldn’t feel a bit embarrassed if your verdict

was contrary to what he said?
A. No sir.
Q. Are you Mr. Crowell?
A. That’s right.
Q. Do you live at Umatilla, sir?
A. I live halfway between Umatilla and Eustis.
Q. What is your business?
A. Carpenter.
Q. How long have you lived in Lake County, Florida?
A. I was born in Lake County, but I have lived here,

this time, 6 years. Prior to that, I was in Michigan.
Q. Do you have a family, sir?
A. Wife.
Q. No children?
A. No.

250

Q. You have heard me read off this list of witnesses. Do
you know any of them?

A. Only the deputy sheriff. I know him when I see him.
I have been introduced to him but I have never talked to
him much.

Q. Well, the fact that you have a casual acquaintance
with the deputy sheriff, that wouldn’t embarrass you in
any way in the trial of this case if he might be a witness
in it would it, Mr. Crowell?
[fol. 461] A. No sir.

Q. You don’t know the Padget’s?
A. No. I don’t know any of them.
Q. Or the Tyson family, down in the Bay Lake area?
A. No.
Q. Have you heard or read anything about this case?
A. Well, I didn’t read. My eyes are bad. I heard it

discussed. Heard it on the radio.
Q. From what you heard, did you form any—come to

any opinion as to the guilt or innocence of the defendants?
A. No. The only ones I heard discussed, I didn’t form

any opinion. They wasn’t under oath.
Q. And you feel that you can come into the courtroom

now and serve as a juror and be just as fair and impartial
as if you had never heard anything concerning the case?

A. I do.
Q. Have you ever served on a jury before, sir?
A. No sir.
Q. You heard my discussion with the other members of

the jury concerning the law, that the mere fact that a person
is charged with a crime and brought to trial is no evidence
of their guilt but, on the contrary, the law presumes every
nerson to be innocent of crime and that presumption re
mains with the defendant throughout the trial until it is
overcome by competent evidence proving that guilt beyond
a reasonable doubt. With that in mind do you now feel
that the presumption that Charles Greenlee, Samuel Shep
herd, and Walter Irvin, the three defendants seated over
[fol. 462] there, are innocent of the crime?

A. Yes sir.
Q. And /you also heard me questioning the other jurors

to the effect that if at the conclusion of all the evidence in
the case, either from the evidence that has been introduced
or for the lack of evidence, there is a reasonable doubt in

251

your mind as to the guilt or innocence of the defendants,
then it is your duty to resolve that doubt in favor of the
person accused of crime and vote to acquit him. Do you
think you could do that, sir?

A. I do.
Q. And would you do that, sir?
A. I will.
Q. And that, if, after having heard all the evidence in

the case, received your instructions from the Court, retire
to the jury room, either you are of the opinion that one
or all of the defendants, were innocent, or there was a
reasonable doubt in your mind as to the guilt of them, you
would then vote to acquit them?

A. I would.
Q. And, having arrived at that opinion from the law and

the evidence, would you abide by that opinion and consist
ently vote that way?

A. I "would.
Q. And regardless of how the other 11 members of the

jury serving with you might feel?
A. Yes sir.
Q. And that any verdict brought out, would be your

verdict ?
A. I could do that.

[fol. 463] Q. How do you feel about negro attorneys serv
ing as defense counsel in this case ?

A. If he didn’t have a right there, they wouldn’t be
there.

Q. And, being here, you think they should fulfill their
duty and you would judge them according to the same
standards you would judge white attorneys?

A. That’s right.

Mr. Akerman: What says the State ?

By Mr. Hunter:
Q. One thing I want to state. One question I want to

ask. Is Mr. Dotto here?
A. No sir. He is in Pennsylvania.
Q. He is not in this State?
A. Not as I know of.

Mr. Hunter: I want to state that we failed to get service
to Mr. Dotto. He lives in the State of Pennsylvania.

252

Q. Are you conscientiously opposed to the infliction of
capital punishment in those cases where the law authorizes!

A. No sir.
Q. Are you, Mr. Crowell!
A. No sir.
Q. Any other member of this jury opposed to capital

punishment in those cases where the law authorizes it!
If you are, just hold up your hands.

(There were none indicated.)
Mr. Hunter: State will excuse Mr. Edward A. Wineman

and Mr. Bernard Griffis.

[fo l. 464] Me. T homas E. Caldw ell , sw orn, entered the
box, also Mr. E dmunds L ittleton .

By Mr. Hunter:
Q. Mr. Caldwell, where are you from?
A. Umatilla.
Q. How long have you lived there!
A. 29 years.
Q. What business are you in?
A. Umatilla Fruit Company.
_Q- You have heard, this morning, the statement of what

this cause is, have you not?
A. Yes sir. I have.
Q. Have you heard the facts in this case discussed by

people who purported to know what the actual facts are?
A. I have not.
Q. Have you read about them in the newspapers?
A. I have.
Q. From your reading of the newspapers, have you

formed or expressed any fixed opinion as to the guilt of
these particular defendants?

A. Well, we all form an opinion. We cannot rely upon
what you read in print. I go from the evidence, the testi
mony from the witness stand.

Q. Then you could try this case from the evidence ad
duced before you with sworn witnesses just as easily as
you could, and render a fair verdict, just as easily as you
could if you had never read the newspapers?

A. I can. Yes sir.

253

Q. Do you have any prejudice against the colored race
that would prevent you from doing that?

A. None, whatever.
[fol. 465] Q. Do you feel that you would be a fair and im
partial juror in this case?

A. I do.
Q. Mr. Littleton, where are you from?
A. Leesburg.
Q. How long have you been there, Mr. Littleton?
A. I t ’s Littleton Edmunds.
Q. How long have you been there?
A. 27 years.
Q. Your name is Edmunds. Not Edmunds Littleton?
A. Yes sir. The reverse.
Q. Say you have been there 27 years ?
A. Yes sir.
Q. Do you know anything about this case?
A. No sir. No more than what I have read.
Q. Have you formed or expressed any opinion about it?
A. No sir.
Q. Do you have any prejudice against colored people?
A. No sir.
Q. Can you give them both, both sides a fair and im

partial trial?
A. Yes sir.
Q. Both of you gentlemen, have either of you any con

scientious scruples against the infliction of capital punish
ment in those cases where the law provides?

A. No sir.

Mr. Hunter: You may inquire.

By Mr. Akerman:
Q. Mr. Caldwell, you say you have read about this occur-

[fol. 466] rence in the papers?
A. Yes sir. I have.
Q. What papers did you read, sir?
A. Orlando morning Sentinal.
Q. And you say naturally that------
A. Naturally, we do form an opinion.
Q. From what you read in the paper?
A. That’s right.
Q. And what’s the nature of that opinion? I think maybe

254

I had better explain, before you go ahead, I ’m not trying
to ask you whether it is for guilty or innocence.

A. Well------
Mr. Hunter: You don’t have to express any opinion.
Q. That’s what I say. Any of my questions are not

directed to that. I am not trying to ascertain that fact.
But I mean now, with that view in mind------

A. As I stated to Col. Hunter, we all form some kind of
opinion. We know that. But naturally, I go from the
testimony from the stand before I come to my final con
clusion.

Q. And you feel that if accepted on this jury, you could
make the same fair and impartial juror that you could
have if you had never heard anything about this case!

A. I could.
Q. What business are you in, sir?
A. With the Umatilla Fruit Company. Foreman.
Q. And do you have a family, sir?
A. I have.
Q. What does your family consist of?
A. Wife and one son.

[fol. 467] Q. Are you acquainted with any of the wit
nesses I read out or, could you hear me from where you
were?

A. I don’t know any of them.
Q. You are not acquainted with the Tyson family down

in the Bay Lake area?
A. No. I don’t know them.
Q. You know nothing of the family of Irvin and Shepherd,

over here ?
A. No sir.
Q. Your business is up at the other end of the county?
A. Up at the other end of the county. Yes sir.
Q. You have served on juries before, haven’t you?
A. Yes sir.
Q. Criminal juries as well as civil?
A. Yes sir.
Q. And you received instructions from the Court as to

the law in the case ?
A. Yes sir.
Q. And you are familiar with the principle of law that

merely because the person is indicted, brought into Court

255

to stand trial for a crime, that’s no evidence of that per
son’s guilt?

A. That’s right.
Q. And in fact, the law is to the contrary. That every

person is presumed to be innocent and that presumption
remains with them unless and until their guilt is estab
lished by evidence beyond a reasonable doubt?

A. Yes sir.
Q. Then you feel at the present time the presumption that

those three defendants seated over there, Charles Greenlee
and Samuel Shepherd and Walter Irvin, are innocent of
this crime?

A. That’s right.
[fol. 468] Q. And after hearing all the evidence and re
ceiving your instructions as to the law from Judge Futch,
then if you believe that all three, of the defendants or one
or two of them are innocent, or, if there’s a reasonable
doubt in your mind as to the guilt of them, then you will
vote for a verdict of not guilty. Is that right, sir?

A. That’s right.
Q. And, having arrived at that opinion from the evidence

and the law, that will be your opinion and you will abide
by it?

A. That’s right.
Q. And if there is a reasonable doubt, regardless of how

the other 11 gentlemen here, may feel about the case?
A. Yes sir.
Q. Any verdict that comes out of that jury room, if you

are serving on it, it ’s going to be your verdict, isn’t it?
A. That’s right.
Q. How do you feel about the fact that two of the de

fense attorneys are negroes?
A. All right.
Q. And if they are serving as attorneys in this case they

have as much right to cross examine and conduct them
selves and you will judge them by the same standard of
activities and conduct that you would judge the rest of
the white lawyers in this case?

A. That’s right. I would.
Q. Now, Mr. Hunter is not your attorney at the present

time?
A. No sir.

[fol. 469] Q. Never been represented by him?

256

A. No sir.
Q. Do you know of any reason, Mr. Caldwell, why, if ac

cepted on this jury, you cannot give a fair and impartial
trial in the case?

A. I do not.
Q. Is that Mr. Edwards or Edmunds?
A. Edmunds.
Q. You live in Leesburg?
A. Yes sir.
Q. What is your business?
A. Farm.
Q. Do you have a family?
A. Yes sir.
Q. What does it consist of ?
A. Wife and daughter.
Q. Did you hear me read the list of State’s witnesses

from where you were seated back there?
A. Yes sir.
Q. Do you know any of them, Mr. Edmunds?
A. Two.
Q. Which ones are those?
A. Curtis Howard, I know him. But I haven’t talked to

him on any subject and I also know Mr. Campbell.
Q. You know Mr. Howard. He is the filling station man?
A. Well, he works there at times.
Q. You haven’t discussed the case with him?
A. No. I haven’t.
Q. Who was the other witness?
A. The Deputy Sheriff. Mr. Campbell. I haven’t talked

to him, either.
Q. And your acquaintanceship with those witnesses would

be such as to either give more or less credence to any testi
mony they gave over what some stranger might say?

A. It wouldn’t bother me in the least.
[fol. 470] Q. Have you read or heard anything concern
ing the facts?

A. Yes, I have read. I was not here at the time the case
was taken.

Q. You were out of the State?
A. I was at Daytona Beach.
Q. You have read some of the newspapers?
A. Yes sir.
Q. What newspapers did you read, sir?

A. Daytona Beach paper. I saw it first in, and then in
the Tampa Tribune.

Q. Prom what you read, did you form any opinion as to
the guilt or innocence of these defendants?

A. No sir.
Q. And do you feel that you could now serve on this jury

and be the same fair, give the same fair, impartial trial
just as if you had never heard anything about this ease?

A. I could.
Q. You have served on juries before, sir, haven’t you?
A. Yes sir.
Q. Criminal juries?
A. Yes sir.
Q. And then, you are familiar with the instructions that

are given to you by the Court that merely because a person
is indicted and brought to trial, that there is no evidence
of their guilt?

A. That’s right.
Q. And in fact, on the contrary, they are presumed to be

innocent?
A. That’s right.

[fol. 471] Q. And that presumption remains with them,
until the evidence proving their guilt beyond a reasonable
doubt is introduced?

A. Yes sir.
Q. Then with that in mind, do you feel at the present

moment that there is a presumption that Charles Greenlee,
Samuel Shepherd and Walter Irvin, are innocent of this
crime ?

A. Yes sir.
Q. And that you will maintain that presumption all the

way through this case unless and until the State proves
their guilt beyond a reasonable doubt?

A. Yes sir.
Q. And if, at the conclusion of all the evidence in the

case and you have received your instructions as a juryr
from the Court, you are of the opinion that, from the evi
dence that’s been produced or from the lack of evidence
in the case, that one or more of the defendants are innocent,
or that there is a reasonable doubt as to their guilt, then
you will vote for a verdict of not guilty?

A. Yes sir.
Q. Is that correct, sir ?

17—420'

257

258

A. Yes sir.
Q. And, having come to that conclusion, after having

heard the evidence, it is your opinion that they are innocent
or, that there is evidence of their guilt, you will abide by
that opinion?

A. Yes.
Q. Regardless of how your other fellow jurors may vote

or feel about the matter?
A. Yes.

[fol. 472] Q. And that if you serve on this jury, any ver
dict that comes out of the jury room will be the verdict
that you conscientiously subscribe to?

A. Yes.
Q. Do you know of any reason why, if selected on this

jury, you cannot serve and give a fair and impartial trial?
A. I don’t.
Mr. Akerman: What says the State?
Mr. Hunter: The State tenders the jury.
Mr. Akerman: The Defendant, Charles Greenlee, will

excuse Mr. Dykes.

Mr. 0. L. D kawdy was sworn, and entered the jury box.

By Mr. Hunter:
Q. Mr. Drawdy where do you live?
A. Fruitland Park, in Leesburg.
Q. How long have you lived in this county?
A. About 6 years.
Q. What is your business?
A. Citrus.
Q. Have you heard the facts or circumstances in this case

discussed?
A. Just what I have read about it is all.
Q. Have you formed or expressed any opinion as to the

guilt of these particular defendants from what you read?
A. No sir.

[fol. 473] Q. Do you have any prejudice against the
colored people that would in any way hamper you in the
trial of this case?

A. No sir.
Q. If taken as a juror, would you give both sides a fair

and impartial trial?
A. Yes sir.

Q. Are you opposed to capital punishment in those cases
where the law authorizes it!

A. Yes sir.
Q. You are?
A. No sir.
Mr. Hunter: You may inquire.

By Mr. Akerman:
Q. You say you live out on the Fruitland Park, Mr.

Drawdy!
A. That’s right.
Q. What is your business, please, sir?
A. In the citrus business.
Q. Do you know Norma Padget?
A. No sir.
Q. Or her husband, Willie Padget?
A. No sir.
Q, Are you acquainted with the Tyson family down in

the Bay Lake area?
A. No.
Q. Do you know any of the defendants in this case,

Charles Greenlee, Samuel Shepherd and Walter Irvin?
A. No sir.
Q. Do you know the family of the defendant, Greenlee,

—I mean, Shepherd, or Irvin? ,
A. No sir.
Q. Did you hear the list of witnesses I read off back

there ?
A. Yes sir.

[fol. 474] Q. Do you know any of them?
A. The Deputy Sheriff is about the only one I personally

know.
Q. He is the deputy sheriff ?
A. That’s right.
Q. How long have you known Mr. Campbell?
A. Ever since he’s been a deputy.
Q. What is the nature of your acquaintanceship with

him ?
A. Just know him when I see him, mostly.
Q. Would the fact that you are acquainted with Mr.

Campbell cause you to give either more or less credence to
his testimony than any other testimony?

A. Not a bit.

259

260

Q. No more or less than any other witness?
A. That’s right.
Q. How do you feel about two of the defense counsel

being negroes?
A. I t ’s all right with me.
Q. Would you judge them by the same standards of

conduct that you would judge white counsel?
A. That’s right.
Q. And think it is perfectly all right for them to cross

examine white witnesses?
A. Yes sir.
Q. You arê familiar with the rule of law that every

person that’s presumped to — innocent until proven guilty?
A. That’s right.
Q. The mere fact that an indictment has been returned

against them when they are brought into Court to stand
trial is no evidence of their guilt?

A. That’s right.
[fols. 475-479] Q. And this presumption of innocence
remains with them all the way through until it is overcome
by evidence, proved beyond a reasonable doubt?

A. That’s right.
Q. Then, do you presume Charles Greenlee, Samuel Shep

herd, and Walter Irvin to be innocent of this crime at the
present time?

A. Unless it is proved difference.
Q. Do you know of any reason why, if accepted in this

jury, you cannot serve as a fair and impartial juror, return
a fair and impartial verdict in this case?

A. No.
Mr. Akerman: What says the State?
Mr. Hunter: State tenders the jury.
Mr. Akerman: The defendant, Charles Greenlee, will

excuse Mr. Calhoun.

[ fo b 480] M e . Chables B laze , was sw orn and entered the
ju ry box.

By Mr. Hunter:
Q. What is your name, please?
A. Blaze.
Q. Where do you live, Mr. Blaze?

261

A. Fruitland Park.
Q. How long have you lived there?
A. 30 years.
Q. What is your business?
A. Work at carpentry work.
Q. Have you ever heard anything about this case ?
A. No.
Q. Did you read about it?
A. I looked at the headlines. That’s all.
Q. From what you have heard and read, did you form

any opinion as to the guilt or innocence of these defend
ants ?

A. None, whatsoever.
Q. Just don’t know anything about the case?
A. Not much.
Q. If you were taken as a juror, would you give both sides

a fair and impartial trial from the testimony you would
hear in the courtroom?

A. Yes sir.
Q. Have you any prejudice against the colored race?
A. No sir.

Mr. Hunter: You may inquire.

Q. Do you have any conscientious scruples against the
infliction of capital punishment?

A. No.

[fol. 481] By Mr. Akerman:
Q. Did you hear me read the list of these people to the

other jurors?
A. Yes sir.
Q. Do you know any of them?
A. No.
Q. Do you have a family, sir?
A. No.
Q. Did you know any of that list that I read ?
A. No.
Q. You are not acquainted with the Tyson family down

in the Bay Lake area?
A. No.
Q. Have you served on juries before?
A. Yes.
Q. Criminal cases?

262

A. Yes.
Q. And of course, you have received the general instruc

tions of the law from the Judge at the conclusion of the
case!

A. Yes.
Q. And then you are aware of the rule of law that it is

the law of this country and of our State, that merely because
a person is indicted and brought into Court to stand trial
is no evidence of their guilt!

A. Yes.
Q. Are you familiar with that rule!
A. Yes.
Q. And have followed it in other cases!
A. Yes.
Q. And will follow it in this case!
A. Yes.
Q. And also that they are presumed to be innocent and

that presumption remains with them throughout the trial
unless and until the State has overcome that presumption
by evidence of the proof of their guilt beyond a reasonable
doubt!

A. Yes.
[fob 482] Q. Then you feel that there is a presumption at
the present time that Charles Greenlee, Samuel Shepherd
and Walter Irvin, the three defendants seated along there
are innocent of this crime!

A. Until they are proved otherwise.
Q. Well of course at this state of the proceedings there

has been no evidence in the case, so you feel there is a
presumption now that they are innocent!

A. Well, until they are proved otherwise.
Q. And you are also familiar with the rule of law that’s

the law of this country, that every person charged with a
crime has to be proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt
and if there is a reasonable doubt in your mind arising
either from the evidence that’s been introduced or from the
lack of evidence you should resolve that doubt in favor of
the defendant!

A. Yes.
Q. So if accepted on the jury in this case, after hearing

the evidence and the law given to you by Judge Futch, you
retire to consider the case, if there is a reasonable doubt
in your mind as to the guilt of these defendants, will you
vote for a verdict of not guilty!

263

A. Yes.
Q. And, having arrived at that opinion from the law and

from the evidence, will you abide by that opinion regardless
of what opinion the other 11 members of the jury may have?

A. I will.
Q. Any verdict that comes out of the jury room, if you

serve on this jury, will be your verdict?
A. Yes.

[fol. 483] Q. Will be your opinion?
A. Yes.
Q. And not the opinion of someone else ?
A. Right.
Q. How do you feel about two of the defense lawyers

being negroes ? Think that’s proper ?
A. I don’t quite understand that.
Q. Two of the defense counsel here are negroes. How do

you feel about that?
A. Go to it.
Q. And do you think that they have the right in this case

to participate in the cross-examination of white witnesses?
A. Sure.
Q. And you would judge them by the same standard of

conduct that you would njudge a white lawyer?
A. Nothing there.
Q. What is the answer ?
A. Give it to me again and I ’ll catch it better.
Q. I say that since two of the defense counsel are negroes,

do you feel then that they have the right in this case to
cross-examine the witnesses vigorously?

A. Yes.
Q. And that you would judge them by the same standards

of conduct that you would judge the white lawyers?
A. Have to in that case.
Q. Would you have any trouble doing that?
A. No. I don’t think so.
Q. Mr. Blaze, are you nor or have you ever been repre

sented by Mr. Hunter, the State’s Attorney here?
A. No. I don’t have no occasion for it.

[fol. 484] Mr. Akerman: No further questions.

By Mr. Hunter:
Q. Where are you from? What is your native State?
A. I was born in Indiana,

264

Mr. Hunter: We tender the jury again.
Mr. Akerman: Defendant, Charles Greenlee, will excuse

Mr. Drawdy.

Mr. A rth u r P olk , was sworn and entered the ju r y box.

By Mr. Hunter:
Q. Mr. Polk, where do you live?
A. I live in Eustis.
Q. How long have you lived there?
A. 12 years.
Q. Have you heard any of the facts and circumstances

in connection with this case discussed?
A. No sir.
Q. Read about it in the newspapers?
A. Yes sir.
Q. Did you form or express any fixed opinion on the

guilt or innocence of these defendants from what you read
in the papers?

A. No sir.
Q. Have you any prejudice against the colored race that

would keep you from giving them a fair trial?
A. I do not.
Q. Are you opposed to capital punishment?
A. No sir.
Q. If taken as a juror, you will give both sides a fair

and impartial trial?
A. Yes sir.

[fol. 485] Mr. Hunter: Tender the jury.

By Mr. Akerman:
Q. Where did you say you lived, Mr. Polk?
A. Eustis.
Q. How long have you lived in Lake County, Mr. Polk?
A. 27 years.
Q. Are you acquainted down in the Groveland area?
A. I know a few people.
Q. What is your business?
A. Automobile dealer and gasoline business.
Q. And do you know Mr. and Mrs. Willie Padget from

down there?
A. No sir.

265

Q. Do you know the Tyson family down in the Bay Lake
area?

A. No sir.
Q. Do you know any of these defendants, here?
A. I do not.
Q. Know any of their families?
A. No sir.
Q. Did you say you had read something in the newspaper

about this ease?
A. I have.
Q. What newspapers did you read?
A. I was out of the State at the time of this. I went

to Carolina. And I don’t recall the name of the papers.
Q. Wasn’t any of the local papers, here?
A. I did, when I got back here.

[fol. 486] Q. From what you read, did you form any
opinion as to the guilt or innocence?

A. No sir.
Q. And, do you feel that you could serve on this jury

and be just as fair and impartial a juror now, that you
would have been had you not heard anything about the
facts in this case?

A. No sir.
Q. Do you have a family, Mr. Polk?
A. Yes sir.
Q. What does your family consist of?
A. Wife, son, and two daughters.
Q. Have you ever served on a jury before?
A. Yes sir.
Q. Criminal cases?
A. Yes sir.
Q. Then you have heard the Court instruct the jury on

the law?
A. I have.
Q. And are familiar with the rule of law that says before

a verdict of conviction there must he proof beyond a rea
sonable doubt; if there is any reasonable doubt in your
mind, that you should resolve it in favor of the defendant?

A. That’s right.
Q. And, if accepted on this jury, would you resolve any

reasonable doubt in favor of the defendants, Charles Green
lee, Samuel Shepherd, and Walter Irvin?

A. I would.

266

Q. And you are also familiar that merely because a person
is indicted and charged with crime, that that’s no evidence
of their guilt?

A. That’s right.
Q. Fact, that it is the law that every person is presumed

to be innocent and that presumption remains with them
throughout the trial unless and until overcome by evidence
[fol. 487] proving their guilt beyond a reasonable doubt?

A. That’s right, sir.
Q. Then you feel, then, that there is a presumption at

this present moment, that Charles Greenlee, Samuel Shep
herd and Walter Irvin, are innocent of this crime?

A. I do. Until proven otherwise.
Q. How do you feel about the fact that two of the defense

counsel in this case are members of the negro race?
A. If they were approved by the Court, they are OK

by me.
Q. And you would feel that serving as attorneys in this

case, that they would have the right to vigorously cross-
examine white witnesses?

A. That’s right.
Q. Even if it is necessary to cross-examine a white lady

in this case?
A. Sure.
Q. And you would judge them by the same standards of

conduct that you would judge white attorneys?
A. I would.
Q. Do you know of any reason why, if accepted on this

jury, you cannot serve and give a fair and impartial trial
in this case?

A. I do not.
Mr. Akerman: What says the State?
Mr. Hunter: I ’ll ask the Court to recess for 5 minutes.
The Court: The Court will take a 10 minutes recess.
(At the end of the recess, the Court reopened and the

following proceedings were had:)
[fol. 488] Mr. Akerman: What says the State?

Mr. Hunter: We tender.
Mr. Akerman: The Defendant, Charles Greenlee, will

excuse Mr. Caldwell.

267

Mb. J. Gr. R ay, Jr., sworn, entered the jury box.

By Mr. Hunter:
Q. Mr. Ray, where do you live?
A. Mt. Dora.
Q. How long have you lived there?
A. 29 years.
Q. You have heard the statements of this case?
A. Yes sir.
Q. Do you know anything about it?
A. Nothing definite.
Q. Did you ever hear the facts or circumstances in con

nection with it discussed?
A. Just what I read in the papers.
Q. Did you form or express any opinion from what you

read in the papers?
A. Yes sir.
Q. Definite?
A. It could be changed.
Q. Could you disregard what you read in the papers and

try these men on the sworn testimony here?
A. If I were selected on the jury, I would certainly try

to disregard it.
[fol. 489] Q. You think you could?

A. Why, I don’t know. I think I could.
Q. Well, there’s not anybody else that knows but you?

You wouldn’t try a man on a capital offense on what you
read in the newspapers, about him, would you?

A. No sir.
Q. Would you listen to the evidence and try him on that?
A. Yes. I would listen to the evidence.
Q. Could you disregard what you read in the newspapers

and try him on the evidence, alone?
A. I don’t know that I could forget all I read in the news

papers, but I would certainly try to be fair about it.
Q. Could you disregard what you read in the newspapers

and try him on the evidence, alone?
A. Yes.
Q. Would you do that?
A. Yes.
Q. Do you have any prejudice against the colored people?
A. No. That is, none that would affect this trial.
Q. You can give them the same fair and impartial trial

268

that you could anybody else, white man or anyone else,
couldn’t you?

A. That’s right.
Q. And would try this case solely upon the evidence

you hear from the witness box and what the Court tells you
is the law?

A. Yes.
Q. Would you have any difficulty about it?
A. Well I don’t believe I will.

[fob 490] Q. Well, you are the one to answer. Would
you?

A. Well I don’t see how I could tell that until after I
experienced it. I don’t think I would.

Q. Do you know whether you can give them a fair trial
on the evidence you hear here just the same as if you had
never read anything about it?

A. I would certainly do my best to give him a fair trial.
Q. Well, could you do it?
A. This is my first experience. I don’t know whether

I could or not.
Q. You would just do the best you could?
A. Yes sir.

Mr. Hunter: I expect you would make a better juror then,
than some old professional. You may inquire.

By Mr. Akerman:
Q. Mr. Ray, you live at Mt. Dora?
A. Yes sir.
Q. What is your business, Mr. Ray?
A. Building.
Q. Do you have a family?
A. Yes sir.
Q. What does your family consist of, please sir?
A. I have a wife and three sons, two daughters. And

all the other relatives.
Q. Mr. Ray, you say you read of this case?
A. Yes sir.
Q. What papers did you read, sir?
A. I read the Topic and the Sentinal. Reporter Star,

and the Tribune and the Miami Herald.
[fol. 491] Q. Did you talk to anybody about the case?

A. Yes sir.

269

Q. Quite a number of people?
A. Yes sir.
Q. You say you formed an opinion on it?
A. Yes sir.
Q. Have you ever expressed that opinion to anybody?
A. Yes sir.
Mr. Akerman: Challenge the juror for cause, if the Court

please. He formed and expressed an opinion.
Mr. Hunter: Well, that’s not the rule.
The Court: I think he’s evidenced a sufficient lack of

understanding and ability. The challenge should be sus
tained.

Mr. J. J. H u n t , sworn, entered the jury box.

By Mr. Hunter:
Q. Mr. Hunt, where are you from?
A. Down in the south end of the county.
Q. What place?
A. Down close to the Withlacoochee River.
Q. What precinct?
A. I guess it ’s the 44th district.

[fol. 492] Q. What district is that?
A. That’s the Groveland District.
Mr. Hunter: Under our stipulation, Your Honor, Mr.

Hunt will be excused.
The Court: All right, Mr. Hunt.

Mr. R ay B obbin's, sw orn, entered the jury box.

By Mr. Hunter:
Q. Mr. Robbins, what precinct are you from?
A. I live northwest of Mascotte.
Q. In the Mascotte precinct?
A. Yes sir.
Mr. Hunter: Mr. Robbins comes under the same stipu

lation, Your Honor.
The Court: All right, Mr. Robbins.

Mr, J. E. H yatt , sworn, entered the jury box.

By Mr. Hunter:
Q. Mr. Hyatt, you are from Mascotte, too, aren’t you?
A. Yes sir.
Mr. Hunter: Nothing against you, but we have a stipu

lation here not to call any jurors from Mascotte.
The Court: Is that agreed to, Mr. Akerman?

[fol. 493] Mr. Akerman: Yes sir.

Mr. C. B. H u ll , sworn, entered the jury box.

By Mr. Hunter:
Q. Mr. Hull, where do you live?
A. Clermont.
Q. You have heard about this case, haven’t you?
A. Very little.
Q. Read about it in the newspapers?
A. Started to read it and I throwed it down and I didn’t

want to read it.
Q. Wasn’t interested in it?
A. No, not particularly.
Q. Now have you talked to anybody that purported to

know the facts about it?
A. No, I haven’t discussed it with anyone.
Q. Your mind is perfectly free and open then, to try this

case from the evidence you would hear here in the jury box?
A. Absolutely.
Q. Do you have any prejudice against a colored man?
A. No prejudice against any man, living or dead.
Q. If taken as a juror, would you give both sides a fair

and impartial trial?
A. I ’ll do my best.
Q. Are you conscientiously opposed to capital punish

ment?
A. Not where the law so provides.
Mr. Hunter: OK. You may inquire.

[fol. 494] By Mr. Akerman:
Q. What is your business, Mr. Hull?
A. Farming at the present time.

271

Q. Do you have a family, Mr. Hull1?
A. 8 children. 4 boys and 4 girls.
Q. How long have you lived in Lake County, sir!
A. A little over 60 years.
Q. Spent most of that time down in the Clermont section?
A. Yes. Most of the time. Yes.
Q. Are you acquainted down in the Groveland section?
A. I am acquainted some. But I am not acquainted with

these people.
Q. Now do you know anybody down in the Bay Lake

area?
A. No. I am acquainted with the business people down

in Groveland. Those that run stores and things like that.
Q. So you don’t know Norma Padget or her husband,

Willie Padget?
A. No. I couldn’t pick them out here in the courtroom.
Q. Tyson family?
A. No sir.
Q. And you don’t know anything about this case or the

negroes here?
A. I never saw them before until today.
Q. You do not know anything about the families of

Shepherd or Irvin?
A. No.
Q. I believe you stated that you just started to read it

and threw it aside. So you haven’t formed any opinion in
this case. Have you?

A. I just figured I would be called on the jury and I
wouldn’t read it.
[fol. 495] Q. You have served on juries before, I guess,
in Lake County?

A. Yes.
Q. Criminal juries?
A. Yes sir.
Q. You know, of course, then, the rule of law that any

reasonable doubt should be resolved in favor of the de
fendant?

A. Yes.
Q. You would do that in this case, wouldn’t you?
A. Absolutely.
Q. Also the presumption that they are innocent?
A. As far as I know, they are not guilty.
Q. And you feel that way right now, that Charles Green-

272

lee and Samuel Shepherd and Walter Irvin are not guilty;
you are going to wait and see what the evidence brings
forth?

A. Absolutely.
Q. And you are not going to make up your mind until

you have heard all the evidence and the law as given to
you by Judge Futch?

A. Yes sir.
Q. And if you feel that they are not guilty or there is a

reasonable doubt of their guilt, you are going to vote not
guilty?

A. That’s right.
Q. And, having made your opinion from the law and

the evidence, that’s going to be your opinion ?
A. Absolutely.
Q. And, regardless of the feeling of the other 11 men?
A. Yes. I don’t pay no attention to them, at all.

[fol. 496] Mr. Akerman: What says the State?
Mr. Hunter: State tenders.
Mr. Akerman: Defendant, Charles Greenlee will excuse

Mr. Driver, Mr. Crowe, Mr. Postella and Mr. Hollinger.

G eorge H. R ast, R alph G. B ishop and A. M. Chase ,
J oseph E. D ix o x , were sworn and took their places in the
jury box.

By Mr. Hunter:
Q. What is your name, sir?
A. A. M. Chase.
Q. Where are you from?
A. Lady Lake.
Q. Mr. Dixon, where are you from?
A. Groveland.
Mr. Hunter: All right. Mr. Dixon comes in our stipu

lation.
(Whereupon, the juror was excused.)

Mr. W illiam E. N ew tOH, was sw orn and took liis seat in
the jury box.

By Mr. Hunter:
Q. Now this gentlemen, here, what did you say your

name was?
A. A. M. Chase.
Q. Where do you live, Mr. Chase?
A. Conine Switch, Lake County.

[fol. 497] Q. How long have you been there?
A. 3 years.
Q. Where are you from?
A. Dallas, Texas.
Q. What is your business?
A. Retired.
Q. Have you heard anything about this case?
A. Very little.
Q. Talked with any persons who purported to know the

facts in the case?
A. No sir.
Q. Have you read anything about it in the papers?
A. Very little.
Q. What you have read, have you formed and expressed

any opinion about the case?
A. No sir.
Q. Do you have any prejudice against the colored race

that would prevent you from giving these people a fair
trial?

A. None, whatsoever.
Q. Do you know of any reason why you couldn’t sit as

a fair juror in this case?
A. None, whatever.
Q. Now, somebody gave me a list of the ones that were

called.—Are you conscientiously opposed to the infliction
of capital punishment?

A. No sir.
Q. Now, Mr. Newton, where do you live?
A. Astatulla.
Q. Do you know anything about this case?
A. No sir.
Q. Are you prejudiced against the colored race in any

degree that would cause you to hesitate to form a righteous
[fol. 498] verdict in this case?

273

18—420

274

A, No sir.
Q. Do you know any reason why you couldn’t sit as a

fair and impartial juror?
A. No sir. I don’t.
Q. Now I believe, Mr. East is another one here. Where

are you from?
A. Leesburg.
Q. Do you know anything about this case?
A. I don’t know any of the'facts.
Q. You read about it in the newspapers, I presume?
A. Very little. I was out of the State at the time.
Q. You were out of the State. Then you have not formed

or expressed any opinion as to the guilt or innocence of
these defendants?

A. No.
Q. Do you have any prejudice against the colored race

that would in any way hinder you or keep you from render
ing a fair and impartial verdict in this case?

A. No sir.
Q. If taken as a juror in this case, would you give both

sides a fair and impartial trial?
A. Yes.
Q. Are you opposed to capital punishment in cases where

the law authorizes it?
A. No sir.
Q. Are you, Mr. Newton?
A. No sir.
Q. Now, wasn’t there someone else called up?—What

is your name?
A. Bishop.
Q. Where are you from, Mr. Bishop?
A. Mineola.
Q. Do you know anything about this case?
A. No sir.

[fol. 499] Q. Have you ever heard anything about it?
A. No sir. I was out of the State at that time.
Q. Where are you from originally?
A. Auburn, Indiana.
Q. You say your name is Bishop?
A. Bishop.
Q. And you are from Mineola?
A. Yes sir.
Q. Have you formed or expressed any opinion in rela

tion to this case?

275

A. No sir.
Q. And you haven’t discussed the facts with anyone?
A. That’s right.
Q. I believe you said you were not opposed to capital

punishment?
A. That’s right.
Q. Do you have any prejudice against the colored race?
A. No sir.
Q. If you are taken as a juror in this case, will you give

both sides a fair and impartial trial?
A. Yes sir.
Q. You say you are from Mineola?
A. Mineola.
Q. What do you do down there?
A. I am a citrus grower.
Q. Got any grapefruit?
A. Very little.
Q. Where are they; on the ground?
A. On the ground.
Mr. Hunter: You may inquire.

[fob 500] By Mr. Akerman:
Q. You stated that you were out of the state at the time

of the occurrence, so you heard or read very little con
cerning this?

A. I didn’t. Any of the papers.
Q. You discussed it since you have been home?
A. Just casually.
Q. From your discussions have you formed or expressed

any opinion on it?
A. No. I don’t know that I have.
Q. Do you feel like you can come in here and give just

the same fair, impartial trial that you could if you hadn’t
even heard any discussion about it?

A. Yes.
Q. And you will, if selected on this jury, give a fair and

impartial trial?
A. Yes.
Q. How long have you lived in Lake County, Mr. Bast?
A. About 35 years.
Q. Do you have a family here?
A. Yes.
Q. What does it consist of, please, sir?

276

A. Wife, stepdaughter and son.
Q. You served on juries before, Mr. East?
A. No sir.
Q. Well, in connection with jury service, in courtroom

trials, you probably know the evidence comes from the
witness. Then, the judge, Judge Futch, will instruct you
as to the law in the case. And I believe Judge Futch will
instruct you that the law is that the mere filing of an in-
[fol. 501] dictment and bringing to trial of a defendant or
defendants, is no evidence of their guilt; that merely be
cause they are charged with crime doesn’t indicate their
guilt in an evidentiary way. The law being, on the other
hand, that every person is presumed to be innocent of
crime and that presumption remains with a person charged
with crime throughout the trial unless and until it is over
come by evidence of proof of their guilt beyond a reason
able doubt.

Do you think you would have any trouble applying that
presumption in this case?

A. No.
Q. Then you feel at the present time there is a presump

tion that Charles Greenlee, Samuel Shepherd, and Walter
Irvin, the three defendants, seated right over there, are
innocent of this crime?

A. Yes.
Q. The Court will instruct you that if, after hearing the

evidence there is a doubt, a reasonable doubt, in your mind,
as to the guilt, that it is your duty to resolve any doubt in
favor of the defendants and to return a verdict of not
guilty. Do you think you would have any trouble doing
that in this case?

A. No.
Q. Then if, after hearing all the evidence in the case,

from the witness, and being instructed by the Court on the
law by Judge Futch, when you retire to consider the case,
if, from what evidence has been introduced, or, from the
lack of any evidence, you feel that the defendants, or any
one of them, are innocent, or, that there is a reasonable
douobt as to their guilty, then you will vote for a verdict
[fol. 502] of not guilty. Is that correct, sir?

A. I will.
_ Q- And, having reached that opinion, from the evidence

given that you have heard and the law given to you by the

277

Court, will you abide by that opinion, regardless of the
feeling of, what may be the feeling, of the other 11 members
of the jury?

A. Yes.
Q. So that any verdict, if you are serving on this jury,

that comes out of the jury room, will be your verdict?
A. That’s right.
Q. Are you acquainted with any of the witnesses that

we have read the list of here ?
A. Mr. Campbell and— (out of hearing of the Reporter.)
Q. Would that acquaintanceship embarrass you in this

trial?
A. No sir.
Q. And you could just as easily give as much credence

to the testimony of any other witness ?
A. That’s right.
Q, Mr. Rast, two of the defense counsel in this case

are negro attorneys, and they are participating in this trial.
Will that, in any way affect you?

A. No.
Q. And you would feel that it would be proper for them,

as defense counsel, to cross examine witnesses, even though
the witness happened to be white?

A. That’s right.
Q. And you would judge them by the same standard of

conduct in this trial that you would judge the other white
attorneys?

A. Yes.
[fob 503] Q. Mr. Bishop, you say you didn’t hear much
about this case, too, didn’t you?

A. Just little articles in the paper while I was gone.
Cleveland Plain Dealer, and an article in the local paper
where I was.

Q. And, from what you read, you didn’t even form an
opinion, did you, sir?

A. I was quite a ways away. I didn’t know what it was
all about. Just a little item about like that. (Indicating
with fingers.)

Q. And you feel that if selected as a member of the
jury in this case, you -yean give just as fair and impartial
trial as if you had never heard anything about it?

A. Yes sir.
Q.q Do you know any of the witnesses?

278

A. None that I know of, no.
Q. You don’t know anything about the Tyson family

down in the Bay Lake area?
A. No.
Q. Do /you have a family?
A. Yes sir.
Q. What does it consist of?
A. Wife, daughter and son.
Q. Have you ever served on a jury, sir?
A. Never in the South. I have on the North. I served

in civil cases. Lawsuits and things like that.
Q. Well in the case of a criminal offense, you will recall

that the evidence comes from the witness stand and the
Court instructs you as to what the law is. And you prob
ably are familiar with the rule of law that, merely because
[fol. 504] the person is arrested, charged with a crime,
indictment filed against them, and they are brought into
Court for trial, that that’s no evidence of their guilt?

A. That’s right.
Q. And you subscribe to that principle, don’t you, sir?
A. Yes sir.
Q. And in fact, they are presumed to be innocent and

that presumption stays with them until the evidence is
brought into the trial proving their guilt beyond a reason
able doubt. Do you subscribe to that?

A. Yes sir.
Q. And then you feel, at the present time, that the defend

ants, Charles Greenlee, and Samuel Shepherd and Walter
Irvin, are presumed to be innocent, do you not?

A. That’s right.
Q. And you will give them the benefit of that presumption

and have it remain with them throughout the trial and will
not convict them unless and until the State brings in evi
dence convincing you beyond a reasonable doubt?

A. Yes sir.
Q. And the Court will instruct you that if there is any

reasonable doubt in your mind as to the guilt or innocence
you should resolve that doubt in favor of the defendants.
You think you would have any trouble doing that, sir?

A. No sir.
Q. And if, at the conclusion of all the evidence, the in

structions by the Court, it is your belief that the defend
ants or any one of them are innocent, or if you have a

279

reasonable doubt as to their guilt, you will then vote for
a verdict of not guilty. Is that correct?

A. That’s right, sir.
ffol. 505] Q. And, having come to that conclusion after
hearing the evidence and the law, that will be your opinion
and shall remain your opinion, won’t it, sir?

A. That’s right.
Q. And regardless of what might be the opinion of the

other 11 members or, whether they are one way or whether
they are with you or, of another opinion?

A. That’s right.
Q. And if accepted on this jury, any verdict that comes

out of that jury room will be your verdict, will be your
conscientious belief in the matter, will it not?

A. That’s right.
Q. How do you feel about the fact that there are negro

attorneys appearing in the case? A. Will that affect you in
any way ?

A. No.
Q. And you will judge them by the same standards of

conduct that you would judge the other white attorneys,
both for the State and the defense in the case?

A. That’s right.
Q. Mr. Newton, where did you say you were from?
A. Astatulla.
Q. How long have you lived in Lake County?
A. 45 years.
Q. What is your business?
A. Carpentry.

[fol. 506] Q. Did you hear me read off the list of State’s
witnesses in this case?

A. Yes, sir. I did.
Q. Do you know any of them, sir?
A. I know the deputy sheriff, Yates.
Q. What is the nature of your acquaintanceship with

him?
A. I just met him, is all.
Q. Then it wouldn’t embarrass you any to sit in this case

where he is going to be a witness? You wouldn’t give any
more credence or any less credence to what he said than
someone you didn’t know?

A. No, sir. I wouldn’t.
Q. Have you read or heard anything concerning this case,

sir?

280

A. No, sir. I don’t pay no attention to the papers at
all.

Q. You served on a jury before, haven’t you?
A. No, sir.
Q. If the Court instructs you that the mere arrest and

bringing a person to trial, charging them with crime is no
evidence of their guilt. Will you subscribe to that prin
ciple ?

A. No, sir.
Q. Did you understand my question there?
A. No. I didn’t exactly understand you.
Q. Well, if the Court instructs you that merely because

these defendants have been arrested and charged with a
crime and brought into this courtroom for trial, that that
is no evidence of their guilt. That, of itself, is no evidence
of their guilt?

A. No.
[fol. 507] Q. And will you agree with the Court on that?

A. Sure.
Q. And if he says that they are presumed to be innocent,

that the presumption is that they are innocent of this crime,
and that that presumption remains with them throughout
this trial until the State introduces evidence proving their
guilt beyond a reasonable doubt, will you apply that pre
sumption to them?

A. Yes sir.
Q. Then at the present time, you believe that the three

defendants over there are presumed to be innocent right
at the present time?

A. That’s right.
Q. And will wait and see what evidence the State puts in?
A. That’s right.
Q. And unless evidence is introduced proving their guilt

beyond a reasonable doubt, you will then vote for a verdict
of not guilty. Is that correct, sir?

A. That’s right.
Q. How do you feel about the appearance of colored

attorneys representing these defendants? Do you think
that’s all right?

A. Yes sir.
Q. Could you judge them by the same standard of conduct

that you are going to judge the rest of the attorneys, Mr.
Hunter, myself, and Mr. Buoy?

A. Yes sir.

281

Q. Do you know of any reason why, if accepted on this
jury, you couldn’t serve and give a fair and impartial
trial?

A. No sir, I don’t.
[fol. 508] (Discussion at the Bench out of hearing of the
Reporter.)

By Mr. Akerman:
Q. Mr. Chase, you live out at Lady Lake, sir?
A. Yes sir.
Q. You said you hadn’t heard anything about this case,

didn’t you?
A. Very, very little.
Q. What you heard, you didn’t form any opinion, did

you?
A. No.
Q, And you think that you can come into this case and

try just like you had never heard anything about it before.
Is that right, sir?

A. Yes sir.
Q. Do you know any of these witnesses I called out, most

of them living down in the south end of the county?
A. Not a one of them.
Q. Do you know anything about these three defendants

over there, or their families?
A. Never seen them or heard of them before except the

little I ’ve seen in the papers.
Q. You have served on juries before, haven’t you?
A. Yes sir.
Q. And you are familiar with the fact that the Court

instructs you as to the law?
A. That’s right.
Q. And you are familiar with the instructions about

reasonable doubt?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. In other words, before you are going to convict any

body, you have got to be convinced by evidence beyond a
reasonable doubt?

A. Yes.
[fol. 509] Q. If there is any reasonable doubt in your
mind, at all, you are going to vote for a verdict of not guilty.
Is that correct, sir?

A. That’s right.

282

Q. And you are also familiar with the law that merely
because a person is charged with crime and brought to trial
that that doesn’t constitute evidence or is no indication
of his guilt?

A. That’s right.
Q. They come in here presumed to be innocent?
A. Yes sir.
Q. And then you feel that Charles Greenlee, Camuel

Shepherd, and Walter Irvin, over there, are presumed to be
innocent, right now ?

A. Absolutely.
Q. You are going to sit and wait and see what the evi

dence comes in on them?
A. Yes.
Q. And if, at the conclusion of the evidence, and after

the Court has instructed you as to the law and you retire
to consider your verdict, you feel, your opinion from what
evidence you have heard, and the law given to you by the
Court, that the 3 of them are innocent, or any of the three,
or that there is a reasonable doubt as to their guilt, you
are going to vote for a verdict of not guilty, aren’t you?

A. That’s right.
Q. And, having come to that opinion, you are going to

abide by it?
A. That’s right.
Q. And regardless of what, how the other 11 members

of the jury feel about it?
A. That’s right.

[fol. 510] Q. Would the fact that colored counsel appear,
colored attorneys are appearing in this case, as part of the
defense counsel, in any way affect you in this case?

A. Not whatsoever.
Q. And, if, in the discharge of their duties as attorneys

for the defendants, they have to cross examine witnesses,
white witnesses, you will judge them by the same standard
of conduct that you will judge the white attorneys ?

A. Yes sir.
Mr. Akerman: What says the State.
Mr. Hunter: Tender.
Mr. Akerman: The defendant, Charles Greenlee, excuses

Mr. Bowen, and Mr. Polk.

283

Mr. G ilbert H artw right , Mr. S im on H . B air, were sworn
and took their seats in the jury box.

By Mr. Hunter:
Q. Where are you from, Mr. Bair?
A. 6 miles north and east, of Leesburg.
Q. Did you ever live over towards Aster?
A. No sir.
Q. You spell your name different from those over there?
A. Yes.
Q. Are you in the Leesburg precinct?
A. Fruitland Park.

[fol. 511] Q. Your name is spelled B-a-i-r?
A. B-a-i-r.
Q. How long have you been there Mr. Bair?
A. 5 years.
Q. Where are you from?
A. Ohio.
Q. What is your business?
A. Retired.
Q. Do you know anything about this case?
A. Only what I have read.
Q. Form or express any opinion in reference to the case?
A. Not definitely.
Q. Don’t want you to tell what your opinion is, but you

do have some opinion?
A. No. I don’t have any opinion at all only what I have

read in the papers. Naturally, you form an opinion.
Q. Do you think you would have any difficulty in laying

that opinion aside and trying this ease on the evidence that
you hear?

A. No.
Q. Do you have any prejudice against colored people?
A. Not a bit.
Q. You are from Umatilla, aren’t you, Mr. Hartwright?
A. Yes sir.
Q. Have you heard anything about this case?
A. No. Haven’t talked to anyone. Just heard about it.
Q. Read it in the newspapers?
A. Yes.
Q. Have you any prejudice against the colored people?
A. Not a bit.
Q. Think you could give both sides a fair and impartial

[fol. 512] trial?

284

A. Yes sir. Impartial trial.
Q. How long have you been in Umatilla, Mr. llartwright?
A. About 30 years.
Q. Mr. Hartwright, do you have any conscientious

scruples against the infliction of capital punishment!
A. No sir.
Q. Do you know Mr. Bair!
A. No sir.
Mr. Hunter: OK. Now you can inquire.

By Mr. Akerman:
Q. Mr. Bair, where was it you said you lived, sir!
A. Fruitland Park district.
Q. You say you had read or heard something about this

case!
A. I have read about it. Yes sir.
Q. In the papers. What papers, Mr. Bair!
A. Leesburg Commercial.
Q. Naturally, you did form some opinion when you

read it!
A. Oh, yes sir.
Q. The nature of that opinion fixed or not!
A. No sir.
Q. Do you think that, having read concerning the case,

formed an opinion, that if, in the trial of the case, that you
would have any trouble distinguishing between what you
might have read in the newspapers and what came out on
the evidence, here!

A. What came out on the evidence.
Q. Suppose that the evidence didn’t introduce some of

the things that were in the newspapers; Would you have
any trouble erasing those from your mind and going ahead,
considering those things said in the paper as never been
proved!
[fol. 513] A. Sort of a question.

Q. I mean, you have read certain things in the news
papers. W e’ll assume in this trial that those things are
not proved in the evidence. No mention is made of them.
Now when you get ready to consider your verdict, do you
think you can erase from your mind those things that you
read in the papers and just feel like that you never heard
of them and no evidence of them being introduced here and
no effect on your verdict in any matter!

285

A. I would try not to have anything affect my verdict.
Q. I know, sir, but can you erase what you have heard

from your mind?
A. No. I can’t erase whatever I hear from my mind.
Q. In other words, that’s going to be back there?
A. It will be there. And I think that’s true with all of us.

That’s going to remain a memory there.
Q. Now my point is just this. What I am trying to arrive

at is, certain things have been stated in the newspapers and
it is my opinion that they will not be brought out and proven
in this trial. You see what I mean?

A. Yes.
Q. So that then, after you retire to consider the case,

are you going to be able to keep those things that you heard
but that were not introduced in the trial from in any manner
influencing your verdict?

A. I think so.
Q. You will make every effort to do so?
A. Yes.
Q. And you feel that you can be just as fair and impartial

a juror as if you had never heard anything concerning the
case?

A. Yes sir.
[fol. 514] Q. Did you state you are retired, Mr. Bair?

A. I am.
Q. Do you have a family, sir?
A. Yes sir.
Q. What does it consist of?
A. A son and daughter.
Q. I believe you stated in answer to the question by Mr.

Hunter, that you had no prejudice against the members of
the colored race?

A. That’s right.
Q. How do you feel about the fact that two of the defense

counsel in this case are members of the colored race ?
A. I have never heard of that before.
Q. And you feel that if they are defense counsel they

should participate in the case just like the white counsel do?
A. Yes.
Q. And you would judge them by the same standards of

conduct that you are going to judge Mr. Buoy, Mr. Hunter,
and myself ?

A. As long as their conduct is the same.
Q. And if they start cross examining a witness, even

286

though it is a white person, you wouldn’t feel that they
should hold up on the cross examination; that they should
go right ahead like any other lawyer should do and
wouldn’t start blaming them any quicker than you would
start blaming us?

A. That’s right.
Q. Mr. Hartwright, you live in Umatilla, sir?
A. Yes sir.
Q. Your business?
A. Carpentry.

[fol. 515] Q. You say you lived there for how long?
A. About 30 years.
Q. Do you have a family?
A. Wife and one boy.
Q. Do you know any of these witnesses I read the list of?
A. No sir.
Q. Do you read or did you hear anything concerning

this case ?
A. I read it in the papers, but I haven’t formed an

opinion.
Q. What papers did you read?
A. Orlando papers.
Q. You read it in the papers, but didn’t form an opinion?
A. That’s right.
Q. And you feel that if accepted on this jury, that you

can dismiss what you have heard about it, start off just
like you had never heard anything and take the evidence
as it comes from the stand and the law given you by the
Court?

A. That’s right.
Q. Did you ever serve on a jury before, sir?
A. Yes sir.
Q. Here, in a criminal case?
A. No sir.
Q. Never served on a criminal?
A. No sir.
Q. You heard my discussion with the other jurors con

cerning the rules of evidence, that the mere fact that
Charles Greenlee, Samuel Shepherd and Walter Irvin, the
three defendants seaated over there, were arrested, charged
with this crime, indicted for it and brought here to stand
[fol. 516] trial, is no evidence, whatsoever, of their guilt?

A. That’s right.

287

Q. And you subscribe to that and you will so believe!
A. Yes.
Q. In fact, the fact is that they are presumed to be in

nocent until the State has introduced evidence proving* their
guilt beyond a reasonable doubt!

A. That’s right.
Q. So that at the present moment, you agree that there

is a presumption that they are innocent of this crime !
A. Yes sir.
Q. And you will sit there, if accepted on this jury, and

wait and see what evidence the State puts in!
A. That’s right.
Q. And if, at the conclusion of all the evidence, you feel

that one or two or all of them are innocent, or even though
you may feel they might be guilty, if there is a reasonable
doubt in your mind, will you then vote for a verdict of not
guilty?

A. Yes.
Q. After having arrived at that opinion of not guilty, will

you abide by that opinion irrespective of what may be the
opinion of the other 11 jurors!

A. I will.
Q. Any verdict that’s arrived at will be your verdict;

will be the result of your conscientious opinion in this
case?

A. Yes sir.
Mr. Akerman: The Defendant, Samuel Shepherd, will

excuse Mr. Chase and Mr. Newton.

[fol. 517] Mr. J ames C. B aer, Mr. 0 ’N eal C. B urks , sworn,
took their seats in the jury box.

By Mr. Hunter:
Q. Mr. Barr, where do you live?
A. Clermont, Florida.
Q. How long have you been down there?
A. 37 years, I think. I came there in 1912.
Q. What is your business?
A. Carpenter by trade.
Q. Do you know anything about this case?
A. No. I have heard a lot of stuff.

288

Q. Stuff yon heard and read in the newspapers, did you
form or express any opinion about the guilt or innocence
of these defendants?

A. No, I haven’t. I go by the evidence.
Q. Go by the evidence, strictly?
A. Exactly.
Q. Do you have any prejudice against colored people?
A. No sir. I love the negro and feel the same toward him

as anybody else.
Q. Do you feel, Mr. Barr, that you could give these de

fendants a fair and impartial trial in this case?
A. I could.
Q. And you will do it, too, won’t you?
A. I will.

[fol. 518] Q. What is your name?
A. O’Neal C. Burks.
Q. Where do you live, Mr. Burks?
A. Tavares.
Q. How long have you been living in Tavares?
A. 12 years.
Q. Do you know anything about this case?
A. No sir.
Q. Have you any prejudice against the colored race?
A. No sir.
Q. If taken on this jury, in this case, can you give both

sides a fair and impartial trial?
A. I can.
Mr. Hunter: You may inquire.—
Q. Both of them, I think I know, though, do you have any

conscientious scruples against the infliction of capital pun
ishment?

A. I am in favor of capital punishment.
Q. Where the law requires it?
A. Yes.
Q. How about you, Mr. Burks?
A. I am in favor of it.
Mr. Hunter: OK.

By Mr. Akerman:
Q. Mr. Bar, you say you live down at Clermont?
A. Yes sir.

[fol. 519] Q. Your business, please, sir?

289

A. I am a carpenter by trade. But I ’m not doing any
thing now. I ’m retired.

Q. Are yon fairly well acquainted over in the Groveland
section ?

A. Well I haven’t been over in Groveland. I am ac
quainted with people over in Groveland.

Q. Do you by any chance know Mr. and Mrs. Willie
Padget?

A. No sir. I don’t know them.
Q. How about the Tyson family down in Bay Lake ?
A. No, I don’t know them.
Q. Have you ever heard anything concerning these de

fendants who live down there, Greenlee, and Shepherd—I
mean, Shepherd and Irvin?

A. Who hasn’t heard it?
Q. I mean, prior to this incident?
A. I t ’s been the talk around.
Q. You heard some talk around about them?
The Court: Mr. Sheriff, there’s a rule that people are not

to stand around in the aisles or in the corridors outside.
That is not being enforced. I Avant it enforced immediately
and from now on. Get the folks out of the hallways.

All right. Proceed.

By Mr. Akerman:
Q. You say you read something concerning this case?
A. No. I never read anything* about it. I have read the

[fol. 520] headlines. That’s all.
Q. Do you remember which papers ?
A. Well, Orlando Sentinal and Clermont paper, there.
Q. Then you heard it discussed some around Clermont?
A. Oh, yes. I ha\m heard it discussed. We even had the

military business out there for a while, in Clermont.
Q. Did you discuss it with people ?
A. No. I haven’t discussed it at all.
Q. You just listened to what was said about it? Some

of it, you just had to listen to ?
A. They asked me several times if I had made up my

mind. I says, “ No, I haven’t heard the evidence, yet.”
Q. You just weren’t going to express any opinion on

this thing until you came in the courtroom here to hear the
evidence on it?

19—420

290

A. Yes.
Q. And you feel that what little, or what you have heard

about it, will in no manner affect you in the trial of this
case; that you can try it just like you never have heard it?

A. Not a bit in the world.
Q. How long have you lived in Lake County?
A. I came here in 1912. About 37 years, I guess.
Q. Most of it down at the Clermont area?
A. Yes sir.
Q. Do you have a family, sir?
A. I have a wife. That’s all.

[fol. 521] Q. What is your feeling toward negro attorneys
participating in this case?

A. I feel, because he is a negro, I would protect him and
take care of him. If he is in a negro’s place. I would pro
tect him and take care of him.

Q. Well, do you feel that, being an attorney?
A . Just the same as I w ou ld a w hite man.
Q. You are talking about negro attorneys? Now is that

a negro in a negro’s place?
A. Which?
Q. The fact that two of the attorneys for the defendants,

here, are negroes
A. I haven’t got any illwill feeling at all.
Q. And if they participate in this trial, you feel that it

is perfectly all right for them to cross examine the witness?
A. Certainly.
Q. Going to judge them by the same standards of con

duct that you are going to judge the white attorneys here
in the case?

A. Yes.
Q. Mr. Barr, you live in Tavares?
A. Yes sir.
Q. What is your business?
A. Citrus market.
Q. How long have you lived over here in Lake County?
A. 12 years. I have been in Lake County 14 years.
Q. Now, are you acquainted down in the Groveland area?
A. Yes sir.
Q. Did you ever know Mr. and Mrs. Padget?
A. No sir.

[fol. 522] Q. Tyson family?
A. No sir.

291

Q. Any of these other witnesses that I read out?
A. Nothing hut the deputies. I know them as I see them.
Q. Do you know the deputies?
A. As I see them.
Q. How have you heard or read anything concerning this

case?
A. I have read.
Q. What papers did you read it in, sir?
A. Well, fact, I was out of the State, but I, when I first

read about it. I read the out of State papers.
Q. From what you read, did you form any opinion?
A. No sir.
Q. Do you feel that you could disregard anything you

have read concerning this, start off in a fair trial?
A. Yes sir.
Q. Have you ever served on a jury before, sir?
A. Not in this State.
Q. But you are familiar with the law of this land that,

merely because a person is arrested, charged with a crime
and brought to trial, that that’s no evidence of, or indica
tion of their guilt ?

A. No.
Q. And you feel that, subscribe to that law, do you?
A. Yes sir.
Q. And that a person is presumed to be innocent and that

[fol. 523] presumption stays with them throughout the
trial until it is overcome by evidence or proof of their guilt
beyond a reasonable doubt?

A. Yes sir.
Q. Then you feel at the present time that the defendants

herein in this case, Charles Greenlee, Samuel Shepherd, and
Walter Irvin, are presumed to be innocent right now?

A. That’s right.
Q. And you will consider them innocent all the way

through the trial until and unless evidence is introduced
proving their guilt beyond a reasonable doubt?

A. Yes sir.
Q. And the Court will instruct you that if there is any

reasonable doubt in your mind you should resolve it in
favor of the defendants?

A. Yes sir.
Q. And, will you do so?
A. Yes sir.

292

Q. And if, after hearing all of the evidence and the law
given to you by Judge Futch, you retire to consider your
verdict, if you feel of the opinion that some of the defend
ants or all of them are innocent, or, that there is a reason
able doubt in your mind as to their guilt, will you then cast
your vote for a verdict of not guilty?

A. Yes.
Q. And, having reached that opinion from the law and

the evidence in the case, and the testimony that’s been
given to you here in this case, having reached that opinion,
will you abide bv that opinion?

A. Yes.
Q. Regardless of who, what may be the feeling of the

other members of the jury?
A. Yes.

[fol. 524] Q. And that any verdict coming out of that
jury room will be your conscientious belief as to this case?

A. Yes.

Mr. Akerman: What says the State?
Mr. Hunter: Tender.

(At this point, the Court took a 5 minutes recess, at the
end of which time, the following proceedings were had:)

Mr. Hunter: We tender the jury.
Mr. Akerman: The defendant, Samuel Shepherd, will ex

cuse Mr. Barr.

Mr. A. B. Crutchfield , sw orn, took his seat in the jury
box.

By Mr. Hunter:
Q. Where do you live, Mr. Crutchfield?
A. Leesburg.
Q. How long have you lived there?
A. 19 years. A little better than that.
Q. What is your business?
A. Fruit dealer.
Q. Do you know anything about this case?
A. Well I ’ve heard the street talk, as everyone has, and,

over the radio.
Q. Read about it in the newspapers?
A. Yes.

293

Q. Form or express any opinion as to the guilt or in
nocence of these particular defendants from what you saw
and heard and read ?

A. Not expressed opinion. No sir.
[fol. 525] Q. Do you feel that you could try this case
fairly on the evidence that you would hear from the wit
nesses ?

A. I do, sir.
Q. Have you any prejudice against the colored people ?
A. No sir. I have not.
Q. If taken as a juror, you will give both sides a fair

and impartial trial!
A. Yes.
Q. You have been on juries before, here?
A. Several.
Q. Are you conscientiously opposed to the infliction of

capital punishment?
A. I am not.

By Mr. Akerman:
Q. Mr. Crutchfield, you say you read the newspaper arti

cles on this case?
A. I heard more street discussion and radio and I read

the Orlando Sentinal. Yes sir.
Q. From what you read, did you form any opinion as

to the guilt or innocence?
A. As for facts, in this case, I couldn’t say I formed any,

because I have no facts.
Q. I mean, from what you read in the papers, did you

form, or heard discussed, did you form any opinion as to
the guilt or innocence.

A. Not as to the guilt or innocence but as to the articles
I read. The talk on the street. Would be inclined to
read a paper and, what was in there, we would form an
opinion from what was in the paper. But not as to either
one.
[fol. 526] Q. In other words, naturally, you read the pa
pers, why, you, it had some effect on you ?

A. It would have that. According to the papers.
Q. I didn’t quite catch the distinction you made. That

you formed an opinion, but not on the facts?,
A. Not on the facts. I didn’t have no facts.
Q. But, from what you read in the papers, did you form

294

an opinion as to whether these three defendants were
guilty or innocent?

A. I have not.
Q. And you don’t think that what you have read or

heard or the discussion that you heard, or had concerning
this case, in any manner affected you as a juror in this
case?

A. No sir.
Q. You think that you can now put aside everything

you heard and come in here and try this case just like you
had never of it until you sat in the box there a few moments
ago?

A. I can, sir.
Q. You said you were in the fruit business, Mr. Crutch

field?
A. Yes sir.
Q. Do you have a family here in Leesburg?
A. One daughter. I am divorced. I have one daughter.
Q. How long did you say you lived in Lake County?
A. A little over 19 years.
Q. You are not represented by Mr. Hunter as your at

torney, are you?
A. No sir.

[fol. 527] Q. Are you acquainted down in the Groveland
area?

A. In a minor sense. I know the B & W Fruit Company,
and I have done business there and I know where Grove-
land is and I have been there. But I wouldn’t say that
I was acquainted there.

Q. Do you know Norma Padget or her husband, Willie
Padget ?

A. No sir, I don’t.
Q. Do you know the Tyson family down in the Bay Lake

area ?
A. No.
Q. Do you know Curtis Howard?
A. Yes sir. I do, sie.
Q. What is the nature of your acquaintanceship with

Mr. Howard?
A. I have known Curtis for a number of years when he

was in school in Leesburg. I know that he works for the
Florida Citrus Commission as an inspector and he has been
working with his father-in-law recently at the filling sta
tion called the Sunshine Service Station.

295

Q. Been working with his father-in-law?
A. Father-in-law’s station. Yes sir.
Q. You trade there?
A. Some. Yes.
Q. Have you discussed this case or heard Curtis Howard

talk any of this case?
A. No sir.
Q. How long have you known him?
A. How long have I known him?

[fol. 528] Q. Yes. The best of your memory.
A. I would say 10 years at the longest.
Q. Do you see him quite often?
A. Yes sir. I see him quite often.
Q. Mr. Howard has been summonsed as a State witness

in this case.
A. Yes sir?
Q. And in all probability, will testify as one of the State’s

witnesses in this case. Now, in the trial, as I say, he, in
all probability, will testify. Now, because of your acquain
tanceship with Mr. Howard, would you be inclined to more
readily believe what he said than what some stranger
said?

A. I would take the evidence as presented, sir.
Q. Well------
A. I know him, but it wouldn’t affect against anybody

else.
Q. My question was, even though you take the evidence,

but, as to what he said and, what somebody else might
say, would you be more inclined to believe him because
of having known him this long period of time? And, I
gather, very favorably.

A. Nothing but the fact, sir. I would not. I would
take the facts.

Q. If you are accepted as a juror, you are going to have
to establish what the facts are, and the question I am
asking you is that, Mr. Howard testifies, someone else may
testify directly in conflict to his testimony. Now in arriv
ing at what you consider th be the facts, and your judg
ment will be the final judgment on this, would you be more
inclined to believe Mr. Howard for having known, him
favorably for the past 10 years than you would be some
other witness whom you didn’t know at all?
[fol. 529] A. No sir.

296

Q. Now two of the defense counsel in this case are ne
groes, Mr. Crutchfield, participating in the trial of this
case. Will that in any way affect you in the trial of this
case?

A. No sir.
Q. And do you feel that they are entitled to come in if

the Court has ruled that they are entitled to come in?
A. Yes.
Q. And, having come in as defense counsel, you will

expect them to act like any other attorney, judge them by
the same standards of conduct that you would judge the
rest of the attorneys in here?

A. Yes sir.
Q. Even if it is in connection with a cross examination

of witnesses?
A. That’s right.
Q. As you know, at the trial of a case, the attorneys

have to cross examine the witnesses and if they should have
to cross examine white witnesses in this case, you wouldn’t
hold any ill feeling toward them any more than you would
toward Mr. Hunter, myself, Mr. Price, Mr. Buoy, on our
cross examination, that they are entitled to ask the same
questions and, in the same manner and in the same tone
that the other attorneys would?

A. Yes sir.
Q. Under the law of our land, which we all live in, every

person, black or white, is presumed to be innocent of a
crime and that presumption stays with them. The fact that
they have been charged with the crime, indicted, brought
into Court, here, standing trial, today, under the law, they
[fol. 530] are still presumed to be innocent. Could you
subscribe to that as your belief, too?

A. Yes sir.
Q. And then you believe right at the present moment

the presumption that Charles Greenlee, Samuel Shepherd,
and Walter Irvin, three defendants over there, are not
guilty of the crime for which they are now on trial?

A. At this moment, yes sir.
Q. And will you continue to clothe them with that pre

sumption all through this trial and unless and until the
State introduces evidence proving them guilty beyond a
reasonable doubt, you will still consider them innocent. Is
that correct?

29 7

A. I will, sir.
Q. And if, at the conclusion of all of the testimony in

this case, you are of the opinion that one or all of them are
innocent or there is a reasonable doubt in your mind as
to the guilt of them, then will you vote for a verdict of not
guilty?

A. I will, sir.
Q. Then if you have arrived at that verdict, either be

cause of your belief in their innocence or, not because of
your belief in their innocence, but because you believe there
hasn’t been sufficient evidence to prove them guilty beyond
a reasonable doubt, and, having arrived at an opinion of
a verdict of not guilty, will you remain by that verdict!

A. I will, sir.
Q. And, regardless of how the other gentlemen seated

around here may feel about it?
A. Yes.

[fol. 531] Q. In other words, if accepted on this jury,
whatever verdict is brought out of that jury room will be
your conscientious verdict and not a compromise with any
of the others?

A. Yes.
Q. In other words, you will vote for what you conscien

tiously believe is the right verdict according to the law
and the evidence in this case?

A. Yes.
Q. Regardless of how your other jurors may feel or

regardless of how other people in this community, State or
Nation feel?

A. Yes sir.
Mr. Akerman: The defendant, Samuel Shepherd, will

excuse Mr. Lovell and Mr. B. B. Green.

M e. C harles E. H erring and M r . S. B. K n ig h t , sworn,
took their seats in the ju r y box.

By Mr. Hunter:
Q. Mr. Knight, what precinct do you live in?
A. Mascotte.
Mr. Hunter: Under the rule, Mr. Knight will be excused

by the Court, I presume.

298

Mb. J ames M. W atson , sworn entered the jury box.

Mr. Hunter: Mr. Watson is also from Mascotte.
The Court: All right, Mr. Watson.

ffol. 532] Mr. J. B. N orris, Mr. H tjry, were called to the
box and sworn.

Mr. Hunter:
Q. Where are you from, Mr. Hury?
A. From Fruitland Park.
Q. Do you know any of the facts and circumstances

connected with this easel
A. Only what I have read in the papers.
Q. From what you read in the paper, have you formed

or expressed any opinion as to the guilt or innocence of
these individual defendants!

A. No sir.
Q. How long have you lived over there!
A. 34 years.
Q. What business are you in?
A. Poultry business.
Q. Do you have any conscientious scruples against the

infliction of capital punishment in those cases where the
law authorizes it?

A. No sir.
Q. Do you have any prejudice against the colored race?
A. No sir.
Q. Do you know any reason why you couldn’t sit as a

fair and impartial juror in this case?
A. I do not.
Q. And I know you would do that, wouldn’t you?
A. I would.
Mr. Hunter: You may inquire.—Hold on. I haven’t

inquired about Mr. Norris.
[fol. 533] Q. Mr. Norris, you live at Lake Jem, don’t you?

A. That’s correct.
Q. Do you know anything about this case?
A. Just what I have read in the papers.
Q. Did you form or express any opinion as to the indi

vidual guilt of these defendants from what you read?

299

A. No. I don’t believe I have.
Q. Do you have any prejudice against the colored race?
A. No.
Q. Could you give them a fair and impartial trial like

you would a white man?
A. I would.
Q. Know any reason why you couldn’t do that in this

case?
A. No sir.
Q. If taken as a juror, would you give both sides a fair

and impartial trial?
A. I would.

Mr. Hunter: You may inquire.

By Mr. Akerman:
Q. Mr. Norris, what is your business out at Lake Jem.
A. Grove foreman.
Q. How long have you lived in Lake County, Mr. Norris?
A. About 3 years.
Q. Where did you come from?
A. Tampa.
Q. Came from Tampa.
A. Before then.
Q. You say you have heard this case discussed or, you

read it in the newspapers, or, just what was the nature
of it?
[fol. 534] A. I read the newspapers.

Q. What newspapers did you read?
A. The Orlando paper and the Mt. Dora Topic.
Q. From what you read, you state you formed no opinion

concerning the guilt or innocence?
A. No.
Q. Are you acquainted in the Groveland area?
A. No, I am not.
Q. You know none of these witnesses that I have called

out?
A. No.
Q. You know nothing of the two defendants, Shepherd

and Irvin, who live down in the Groveland area and, know
ing nothing of them know nothing of their families?

A. No.
Q. You served on juries before?
A. I have not.

300

Q. The Court, at the conclusion of the case will instruct
you as to the law. And it is my believe that the Court will
instruct you that every person is presumed to be innocent
of crime and that the mere fact that a person has been
arrested by the State or County officials, indicted, and
brought to trial is no evidence, whatsoever, of their guilt.
Do you believe you would have any trouble subscribing to
that view!

A. I don’t think so.
Q. And that, even thought they have been arrested,

charged with the crime, brought in and are now standing
trial, they are presumed to be innocent and, that presump
tion remains with a person accused of crime all the way
through his trial unless and until his guilt is proven by
[fol. 535] the evidence beyond a reasonable doubt. In view
of that being the law of our land, do you now believe that
Charles Greenlee, Samuel Shepherd, and Walter Irvin
are presumed to be innocent at this very moment?

A. I do.
Q. And will you give them the benefit of that presumption

all the way through this trial and if, at the conclusion of
the trial after having heard the evidence from the witness
stand, it is your opinion that one or all of them are inno
cent of this charge, or, even that it might be your believe
that they are all guilty, if that has not been proven to you by
evidence beyond a reasonable doubt, will you vote for a
verdict of not guilty?

A. I will.
Q. And, having arrived at that verdict, having arrived

at that opinion, would you stand by that opinion regardless
of how the other members of the jury might feel or vote
on it?

A. Yes sir.
Q. Two of the defendants’ counsel in this case are

negroes. And will participate in this trial. Does that
fact in any way affect you in connection with this case?

A. No. It doesn’t.
Q. And, do you feel that if the Court has stated that they

are entitled to be defense counsel in this case, that they
are entitled to take such part in the case as any lawyer
as defense counsel would? Such as cross examining the
wntness?

A. Yes.
Q. And that you would judge them by the same standard

301

[fol. 536] of conduct that you would judge any of the white
lawyers?

A. Yes sir. I would.
Q. And should one or the other or both of them address

the jury, would you pay them the same consideration that
you would pay in listening to either Mr. Hunter, Mr. Buoy,
or myself ?

A. I would.
Q. Do you know of any reason why, if taken on this

case, that you cannot be a fair and impartial juror, render
your verdict in accordance with the evidence introduced
here?

A. No. I don’t.
Q. I didn’t ask you about your family, did I?
Q. Do you have a family, sir?
A. A wife and three boys.
Mr. Akerman: No further questions.

By Mr. Akerman:
Q. Mr. Hury, you live at Fruitland Park?
A. That’s right.
Q. What business are you in, sir?
A. Poultry business.
Q. You have a family, sir?
A. Have a boy and a girl.
Q. And how long have you lived in Lake County?
A. 34 years.

[fol. 537] Q. Now, did you state you had heard or you had
read about this case?

Q. I have read about it. Yes sir.
Q. Bead it in the newspapers?
A. Newspaper.
Q. What newspapers, please?
A. Times Union and the Orlando papers.
Q. From what you read, did you come to any opinion as

to the guilt or innocence of the defendants in this case?
A. No, I haven’t.
Q. Do you feel that you could now disregard what you

have read or heard in connection with this case ?
A. I do.
Q. Try it just like you had never heard anything about

it before?
A. That’s right.

302

Q. And, do you feel that, under the law, that as a pre
sumption of innocence, that, at this very moment, there is
a presumption that Charles Greenlee, Samuel Shepherd
and Walter Irvin, are innocent of this crime!

A. That’s right.
Q. And that you will give them the benefit of that pre

sumption all through the trial!
A. I would.
Q. And unless there is evidence proving them guilty

beyond a doubt, you will believe them innocent and so vote!
A. That’s right.
Q. And that even though at the conclusion of all the

evidence, your belief should be that they are guilty, still
you have from the evidence or lack of evidence, a reasonable
doubt as to their guilt, will you still vote for a verdict of
not guilty!

A. Oh, yes. Not guilty.
[fol. 538] Q. And, having arrived at that opinion from
the evidence and law given to you by Judge Futch, will
abide by that opinion and stand by it!

A. I will.
Q. Regardless of whether the other 11 of the gentlemen

here agree with you or decide otherwise!
A. Oh, yes.
Q. You have heard me question the other jurors in con

nection with the fact that negro defense counsel are appear
ing in this case!

A. Don’t make any difference at all.
Q. You will expect them to act and you will expect them

to diligently defend just like you would expect any other
counsel!

A. That’s right.
Q. And, if they do have the right to cross examine just

like any other counsel and, if they should, one or the other
or both of them, should one of them be addressing the
jury, you show them the consideration of listening to them
just as you would any other counsel either for the defense
or the State!

A. That’s right.
Mr. Akerman: Defendant, Samuel Shepherd, will excuse

Mr. Hury.

303

Mb. J. D. Ogden, sw orn, took his p lace in the ju ry box.

By Mr. Hunter:
Q. Where do you live?
A. Groveland.
Mr. Hunter: He comes under the rule, Your Honor.
The Court: All right. Excuse him.

[fol. 539] Me, S. B. Gamble was called to the jury box and
sworn.

Mr. Hunter: Mr. Gamble is from Groveland.
The Court: All right. Mr. Gamble, you’re excused.

M e. G eoege L. H aw kin s w as called to the ju ry b ox and
sworn.

The Court: You gentlemen from Groveland, and Mas-
eotte, don’t get it in your heads these folks don’t like you
up here. They just didn’t want to get you into an embar
rassing situation. I t ’s been agreed by counsel, in this case.

By Mr. Hunter:
Q. Where do you live, Mr. Hawkins?
A. Bight outside of Eustis.
Q. How long have you lived there?
A. Oh, it ’s been about a year. I have lived in the county

right outside of Eustis, here for 5 years.
Q. Where are you from, originally?
A. Ohio.
Q. What is your business?
A. Contractor.
Q. What kind of work do you contract ?
A. I develop agricultural land.
Q. You have bulldozers and machinery of that kind?
A. Yes sir.

[fol. 540] Q. Didn’t you once live in Tavares?
A. Yes. I lived over here on this end of the lake for

a short while.
Q. That’s before you went to Eustis?

304

A. Yes.
Q. And, have you heard any of the facts and circum

stances in connection with this case?
A. No sir.
Q. Have you read anything about them?
A. Yery little bit.
Q. You therefore have not formed or expressed any

opinion as to the guilt or innocence?
A. I haven’t.
Q. Do you have any prejudice against them because of

their color?
A. No sir.
Q. Do you know any reason why you couldn’t sit as a

fair and impartial juror in this case ?
A. No sir.
Q. If taken as a juror, will you do that?
A. Yes sir.
Q. You have had considerable experience with colored

people, haven’t you? You work them?
A. Some.
Q. You have no prejudice against them?
A. No.
Q; Are you conscientiously opposed to the infliction of

capital punishment?
A. No.
Mr. Hunter: You may inquire.

By Mr. Price:
Q. Mr. Hawkins, you say you are from Eustis ?
A. Yes sir. Right outside of Eustis.

[fol. 541] Q. You are a builder, you say?
A. No.
Q. Contractor?
A. Yes. Clear land.
Q. For whom do you principally work?
A. Well, most of the farmers around the county. Citrus

growers.
Q. You are not now employed by any of the witnesses or

Mr. Hunter or any of us engaged in this case?
A. No sir.
Q. Are you acquainted around Groveland, Mr. Hawkins?
A. No sir.

Q. Have you ever done any construction work over there
in that section, Groveland, and Maseottef

A. I had one little job down there, about a day and a half.
Q. In other words, you didn’t stay over there very long!
A. Not very long.
Q. You are not acquainted in that area over there at all?
A. No sir.
Q. Hid you hear or could you hear Mr. Akerman when

he read the list of the State’s witnesses?
A. Yes sir.
Q. You heard all of those names?
A. Yes.
Q. Are you familiar with any of those people?.
A. No. Only a couple of the deputy sheriffs and I just

know them when I see them.
Q. Just kind of a speaking acquaintance?
A. That’s all. Just wave as you go by.
Q. And howdie, and that’s it? Now you know, Mr. Haw

kins, that there is a presumption that any one who stands
trial charged with a crime, there is a presumption that that
[fol. 542] person is innocent. You know that?

A. Yes sir.
Q. And that that presumption stays with that person,

presumption of innocence, all the wTay through the trial
until and unless there is sufficient evidence introduced by
the prosecution to erase every reasonable doubt as to the
innocence or guilt of that person. In other words, that
person is presumed to be innocent of the crime notwith
standing the fact that he has been charged with the crime
after he has been arrested and that he is here standing
trial for it, that presumption stays with him all the way
through. It must be overcome and, as long as there is even
a reasonable doubt as to it, he must be given the benefit of
that reasonable doubt. As to the question of his innocence.
Are you willing to subscribe to that principle?

A. Yes sir.
Q. You are willing, and you do presume now that these

three defendants are innocent?
A. Yes sir.
Q. And you will continue to give them the benefit of that

presumption until there is sufficient evidence introduced
here?

A. That’s right.
20—420'

305

306

Q. To overcome that presumption and to erase the pre
sumption entirely?

A. Yes sir.
Q. And if there is even a reasonable doubt in your mind

of the innocence of the person, then will you resolve your
doubt in favor of the defendants?

A. Yes sir.
[fol. 543] Q. In other words, the slightest reasonable
doubt, you will resolve in favor of these three defendants?

A. Yes sir.
Q. Of course, now, we have said before, we do have two

negroes as counsel for the defense. Do you have any ob
jection or any feeling? Will you entertain any feeling in
your mind of you see these two negro counsel here ques
tioning the witnesses in this case?

A. No sir.
Q. And of course, you — that on cross examination, at

times, the questioning becomes pretty rapid and of course,
you realize that possibly in this case, we expect that prob
ably there will even be young ladies put on the stand. Do
you think that will arouse any feeling against these counsel
that we have, here?

A. No.
Q. All right. Are you a family man, Mr. Hawkins?
A. No sir.
Q. You are still enjoying single blessedness?
A. Yes sir.
Q. I think you stated that you had not made any definite

opinion about this case?
A. No. I haven’t.
Q. You read the newspapers, probably?
A. Well, two small accounts. One in the Topic and one

in the Sentinel, I think it was.
Q. But you are willing to come in here with no set

opinion ?
A. That’s right.

ffol. 544] Q. And to listen to the evidence in this case
and make your verdict solely on that?

A. Yes sir.
Q. Now in the event that you became convinced of the

guilt or innocence of these defendants, and we’ll say that
perhaps some, or even all 11 others of these jurors, are set
in the other direction. Do you think that there is any chance
that you might go ahead and give in to them or, will you

307

maintain your own view of the evidence that’s presented?
A. Yes sir.
Mr. Hunter: We tender the jury.
Mr. Price: All right. The Defendant, Samuel Shepherd,

Your Honor, excuses Mr. Burke.

Mr. R obert B. R evels, sworn, was called to the box.

Mr. Hunter:
Q. Where do you live, Mr. Revels?
A. Howie.
Q. How long have you lived in Howie, Mr. Revels?
A. About 15 years.
Q. Who was your father?
A. George Revels.
Q. Have you heard any of the facts or circumstances in

connection with this case discussed?
A. Well, yes sir.
Q. What is it you have heard? Neighborhood rumor?
A. Yes sir.
Q. You haven’t heard any of the witnesses or any person

who purported to know anything about the facts, have you ?
A. No sir.

[fol. 545] Q. Have you read anything in the newspapers
about it?

A. A little bit. Yes sir.
Q. Now from those things, have you formed or expressed

any opinion as to the guilt or innocence if these individual
defenders?

A. No sir.
Q. Do you have any prejudice against the colored race

which would preclude you from giving them a fair and im
partial trial?

A. No sir.
Q, Doyyou know any reason why you couldn’t sit as a

fair and impartial juror in this case?
A. No.
Q. Are you conscientiously opposed to the infliction of

capital punishment in those cases where the law author
izes it?

A. No sir.
Mr. Hunter: You may inquire.

308

By Mr. Price:
Q. Mr. Revels, did you read any newspaper accounts of

this happening?
A. Yes sir. Some.
Q. Which papers did you read, sir?
A. The Orlando paper.
Q. The Orlando Sentinel Star?
A. Yes sir.
Q. You didn’t form any opinion, however, as you read

them ?
A. No sir.
Q. All right. Are you a family man, Mr. Revels?
A. Yes sir.
Q. Who, what are the members of your family?
A. Wife and two children.

[fol. 546] Q. Boy and girl?
A. Two girls.
Q. Mr. Revels, have you ever served on a jury before ?
A. No, I haven’t.
Q. Never have. Well, Judge Futch will, I am sure, in

struct you, after all the evidence has been put in in this
trial, will instruct you that there is a presumption in a
criminal prosecution, there is a presumption of the inno
cence of the party charged with the crime at the trial.
Now the fact that he has been arrested, the fact that he
has been charged with the crime, and been brought into
Court, is not evidence of any sort as to his guilt. But
rather, that there is a presumption that that person is
innocent of any crime until evidence has been introduced
to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that that person is
guilty of the crime. Now, do you believe that in your
own mind, right now, that you can give these three de
fendants, Irvin, Shepherd, and Greenlee, the benefit of
that presumption? In other words, are you willing, as you
sit there in the jury box, at this time, and on through to the
end of the trial, are you willing to sit there and presume
that these three defendants are innocent until, if and until,
enough evidence has been introduced to show it to you
beyond a reasonable doubt that they are innocent of this
crime ?

A. Yes sir.
Q. Now, as we have said before, two of the counsel for

defense in this case are negroes. Do you think that that

309

would influence your feeling at all if you sit on the jury?
[fol. 547] Of course it will probably become necessary from
time to time for them to question, even perhaps vigorously,
the various witnesses in this case. Do you think that that
will create any feeling on your part that would prejudice
the defendants?

A. No sir.
Q. Mr. Watson, do you know Norma Padget?
A. No sir. I don’t.
Q. Do you know her husband, Willie Padget?
A. No sir. I don’t.
Q. Do you know Same Dotto, or Howard Crowell?
A. No sir.
Q. Now Mr. Akerman read the list of State’s witnesses

here, before. Did you hear Mr. Akerman read that list of
names?

A. Yes sir.
Q. You heard him at the time. It won’t be necessary

for me to ask you all of those, individually. Were there any
names which Mr. Akerman read then, of people with whom
you are acquainted?

A. I don’t believe there was.
Q. There were not, that you knew?
A. No sir.
Q. Are you acqiminted around Groveland ?
A. Yes sir. Some.
Q. Are you acquainted with the defendants in this case?
A. No sir.
Q. Are you perhaps acquainted with their families ? The

Irvings and the Shepherds?
A. No sir.
Q. Are you acquainted with the Tyson family, sir?
A. Yes sir.

[fol. 548] Q. You are? Just what is your acquaintance
with the Tyson’s? Has it been over a number of years?

A. Yes sir. I have known the father for a good many
years.

Q. Would you say that they had been rather good friends
of yours for a number of years?

A. Yes sir. I would.
Q. Well do you think that being and having been ac

quainted with the Tyson’s in a very friendly way for a
number of years, that that wrnuld influence your feeling

310

in t-liis case at all? Perhaps arouse sympathy on your part,
which of course, I believe would be natural?

A. I don’t believe it would. No sir.
Q. Of course, now, it would be a very natural thing if it

did. I could understand that of course. About howT many
years have you known the Tyson family, Mr. Revels?

A. 20 years, I imagine.
Q. Do you know Norma Padget, who was Norma Tyson?
A. No, I don’t.
Mr. Akerman: We challenge Mr. Revels for cause if

he is a friend of the family of the prosecutrix for a period
of 20 years?

By Mr. Hunter:
Q. How far do you live from the Tyson’s?
A. I don’t even know where the Tysons live.

[fol. 549] Q. Is your acquaintance just an acquaintance
with those people?

A. Well, I consider the father a good friend of mine.
I have known him for many years.

Q. How long since you saw him?
A. Well, I see him every few days.
Q. Where at? Does he visit your house?
A. No. I see him up around the store where I work.
Q. Would the fact that you know him in any way affect

you in the reception of the testimony in this particular
case ? Could you pass on the testimony here without being
influenced at all by the fact you know Mr. Tyson?

A. I think I could. Yes sir.
Q. Well do you know whether you could or not?
A. I believe I could.
Q. Is that as far as you can go on it?
A. Yes sir.
Q. You don’t know, then whether it would affect you or

not?
The Court: I think we better excuse Mr. Revels on the

challenge for cause.

311

Mr. C. E. H arden was called to the box and sworn.

By Mr. Hunter:
Q. Where are you from, Mr. Harden!
A. Mt. Vernon.

[fol. 550] Q. How long have you lived in Mt. Vernon?
A. 56 years.
Q. Do you know anything about this case?
A. I read a little in the papers.
Q. From what you read in the papers, did you form or

express any opinion as to the guilt or innocence of the de
fendant?

A. Yes. I believe I did.
Q. Beg pardon?
A. Yes sir.
Q. Is that a fixed opinion ?
A. Well, I don’t know. I believe it is.
Q. You would try a man then, by what a newspaper said?
A. I believe it is.
Q. You tried a man, then, by what that newspaper said?

Rather than the evidence produced before the Court.
Mr. Akerman: If the Court please, I don’t believe that

question is proper.
(Whereupon, it was argued to the Court.)
Mr. Akerman: I object to the question in the form it is

in. Argumentative type.
The Court:

[fol. 551] I think the question is a little bit out of line.
Q. Which would you give precedent in the trial of this

case; what you read in the newspapers or the testimony
you heard from the wntness stand?

A. Well, the evidence from the witness stand is what I
would go by. When I ’m somewhat prejudiced on the case.

Q. You are prejudiced on the case?
A. Yes sir. I am prejudiced on the case.

Mr. Hunter: OK. I think the gentleman is disqualified.
The Court: All right. Come down.

312

M e . F ran k Oberholtzer was called to the box and sworn.
By Mr. Hunter:

Q. Where do you live, Mr. Oberholtzer?
A. Yalaha,
Q. How long have you lived there?
A. About 35 years.
Q. What business are you in?
A. Citrus groves.
Q. Have you heard any of the facts or circumstances

in connection with this case?
A. No.
Q. Have you read anything about them?
A. Just read the paper. The Orlando Sentinal.
Q. From what you read, have you formed or expressed

any opinion as to the guilt or innocence of these defend
ants ?

A. No.
[fol. 552] Q. Do you have any prejudice against them
because of their race?

A. No.
Q. Do you know any reason why you could not sit as a

fair and impartial juror in this case?
A. No.
Q. If taken as a juror, will you do that?
A. Sure.

Mr. Hunter: You may inquire.—
Q. Are you opposed to capital punishment in those cases

where the law authorizes it?
A. No.

By Mr. Price:
Q. Mr. Oberholtzer, you say you have lived here 35

years?
A. Yes sir.
Q. And you are a citrus man?
A. Yes.
Q. Are you a family man, Mr. Oberholtzer?
A. Yes sir.
Q. How many members do you have in your family?
A. Wife, boy, and 4 girls.
Q. Which newspaper was it you say you read?

313

A. Orlando.
Q. Mr. Oberholtzer, are you acquainted with the Tyson’s

down there?
A. No. I never heard of them.
Q. Well, I guess they’re kind of different ends of the

county from you. Do you know Norma Padget?
A. No sir.
Q. Or Willie Padget?
A. No.
Q. Well, you probably heard the rest of these State’s

witnesses read by Mr. Akerman. Do you know any of
them?

A. No.
[fol. 553] Q. Do you know any of these three defend
ants ?

A. No. Never saw them before today.
Q. Are you acquainted at all around Groveland or

Mascotte?
A. No sir.
Q. Now you know, Mr. Oberholtzer, there is a presump

tion in the law that a person is innocent of a crime. That
is, even though he has been arrested and charged with that
crime, there is still a presumption that he is innocent and
that presumption carries from the beginning of the trial
right on through till the time you go in the jury room,
unless and if there is sufficient evidence presented of his
guilt to convince you in your own mind beyond a reason
able doubt of his guilt. Now, are you willing to presume
that these defendants now are innocent?

A. Yes.
Q. And you are willing to go on all the way through

the trial and if not enough evidence is presented to satisfy,
if the State introduces a great deal of evidence but per
haps not enough evidence to convince you beyond a reason
able doubt that these defendants are guilty, are you will
ing to carry that presumption over and give them the
burden of that presumption?

A. Yes.
Q. (Continued) Of their innocence to the end. All right.

And you have not formed any fixed opinion or any opinion,
about this trial?

A. No. I don’t know enough about it.
Q. All right, sir. Now of course you heard before, we

314

[fol. 554] do have two negro attorneys here, as defense
attorneys in this case. Do you think that their being here
and acting as attorneys in the case might have the same
effect that Mr. Hunter, Mr. Akerman? Do you think that
that will create any feeling at all on your part?

A. No. I don’t think so.
Q. Of course, you realize at times that it might be neces

sary to vigorously cross examine the witnesses in this
case, and who, of course, for the most part, I expect, will
be white people. Do you think that that will create any
feeling in your mind at all?

A. No.
Q. And you have no prejudice, feeling, against the negro

race ?
A. No sir.
Q. All right. Do you know of anything, Mr. Oberholtzer,

which would be a bar to your sitting on the jury in this
case, which would influence your mind at all in favor of
either the innocence or the guilt of these parties?

A. No sir.

Mr. Akerman: What says the State ?
Mr. Hunter: Tender.

(The court then took a five minute recess, at the end of
which time, the trial continued as follows.)
[fol. 555] Mr. Akerman:

Q. The defendant, Samuel Shepherd, will excuse Mr.
Oberholtzer.

Mb. J ames E. B evis, w as called to the box and sworn.

By Mr. Hunter:
Q. Mr. Bevis, where do you live?
A. Leesburg.
Q. What is your business or profession?
A. School Supervisor, Elementary Education in Lake

County.
Q. How long have you lived in Lake County?
A. 7 years.
Q. Have you heard any of the facts or circumstances in

connection with this case discussed?

A. Nothing except in the papers and over the radio.
Q. From what you heard, did you form or express any

opinion as to the guilt or innocence of these defendants?
A. No sir.
Q. Have you any prejudice against the colored race that

would hamper you in any way in forming a proper verdict
in this case?

A. No sir.
Q. Do you know any reason why you couldn’t sit as a

juror in this case?
A. No sir.
Q. Are you conscientiously opposed to the infliction of

capital punishment in those cases where the law authorizes
it?

A. No sir.

Mr. Hunter: You may inquire.

By Mr. Price:
[fol. 556] Q. You live now in Leesburg?

A. Yes. That’s right.
Q. You did live in Tavares before you lived in Leesburg?
A. That’s right.
Q. You, how long have you lived in Lake County?
A. 7 years.
Q. You read in the newspaper the accounts of this?
A. Mostly the headlines.
Q. Which papers would that be in?
A. Orlando Sentinal and Leesburg Commercial.
Q. Are you a family man, Mr. Bevis?
A. Yes sir.
Q. LIow many members?
A. I have a wife, two daughters and one son.
Q. Are you acquainted with any of the Tyson’s, Mr.

Bevis?
A. No sir.
Q. Or, with Norma Padget?
A. No sir.
Q. Willie Padget?
A. No.
Q. You have heard the list of these State witnesses read?
A. Yes.
Q. Do you know any of those witnesses?

316

A. I know tlie two deputj^ sheriffs. And the highway
patrol.

Q. Do you know them well?
A. No. Just me having been in the County Superin

tendent’s office, I naturally know the deputy sheriffs and
just recently I moved next door to Howard.

Q. Was that a short while ago?
A. Just a short while ago. In fact, I have only known

him for 2 or 3 days.
[fol. 557] Q. Have you discussed this case with him at all.

A. No sir.
Q. In other words, you do know a couple of the deputies

and the highway patrol, hut your acquaintance with them
is just an acquaintance?

A. Know the Highway Patrol, Yates, and Leroy Camp
bell.

Q. Well now, you are not------
A. They are both deputy sheriffs.
Q. Well, the point I am getting at, sir, is that your

acquaintance with them is not what you would call a
deep friendship. It is more of a speaking acquaintance?

A. That’s right.
Q. In other words, your acquaintanceship with either

of the three of them wouldn’t affect your opinion or your
stand or your feeling about this case or anything con
nected with it ?

A. Not at all.
Q. Have you ever seen any of the three defendants?
A. No sir. Not that I know of.
Q. You are not acquainted with any of their families?
A. Not that I know of. I would know it if I was. And I

know I am not.
Q. Has your school work ever taken you over around

Groveland or Mascotte?
A. It carries me all over the county.
Q. In other words, in your supervisory capacity you do

visit from place to place throughout the county?
A. Every school in the county. Yes sir.

[fol. 558] Q. Do you have any particularly good friends
in Groveland or Mascotte?

A. Mostly among the teachers and people who are con
nected with the schools.

Q. You haven’t discussed this case with them?

317

Q. Your acquaintance with them wouldn’t affect this
case?

A. No.
Q. Have you ever served on a jury before, sir?
A. No sir.
Q. Well, at the close of all the evidence in this ease, the

Court here, Judge Futch, will instruct you as to the law
in the case. Now, part of that instruction, I am sure, will
he to the effect that where a person has been charged with
a crime and is standing trial, that there is a presumption
of that person’s innocence of that crime. That’s not with
standing the fact that he has been arrested, charged with
that crime, that there’s been various statements circulated
but there is a presumption of his innocence. That pre
sumption carries on throughout the trial until and if, of
course, the procecution introduces sufficient evidence to
convince you beyond a reasonable doubt that this person
is guilty, that presumption carries over and that person
is considered innocent.

Now are you willing to subscribe to that principle?
A. Yes sir.
Q. Of course you understand now that if there is any

question, any serious question in your mind, as to the in
nocence of that person, that that doubt must be resolved
[fol. 559] in favor of the defendants and you must give
your verdict accordingly?

A. That’s right.
Q. Now if you arrive at a conclusion, either one way or

the other, either as to guilt or innocence, then that will be
your opinion and that will be your opinion from that time
on until the time you come in, even though eleven of the
other jurors might be against you in your particular
opinion, whether it is either for guilt or innocence?

A. That’s right,
Q. And the gates of hell shan’t prevail against you.

You will stand on your opinion and whatever verdict is
reached in this case will be your opinion?

A. That’s right, sir.
Q. You haven’t formed any opinion from reading the

various newspaper articles?
A. No sir.

A . No.

318

Q. In other words, as yon come in here to sit in this jury
box, you have no opinion as far as this case is concerned?

A. No sir.
Q. And you are willing to sit there and listen to the

evidence as presented from both the prosecution and the
defense and make up your mind and render your verdict
entirely according to what you believe is in the right,
here?

A. Yes sir.
Mr. Akerman: How says the State?
Mr. Buoy: Tender.
Mr. Akerman: The defendant, Samuel Shepherd, will

excuse Mr. Edmunds.

[fo l. 560] M e . R oyal E. W eidner, w as called to the box
and sworn.

By Mr. Hunter:
Q. Mr. Weidner, where do you live?
A. Leesburg.
Q. How long have you lived there?
A. 11 years.
Q. What do you d o?
A. Citrus grower.
Q. Have you heard any of the facts and circumstances

connected with this case?
A. Just what I have read in the papers.
Q. Formed or expressed any opinion from what you

heard?
A. Yes sir.
Q. Formed and expressed it, both have you ?
A. Yes sir.
Q. Well, is it fixed?
A. Yes. Absolutely.

The Court: All right. Mr. Weidner, you are excused.

319

Mr. W illiam F. A u stin , Jr., was called to the box and
sworn.

By Mr. Hunter:
Q. 'Where do you live, Mr. Austin?
A. Umatilla.
Q. What is your business or profession?
A. Citrus grower and packer.
Q. How long have you been up in that section?
A. 35 years.
Q. Have you heard any of the facts or circumstances in

connection with this case discussed?
A. No sir.

[fol. 561] Q. Read anything about it in the newpapers?
A. About everything that is in the papers.
Q. You read all the papers on everything that way, don’t

you?
A. Yes sir.
Q. Well did you form or express any opinion as to the

guilt or innocence of the defendant?
A. No sir.
Q. The guilt or innocence of these three?
A. That’s right.
Q. Do you know anything about them?
A. I don’t know any of them. I have never seen them

before.
Q. Could you try those men fairly on the evidence that

you would hear from the witness stand, here?
A. Yes sir.
Q. Do you have any prejudice against them because they

are colored people?
A. No sir.
Q. Are you opposed to the infliction of capital punish

ment in those cases where the law authorizes it?
A. No sir.
Mr. Hunter: You may inquire.

By Mr. Akerman:
Q. Mr. Austin, what newspapers did you read on this ?
A. The Orlando Sentinal, the Tampa Tribune. Eustis

Lake region.
Q. And you said you just read what was in the papers?
A. That’s right.

320

Q. You didn’t form any opinion as to the guilt or inno-
[fol. 562] eence of these three defendants over here?

A. Not those three, no sir.
Q. And you feel that if accepted on this jury, you can

serve on this jury and be the same fair, impartial juror
you would have been if you hadn’t heard any or read any
thing about this case?

A. Yes sir. The papers don’t influence me at all.
Q. In other words, you would just dismiss that from

your mind now and listen to the evidence that comes from
the witness stand and the law that Judge Futch gives you?

A. Right.
Q. And if it should occur that something you read in the

newspaper is not brought out on the evidence, why, that
wouldn’t bother you at all. W e’ll just push that back and
go ahead and, just as if you had never heard it at all?

A. That’s right.
Q. You say you have lived in Umatilla for about 35 years?
A. Yes sir.
Q. Do you have a family, Mr. Austin?
A. Yes sir. A wife and three sons.
Q. You have served on juries before?
A. No sir.
Q. You have heard the questions we have asked the other

jurors in connection with the fact that under our system of
law, in this country, that any person, regardless of their
economic or political or any other standing, race, is pre
sumed to be innocent of any crime unless and until they are
proven guilty?

A. Yes sir.
[fol. 563] Q. Now you certainly subscribe to that theory,
don’t you, Mr. Austin ?

A. Yes.
Q. And, at the present moment, since there has been no

evidence introduced in this case, you are presuming that
Charles Greenlee, Walter Irvin, and Samuel Shepherd,
over there, are innocent of this crime?

A. Yes sir.
Q. And you are going to sit here and compel the State

to introduce evidence that will convince you beyond a rea
sonable doubt of that guilt before you ever cast a vote for
a verdict of guilty?

A. Absolutely.
Q. And you are also familiar with our system of law that

321

even though you might believe they were guilty, if there is
any reasonable doubt arising in your mind as to their guilt
or either from the evidence that’s been introduced or for
the lack of evidence that you are, under the law, charged
with the duty of resolving that doubt in favor of the
defendants and you will certainly do that, won’t you!

A. That’s right. I do think that somebody is guilty.
Q. Yes. But merely the fact that because of the fact that

every crime has been committed, that somebody is guilty,
you are not going to be satisfied to just see somebody found
guilty to solve that crime and get it out of the way!

A. No.
Q. What you want is the guilty person brought to justice.

Is that right, Mr. Austin!
A. That’s right.

[fol. 564] Q. And you would be just as quick to fight to
keep somebody who was not guilty from being brought to
justice as you would to see anybody that was guilty!

A. That’s right.
Q. In fact, you would rather, if there was any doubt in

your mind, resolve it in favor of the defendants, would
you not!

A. Yes sir.
Q. And that’s what you would do if you are selected to

serve on this jury !
A. That’s right.
Q. And after hearing all of the evidence, if you believe

that these defendants, or any of them, are innocent or there
is a reasonable doubt arising in your mind as to their guilt,
when you go into the jury room you are going to vote for a
verdict of not guilty. Isn’t that a fact!

A. Yes sir.
Q. And when you have arrived at that conclusion, that

opinion, based on the law and the evidence, that’s going
to be your opinion, isn’t it, sir!

A. Yes sir.
Q. And, regardless of how other members of the jury

may feel, or other people in Lake County or Orange County
or anywhere else, you are going to abide by that opinion!

A. I am.
Q. And when the verdict of the jury is brought out it

will be your conscientious verdict in this case!
A. Yes. That’s right.

21—420

322

Q. Are you acquainted down in the area down there
where this occurred?

A. No sir. I am not.
Q. Are you acquainted with the Padget family?
A. No sir.

[fol. 565] Q. The Tyson family down there?
A. I don’t know them at all. No sir.
Q. Have you ever, until this case came up, have you ever

heard of any one of these three defendants ?
A. No, I haven’t.
Q. Or their families?
A. No sir.
Q. How about the rest of these witnesses? I guess you

know some of the deputy sheriffs or something like that,
don’t you?

A. I know Deputy Yates. Just casually.
Q. What is the nature of that acquaintanceship you have

with Mr. Yates, Mr. Austin?
A. I just know that he is a deputy sheriff and speak to

him in that manner.
Q. And the mere fact that you know him and he is a

deputy sheriff, you wouldn’t give either more or less cre
dence to what he said than you would to any other witness ?

A. I would not.
Q. Now, as you know, two of the defense counsel in this

case are negroes and are going to participate in the trial.
Does that in any manner affect you sitting on the jury here ?

A. It would not.
Q. Do you feel that since they are defense counsel that

they should discharge their duty just like any other lawyer?
A. I do.
Q. And will hold them to the same code of conduct that

you hold the rest of the lawyers in this case to?
A. Yes sir.
Q. Even though it may be necessary in this case for them

to cross examine witnesses and vigorously cross examine
witnesses?

A. Yes sir.
[fol. 566] Q. You will consider them as attorneys in this
case and pay no attention to their race or color ?

A. That’s right.
Q. Do you know of any reason why, if accepted to serve

on this jury, you could — sit here and calmly and fairly
deliberately give a fair and impartial trial and render a

323

fair and impartial verdict? Fair, on the one hand, to the
people of Lake County and the State of Florida, and, on the
other hand, to the three defendants over here. After all
the verdict which is fair is fair to all of them. That’s what
you will do if you are accepted on this case ?

A. Yes sir.
Mr. Akerman: What says the State?
Mr. Hunter: We tender the jury.
Mr. Akerman: The defendant, Samuel Shepherd, will

excuse Mr. Hartwright. The defendant, Walter Irvin, will
excuse Mr. Hawkins.

Mr. B. E. R eaves, J r ., Mr. S. C. Can n o n , were called to
the stand and sworn.

By Mr. Hunter:
Q. Mr. Cannon, where do you live?
A. Astatula,
Q. How long have you lived there?
A. About 7 years.

[fol. 567] Q. What is your business?
A. Take care of groves.
Q. Have you heard the facts and circumstances in this

case discussed?
A. Just a few catches along.
Q. Have you read about the case in the newspapers ?
A. Not too much.
Q. From what you have heard and what you have read,

have you formed or expressed an opinion as to the guilt or
innocence of these defendants?

A. No. I haven’t.
Q. Are you conscious of any prejudice against the colored

race which would keep you from giving these men a fair
and impartial trial?

A. No.
Q. If you are taken as a juror, will you give them a fair

and impartial trial from the law and the evidence?
A. I will.
Q. Mr. Reaves where do you live?
A. Lady Lake.
Q. How long have you lived there?
A. 15 years.
Q. What is your business?

324

A. Trucking contractor.
Q. Do you know anything about the facts or circum

stances in connection with this case?
A. Nothing but what I have read in the papers and street

talk.
Q. From what you have read, have you formed or ex

pressed an opinion as to the guilt or innocence of these
defendants.

A. Well, yes and no. I sometimes form an opinion by
reading the papers.

Q. Could you lay aside anything that you have read in the
[fol. 568] papers or heard and try these men solely on the
evidence given here ?

A. Yes, I could.
Q. Would you do that if you were taken as a juror?
A. Yes sir.
Q. Have you any prejudice against the colored race that

would hamper you in any way in the trial of this case?
A. No sir.
Q. If taken as a juror, will you give both sides a fair

and impartial trial?
A. Yes sir.
Mr. Hunter: You may inquire.------
Q. Another thing. Have either of you gentlemen, Mr.

Cannon, and Mr. Reaves, any conscientious scruples against
the infliction of capital punishment in those cases where
the law authorizes ?

A. (Mr. Reaves) No. (Mr. Cannon) I would want suf
ficient evidence.

Mr. Hunter: You may inquire.

By Mr. Price:
Q. Mr. Cannon, how long have you lived in Lake County?
A. About 12 or 14 years.
Q. Where did you live prior to that time?
A. I lived up here at Altoona a while and then moved to

Astatula.
Q. Did you read the papers on this thing?
A. Very little reading I do. I listen to the radio and

that’s about all.
[fol. 569] Q, Did you come to any opinion about this?

A. No sir.

325

Q. Did you talk about this with your friends!
A. No sir.
Q. Neighbors!
A. No sir.
Q. And you haven’t made any definite opinion about the

thing at all!
A. No sir.
Q. What did you say your business was?
A. Grove caretaker.
Q. You heard the list of the State witnesses, I imagine,

when Mr. Akerman called them off. On that list, I have
Norma Padget. Do you knowT Norma Padget?

A. No sir. I don’t know her.
Q. Or her husband, Willie Padget!
A. No sir.
Q. Are you acquainted with any of the Tyson family?
A. No.
Q. Do you know any of the people on that list of witnesses

Mr. Akerman called?
A. No. I don’t know any of them.
Q. Do you know the defendants, over here?
A. No.
Q. Mr. Camion, are you acquainted around Groveland

at all?
A. No sir. I only go there when I go to Ft. Meade. I go

through Groveland.
Q. Are you acquainted at all around Bay Lake, Mascotte,

or through there ?
A. No sir.
Q. Now have you ever served on a criminal jury before?
A. No sir. I haven’t.

[fol. 570] Q. Well, when all the evidence has been put in
in this case and before you go to the jury room, the Judge
will instruct you on the law in this case. Now are you will
ing, to abide by the instructions of the Court as to the law?

A. As far as it lays within me.
Q. Well do you believe that as a member of the jury that

it is up to you, we’ll say to follow the law? as the judge gives
it to you regardless of personal feelings in the matter?

A. That’s right.
Q. In other words, whatever Judge Futch tells you then,

that is the way you will order your own decision in this
case?

A. That’s right.

326

Q. All right. One of the things which Judge Futch will
probably I ’m sure tell you, before you go on into the jury
room, is that any person, any person in the United States,
or any person in Florida, this is the law, that any person
who is charged with crime is presumed to be innocent of
that crime. The fact that he has been arrested for that
crime, the fact that he has been charged with that crime
and brought into Court here and charged and the fact that
various witnesses will come into this trial and present evi
dence that he committed that crime; all of those things, not
withstanding, there is still a presumption that this person
is innocent until and unless there is sufficient evidence of his
guilt introduced here and the facts which the witnesses,
themselves, will give to you to establish the guilt of that
person beyond a reasonable doubt. Now, are you willing to
[fob 571] presume now at this particular time to presume
that these three defendants are innocent?

A. As far as I know, they are.
Q. You are willing to give them the benefit of that pre

sumption ?
A. That’s right.
Q. In other words, you are willing to sit here and, in

your own mind, erase anything you might have read in the
papers or heard on the radio, you are willing to come in
here with a free and open mind?

A. That’s right.
■ Q. And sit here and listen to the evidence that’s pre
sented to you?

A. That’s right.
Q. And to make your decision in this case based solely

on that?
A. That’s right.
Q. And while you are doing that, to give these three de

fendants the benefit of the presumption that they are in
nocent ?

A. Yes.
Q. Until it is proven that they are not by competent evi

dence ?
A. That’s right.
Q. All right. Now under another principle of law, you

also know that even though there is evidence introduced
which would tend to show to you that they were guilty,
that if there is any reasonable doubt in your mind, whatso-

327

ever, if there is any reasonable doubt of the guilt of the three
defendants, that it is up to you then, under the law, to re
solve that doubt in favor of these defendants and to find
them not guilty. And, are you willing to abide by that rule?

A. Yes. I am.
Q. Are you familiar with that?
A. I am.
Q. Are you a family man?
A. Yes. I am. 7 children.

[fol. 572] Q. How many of those children are boys and
how many are girls?

A. I got 5 boys and 2 girls.
Q. Mr. Reaves, what is your business or occupation?
A. I am a trucking contractor.
Q. How long have you been in the trucking business ?
A. Oh, about 15 years. Off and on.
Q. Were you ever a law enforcement officer?
A. No sir.
Q. And where do you live, sir?
A. Lady Lake.
Q. Your business is at Lady Lake, too, sir?
A. No sir. Leesburg. It is now Foremost Fertilizer

Company.
Q. Are you acquainted down in the Groveland area?
A. Yes sir.
Q. Do you know Mrs. Norma Padget and her husband,

Willie Padget ?
A. No sir. I don’t know them.
Q. How about the Tyson family?
A. No sir.
Q. Mrs. Padget was a Tyson. You don’t know any of

them down there?
A. No sir.
Q. Did you hear the list of names?
A. I might know them just as looking at them, but I

never met them or anything like that.
Q. You heard the list of names that I read off?
A. Yes sir. I know Howard and, both the deputy sher

iffs.
Q. Do you know Curtis Howard?
A. Yes sir.
Q. Both deputy sheriffs?
A. That’s right.

328

[fol. 573] Q. What is the nature of your acquaintanceship
with Mr. Howard ?

A. Just the casual acquaintanceship as I am in town,
maybe shoot a game or two of pool with him, something’
like that.

Q. How long have you known him?
A. Oh, I would say 5 or 6 years, maybe longer.
Q. How long have you known Mr. Yates, the deputy

sheriff?
A. Well, I wouldn’t even say that I knew Mr. Yates only

that somebody told me, “ there goes Mr. Yates, the deputy
sheriff,” and it sticks in my mind because of the car be
drives and stuff like that because I am a trucking contrac
tor, I look out for that.

Q. How about these highway patrolmen? Do you know
any of them?

A. Well, yes sir. I know them.
Q. Think it ’s a good idea for us to have them over here,

right now? Do you have a family, Mr. Reaves?
A. Yes sir. Wife and stepdaughter.
Q. Now have you heard or read anything concerning this

case?
A. Yes sir. I have.
Q. You have, sir?
A. Yes sir. I read everything that was in the Orlando

paper about it. Leesburg papers, and the Tampa papers.
Q. Have you heard anybody discussing it?
A. Yes sir.
Q. Quite a good bit of discussion?
A. No. Not too much. Just street talk.
Q. From what you heard, did you form any opinion

in the case?
A. No sir. Because I didn’t know any of the facts and

I didn’t go down through Groveland and don’t know any
of the facts, so I didn’t form any opinion.
[fol. 574] Q. And you have served on juries before,
haven’t you?

A. Yes sir.
Q. And probably know a lot of times in connection with

a case you read a lot of things in the newspaper?
A. That’s right.

■ Q. Then you come in the trial of the case and it is en
tirely different and you learn things in the trial that were
never in the paper, and a lot of the things that were in the

329

newspapers you never hear about in the actual trial! Well
now, do you feel with that in view, that you can remove any
of these various newspaper accounts that you have read
from your mind so that after you hear the evidence in this
case, there won’t be any question of whether what you heard
was evidence in here or was this something that you read in
the newspaper!

A. Yes. I think I can. I know I can.
Q. You make every conscientious effort you can and you

believe you can?
A. That’s right.
Q. And if, after the evidence is all in, if there was some

thing in the newspaper that if it had come from the witness
stand might make you firmly convinced of the guilt, as
long as it didn’t come in the witness stand, you would dis
regard it ?

A. That’s not the facts.
Q. And vote for a verdict of not guilty? I f you see what

1 mean?
A. Yes sir.

{fol. 575] Q. If, in connection with the evidence that you
heard that it would take something that you had read in
the newspaper, you would have no trouble disregarding
that and vote for a verdict of not guilty?

A. Eight.
Q. Now you know that two of the defense counsel in

this case are negroes. And they will participate in this
trial as lawyers. Does that in any way affect you in the
trial of the case?
■ A. No.

Q. And if they should, in their participation in their
duties as counsel have to cross examine a witness or have
to object to certain of the State’s questions, would that af
fect vou in any way?

A." No.
Q. You would hold them to the same course of conduct

in this trial that you would hold Mr. Hunter, Mr. Buoy,
myself or any other lawyer?

A. Yes sir.
Q. In other words, I believe you stated that you had

served on juries, or had not?
A. Have.
Q. You have served on juries. You know how trials go.

330

You know, in connection with the trial, they may be ask
ing a question and Mr. Hunter thinks it is improper and he
has to jump up and say, “ I object, Your Honor.” And
the same way, Mr. Hunter might be asking* a question and
I ’ll have to do that. Well, suppose Mr. Hunter is asking a
question and one of the colored counsel had to jump up
and object to it. You wouldn’t have any feeling or preju
dice in the case, would you?

A. No sir.

[fol. 576] By Mr. Price:
Q. Are you sure on that?
A. Well, I think in this case, I could.
Mr. Price : It is a real factor.

Mr. Akerman:
Q. We are trying to present the facts to all of you gentle

men. I know that there is not a person in this courtroom,
either sitting up here or back there, that would want to
serve on this jury that wouldn’t do anything but render
a fair and impartial trial and that’s the reason we are try
ing to bring these facts out to you now so that you will know
what the situation is and then, your answers you can answer
them now.

Of course, Mr. Reaves, you are the only person that
could know, in your own mind, and that’s what I want you
to consider on the thing.

A. That’s right.
Q. You think you would feel the same way if he jumped

up and objected to what Mr. Hunter said? Or, should he
sit down and keep quiet about it?

A. Well, if it looked like he should. If he had a right
to do that, he should be able to do it.

Q. Well I mean now of course, that’s going to become a
question for the Court to decide and a lot of occasions, the
lawyers have to place an objection in and after the argu
ment of the Court, he may decide that the objection is well
founded or that it is not well founded. But I mean, that
[fol. 577] happens, as you know from sitting in these trials,
lots and lots of times. And that’s the reason we are ask
ing you these questions. You say, if the objection was well
founded. Well, suppose it wasn’t well founded? We law
yers are presumed to know the law, but it seems we make

331

mistakes on it. The Judge says, “ Your objection is not
well founded.” I mean, then, how would you feel about one
of these negro lawyers jumping up and objecting?

A. Well it would still be up to the Judge. Whatever he
said. It wouldn’t have anything to do with my opinion,
white or colored.

Q. You believe that would in no way affect the trial? You
say that’s up to the Judge?

A. That’s right.
Q. Mr. Akerman: The defendant, Walter Irvin, will

excuse Mr. Hull. Mr. G ordon B. R ichardson, was called
to the box and sworn.

By Mr. Hunter:
Q. Mr. Richardson, where do you live?
A. Tavares, out about a mile from Tavares.
Q. How long have you lived here?
A. 39 years.
Q. What business are you in?
A. Citrus work.

1 Q. Have you ever been informed of the facts and cir
cumstances in connection with this case? Ever heard them
discussed?
[fob 578] A. No sir. I haven’t. Except what I saw in
the papers.

Q. From what you saw in the papers, did — form or ex
press any opinion as to the guilt or innocence of these de
fendants ?

A. No.
Q. Have you any prejudice against the colored race that

would preclude you from forming a fair and impartial
verdict in this case ?

A. No sir.
Q. Could you give both sides a fair and impartial trial

if taken in this case?
A. Yes sir.
Q. Are you conscientiously opposed to the infliction of

capital punishment in those cases where the law authorizes
it?

A. No sir.

332

By Mr. Price:
Q. Mr. Richardson, have yon read much about this case

in the newspapers?
A. No sir.
Q. Heard anything about it over the radio?
A. Well, I heard it. I heard it one time over the radio.
Q. You don’t read the daily newspapers very much?
A. Well, not a whole lot, no. I get the Orlando paper

every day.
Q. You didn’t read anything about this case in particu

lar?
A. WTell, I, that’s the paper that I read it in. I read it

once in the paper.
Q. Did you form any opinion on the basis of what you

heard? Did you come to any conclusion about any of this?
[fol. 579] A. No.

Q. Didn’t form any opinion. Didn’t express one to any
body?

A. No.
Q. Did you discuss this case with any of your friends and

neighbors?
A. No. I haven’t.
Q. Family?
A. No. I haven’t. Not more than just a little talk.
Q. Didn’t have any definite conclusions on it, one way

or the other?
A. No.
Q. Do you have a family, Mr. Richardson?
A. Yes.
Q. How many?
A. Wife and 2 sons.
Q. Are you acquainted at all, Mr. Richardson, with

Norma Padget or with Willie Padget?
A. No.
Q. Do you know any of the Tysons?
A. No."
Q. No anybody much around Bay Lake?
A. No sir.
Q. Are you acquainted at all around Groveland?
A. No. I am not.
Q. Mascotte, over in that area?
A. No.
Q. You have heard this list of State’s witnesses, I imag-

333

ine, that Mr. Akerman read out here several times, earlier.
Did you listen to these names and did you recognize any of
them as friends of yours ?

A. I don’t know any of them. I really don’t know any
of them except Mr. Yates. I know him when I see him.

Q. Know him when you see him around; know he’s a
deputy sheriff?

A. That’s all.
[fol. 580] Q. Just maybe pass the time of day with him.
That’s all?

A. That’s all. Never had a conversation with him.
Q. Do you remember ever seeing any of these three de

fendants before, sir?
A. No sir.
Q. You have already told me that you are not acquainted

at all around Groveland?
A. No sir.
Q. Have you ever been on a jury in a criminal case before ?
A. Yes sir.
Q. All right, sir. You are probably familiar then, with

the legal premise of a presumption of innocence of the de
fendants in this case ?

A. Yes sir.
Q. In other words, that presumption is that a defendant

in a criminal case is presumed to be innocent until and un
less sufficient evidence of his guilt has been introduced to
show beyond a reasonable doubt that he is guilty of the of
fense with which he has been charged ?

A. That’s right.
Q. That’s the presumption with which he is clothed from

the time the trial begins right on through until enough
evidence has been presented to convince you in your own
mind that there is not a reasonable doubt at all, but that
he is guilty?

A. Yes.
Q. Are you willing to give these defendants the benefit

of that presumption?
A. I am.
Q. In other words, right now, at this time, you are will

ing to presume that these three defendants are innocent of
this crime?

A. That’s right.
[fol. 581] Q. And that you will continue to presume that

334

they are innocent until or unless the State brings in enough
evidence to convince you that they are guilty, absolutely?

A. That’s right.
Q. And you are willing to disregard what you have heard

about this case or anything that you have read about it?
A. Yes sir.
Q. Anything you happen to have read in the newspaper,

radio or anywhere else; anything anybody says. You are
willing to come in here and sit down with a fair and open
mind and, just on the basis of the evidence as presented to
you, to make your decision?

A. That’s right.
Q. All right. And you are willing to, if there is any

reasonable doubt in your mind at all, of the guilt of these
defendants, that you are willing to give them the benefit
of that doubt?

A. That’s right.
Q. And if you are of one conclusion in the jury and as

many as all 11 of the other jurors have come to the other
conclusion, that you have come to a definite conclusion,
yourself, as to the innocence or the guilt of these defend
ants, are you willing to let whatever verdict comes out in
this case be your verdict?

A. I would stick to my own verdict.
Q. You will stick to your own opinion?
A. Yes sir.

[fol. 582] Q. All right. We have a situation here, Mr.
Richardson, of having two negro attorneys as counsel in
this case for the defense. Now, will that affect in any way
your feelings?

A. No. No, it won’t affect me.
Q. In other words, it won’t affect you at all to hear these

two negroes cross examine witnesses or make objections
to certain things that prosecution will have to say?

A. No.
Mr. Akerman: The defendant, Walter Irvin, will excuse

Mr. Cannon, Mr. Richardson, and Mr. Reaves.
The Court: Gentlemen of the tentative jury, members

of the defense counsel, State counsel, evidently we can’t
finish the jury this afternoon. Now you gentlemen who
have been through the jury box, challenged and refused,
you don’t have to return. You jurors who have not yet

335

been called to the box are to return in the morning as well
as the gentlemen who are tentatively in the box. We are
going to recess until tomorrow morning at 9:30.

Now you gentlemen who are in the jury box, tentative
jurors, do not discuss this case among yourselves or with
anyone else, or allow anyone to discuss it with you. Be
in the jury box tomorrow morning at 9:30.

(The Court then recessed until 9:30 AM, September 2nd
1949, at which time, the following proceedings were had:)
[fol. 583] (The Court opened at 9:30 AM. and a special
panel of jurymen was called and qualified on voir dire.

Mr. Akerman: If the court please, the defendants chal
lenge the special panel that has been summonsed on yes
terday and ask that their challenge heretofore filed for
the regular panel be considered a challenge for these with
the amendment to show the proper date of summonsing
and the appearance of two negroes on the panel.

The Court: Let the record show that the motion to quash
the panel as filed against the regular panel be brought to
apply to the present one with the necessary amendments.

Let the record also show that the motion is denied.
Are you satisfied with that same list of jurors that were

there yesterday?
Mr. Akerman: Yes sir.

Mr. P h ilip A ir y , Mr. F eed L ouis W olf, Mr. P earl G en
try, were called to the box and sworn.

By Mr. Hunter:
The Court: Let the record show that the defendants are

present in Court.
Q. Mr. Airy, where do you live?
A. Mt. Verde.

[fol. 584] Q. What is your business or profession?
A. U. S. Rubber Company.
Q. Do you have any conscientious scruples against the

infliction of capital punishment in cases where the law
authorizes?

A. No.

336

Q. Who is the next juror that was called?—Mr. Wolfe.
Where do you live?

A. Clermont.
Q. What business are you in, Mr. Wolfe.
A. Building Supplies.
Q. Do you have any conscientious scruples against the

infliction of capital punishment?
A q. No sir.
Mr. Hunter: Now is this the first panel?
The Court: Yes.
Q. Mr. Gentry, where do you live?
A. Okahumka.
Q. What do you do, Mr. Gentry?
A. Mechanic.
Q. Do you have any conscientious scruples against the

infliction of capital punishment in those cases where the
law authorizes it?

A. No sir.
Mr. Hunter: We tender the jury.

By Mr. Akerman:
Q. Mr. Airy, you say you live down at Mt. Yerde?
A. That’s right.
Q. Have you heard or read anything concerning this

case?
[fol. 585] A. Yes.

Q. Bead newspaper accounts of it?
A. Yes.
Q. What papers, please sir?
A. Sentinal and the Clermont paper.
Q. Did you hear any discussion of this case?
A. Yes.
Q. From what you heard or read, have you formed any

opinion in this case ?
A. That’s hard to say.
Q. Have you expressed------
A. I don’t know that I have formed any opinion that

would be held over after listening to the testimony.
Q. Well did you form any opinion as to the guilt or

innocence of the accused from what you have read or
heard?

337

A. Yes sir.
Q. Did you express it! To anybody?
A. Just among my own personal friends, not publicly.
Q. And you were here yesterday when we were ques

tioning the jurors, then?
A. Yes sir.
Q. Understand that I am not trying to find out from you

what your opinion is, either guilt or innocence, you don’t
have to answer that. And we are not trying to inquire
about that, sir. When we start asking you about the nature
of the opinion, I want you to understand that’s not what
we are seeking. You say you read the Orlando Morning
Sentinel ?

A. That’s right.
[fol. 586] Q. Any other newspapers?

A. Clermont.
Q. Clermont paper?
A. That’s right.
Q. Then you have heard the matter discussed and you

have discussed it?
A. That’s right.
Q. And from what you heard and read, you have formed

an opinion and expressed that opinion among your per
sonal friends and groups that you were talking to?

A. That’s right.
Q. Now, do you feel that, in view of the fact that you

have discussed the matter, you have read of it, that you
have formed or expressed an opinion as to the guilt or
innocence of the defendants; that, if accepted on this jury,
wouldn’t that opinion still be with you at the present time?

A. I don’t know. I don’t believe it would have too much
bearing.

Q. But at the present moment, you still have the opinion
that you formed after reading this. Is that correct?

A. I ’m afraid I have.
Q. And that would require some evidence to make you

change your opinion?
A. I might add that I formed my opinion not from read

ing the papers but from discussing with people that I
know.

Q. And it would require some evidence to remove that
opinion wouldn’t it?

A. Yes.
22—420

338

[fol. 587] Mr. Akerman: Defense challenges Mr. Airy
for cause.

The Court: Don’t think you have quite arrived at that
point, Mr. Akerman.

Mr. Akerman: He stated it would require evidence to
remove the opinion.

By Mr. Hunter:
Mr. Airy, could you put aside whatever opinion you

formed—with draw that question.— This opinion that you
formed, is simply from neighborhood talk and rumor, was
it not?

A. I wouldn’t call it neighborhood. I t ’s conversations
with men in Clermont that I know and from neighbors,
yes.

Q. Those people were not under oath?
A. No.
Q. Could you entirely lay that aside and try this case

solely on the sworn testimony that you hear in this case?
A. I believe I could.
Q. Well, can you?
A. I can try.
Q. Well, that isn’t the question. Can you do it?
A. I can’t answer that.
The Court: I think the challenge is good.

Mr. C. A. R utledge was called to the box and sworn.

By Mr. Hunter:
Q. What is your name?
A. C. A. Rutledge.

[fol. 588] Q. Where do you live?
A. I live about 4 or 5 miles from Groveland and Polk

City. South edge of Lake county, about halfway between
Groveland and Polk City.

Q. Are you in the Groveland precinct?
A. Yes sir.
Mr. Hunter: This gentleman comes under the stipula

tion, Your Honor.
The Court: All right. Come down, Mr. Rutledge.

339

Mr. C. C. Holly was called to the box and sworn.

By Mr. Hunter:
Q. The State will excuse Mr. Holly.
The Court: All right, Mr. Holly. Come down.

Mr. E. I. B urleigh w as called.

The Court: Mr. E. I. Burleigh is excused because he was
called as a witness in the case for the State.

Mr. W illiam A daire was called to the box and sworn.

By Mr. Hunter:
Q. What is your name, sir?
A. William Adaire.
Q. Where do you live?
A. I live in Eustis.
Q. How long have you lived there, Mr. Adaire?
A. 3% years.
Q. Where are you from, originally?
A. Michigan.

[fol. 589] Q. What is your business?
A. Painter.
Q. Have you heard the facts and circumstances in connec

tion with this case discussed?
A. I have heard some facts. I don’t know whether they

were all or not.
Q. Did you read about it in the newspapers ?
A. Yes sir.
Q. From what you heard and read, did you form or

express an opinion as to the guilt or innocence of the
defendant?

A. Yes.
Q. You still have that opinion?
A. I have.
Mr. Hunter: I think you had just as well excuse him,

Your Honor.
The Court: All right.

340

M e . J o h n W. J o n e s was called to the box and sworn.

By Mr. Hunter:
Q. Mr. Jones, where do you live?
A. Paisley.
Q. How long have you lived at Paisley?
A. 5 years, the last time.
Q. What business are you in?
A. Block layer.
Q. Did you hear any of the facts or circumstances rela

tive to the guilt or innocence of these defendants discussed?
A. No sir.
Q. Did you read anything about it in the newspapers?
A. Yes sir.

[fol. 590] Q. What papers?
A. Eustis papers.
Q. Where is Paisley? Located in this county.
A. That’s in the northeast part of the county.
Q. From what you read in the newspapers did you form

or express any opinion as to the guilt or innocence of these
defendants ?

A. No sir.
Q. Do you feel that you could try this case fairly and

squarely between the State of Florida and the defendants?
A. Yes sir.
Q. Are you opposed to capital punishment in those cases

where the law authorizes it?
A. No sir.

Mr. Hunter: You may inquire.

By Mr. Akerman:
Q. Mr. Wolfe, you live in Clermont?
A. Yes sir.
Q. Have you heard or read anything concerning the facts

and circumstances of this case?
A. I read no evidence about the case.
Q. Did you read the newspaper stories?
A. I read stories about the incident.
Q. Did you hear any discussion concerning the incident?
A. About what was in the papers.
Q. Did you hear any discussion from anybody who pur

ported to know the facts in the case?

341

A. No.
[fol. 591] Q. You heard the list of witnesses called. Did
you hear any of them discussing it?

A. No.
Q. Didn’t hear Sam Dotto down there in Clermont, dis

cussing it?
A. No sir.
Q- Or anyone purporting to have talked to any of the

witnesses in the case?
A. No.
Q. How long have you lived in Clermont, Mr. Wolfe?
A. 3% years.
Q. What is your business down there?
A. Building materials.
Q. Do you have a familv, sir?
A. Yes.
Q. What does your family consist of, please, sir?
A. Wife and three children.
Q. What age are your children?
A. 16, 10, and 6.
Q. Girls or boys?
A. Two girls and one boy.
Q. Arej you acquainted over in Groveland area?
A. Slightly.
Q. Do you know Mrs. Norma Padget or her husband,

Mr. Willie Padget?
A. No.
Q. Do you know the Tyson family down there in the Bay

Lake area?
A. No.
Q. And from what discussion, little discussion you heard

and read in the papers, you didn’t form any opinion as
to the guilt?

A. I haven’t read or heard any of the evidence to form
an opinion on, so I do not have any.
[fol. 592] Q. You feel that you can give just as fair and
impartial trial now as if you had never heard anything
about it at all before you came in the courtroom, today?

A. Yes.
Q. You served on juries before, haven’t you, sir?
A. No.
Q. In a trial, the evidence of course, comes from the

witnesses on the witness stand. Then, at the conclusion of

342

the trial, why Judge Futch will instruct you as to the law
in the case. It is my belief of the law to be and I firmly
believe that Judge Futch will instruct you that merely
because a person is arrested, charged with a crime, and
brought to trial for the crime, is no evidence of their
guilt. Do you have any trouble applying that rule of law?

A. I will follow the Judge’s instructions.
Q. And when he instructs you that they are presumed

to be innocent?
A. I ’ll follow that.
Q. Every instruction that the Judge gives you, you will

follow and apply it to the facts?
A. To the best of my ability.
Q. And it would be your duty to decide what the true

facts are, yourself, and then apply the law to those facts
and that is what you will do?

A. That’s right.
Q. Now, two of the defense counsel are negro attorneys.

Would that in any way affect you in the trial of this case?
A. They are not on trial, are they?

[fol. 593] Q. But, they are defending. Are defense coun
sel and will participate in the case. That wouldn’t affect
your deliberations at all in this case?

A. Well, as I understand it, I am supposed to listen to
the evidence, so they have nothing to do with the evidence
that I hear. I mean their appearance has nothing to do
with that.

Q. Mr. Gentry, you live at Okahumka, sir?
A. Yes sir.
Q. How long have you lived there, sir?
A. 26 years.
Q. Are you fairly well acquainted down in the Groveland

area?
A. No sir. I am not.
Q. What did you say your business was?
A. Mechanic.
Q. You don’t know any of these witnesses whose names

were called?
A. No sir.
Q. You don’t know the Tyson family down in Bay Lake?
A. No sir.
Q. Have you heard or read in the newspaper anything

concerning this?
A. I have read it.

343

Q. You haven’t heard anybody that’s supposed to know
the facts in the case discussing it, have you?

A. No sir.
Q. From what you read in the newspaper, did you arrive

at any opinion as to the guilt or innocence?
A. No, I haven’t.

[fol. 594] Q. And you feel, Mr. Gentry, that you can
come in, today, and give these three defendants just as
fair and impartial trial as if you had never seen anything
in a newspaper and have no trouble dismissing it from
your mind and taking the evidence as it comes from the
witness stand?

A. That’s right.
Q. You served on juries before, haven’t you?
A. No sir. I haven’t.
Q. Judge Futch instructs you that merely because

Charles Greenlee, Samuel Shepherd and Walter Irvin, have
been arrested, charged with crime and brought here to
trial, that that is no evidence of their guilt, you wouldn’t
have any trouble following that instruction at all, will you?

A. No sir.
Q. And instructs you that they are presumed to be inno

cent until and unless the State, by evidence, proves their
guilt beyond a reasonable doubt, you will have no trouble
applying that instruction?

A. No sir.
Q. And you feel that, at the present time, Charles Green

lee, Samuel Shepherd, and Walter Irvin, are presumed to
be innocent?

A. That’s right.
Q. And you will sit there and see what evidence comes in?
A. Yes.
Q. And, at the end, at the conclusion of all of it, if you

believe then they are innocent, you will, or even, though it
might be your belief of their guilt, if there is still a reason
able doubt in your mind arising from either the evidence
that’s introduced or the lack of it, you will vote to acquit
them, won’t you, sir?

A. Yes sir.
[fol. 595] Q. And, having arrived at that opinion, after
hearing all the evidence, why, you will abide by it, and
that will be regardless of how the other jurors feel, whether
they agree with vou or whether they don’t agree with vou.

A . —

344

Q. Do you have a family, sir?
A. Yes sir.
Q. What does it consist of?
A. Two children. A girl and a boy.
Q. Mr. Jones, you said that the only thing you had read

about this case was in the Eustis paper?
A. The Eustis Lake Region is the only paper I take.
Q. And you didn’t pay much attention to that, did you,

Mr. Jones?
A. Well, I just read the paper, all the time.
Q. Just like you would read any other, only it didn’t make

any particular impression on you?
A. No sir.
Q. From what you read, did you form any opinion as to

their guilt or innocence?
A. No sir.
Q. Are you acquainted down in the Groveland area, Mr.

Jones?
A. No sir.
Q. And you don’t know any of these witnesses we have

called out?
A. No sir.
Q. You haven’t heard anything discussed in this case

that was claimed to be the true facts, have you?
A. No sir.
Q. And you have heard the other questions as to the

fact that negro attorneys are participating in this case.
Does that in any way prejudice you or affect you in this
[fob 596] trial?

A. No sir.
Q. And the fact that the defendants are negroes, you

would try them just like you would try a white person,
wouldn’t you ?

A. Yes sir.
Q. And if there is not sufficient evidence introduced you

will vote to acquit them?
A. Yes sir.
Q. And, having, at the conclusion of all the evidence and

having arrived at the decision either that they are innocent
or that although you might believe them to be guilty, you
don’t think the evidence is sufficient to convince you beyond
a reasonable doubt you will vote to acquit them, won’t you,
sir?

A. Yes sir.

345

Q. And having arrived at that conclusion, you will stand
by it regardless of whether the 11 other members of the
jury agree with you or disagree?

A. Right.
Q. Do you have a family?
A. Have a wife and one child.
Q. Daughter or son?
A. Boy.

(Conference of counsel out of hearing of the Reporter.)

By Mr. Akerman:
Q. Mr. Wolfe, are you any relation to Claude Wolfe, in

Orlando ?
A. Yes.

[fol. 597] Q. Are you any relation to his brother in St.
Augustine ?

A. He is one; O. D. is another; W. H. is another; W. M.
is another. P. E. is another.

Mr. Akerman; The defendant, Walter Irvin, will excuse
Mr. Gentry.

Mb. A ngus C owne, was called to the ju ry b ox and sworn.

By Mr. Hunter:
Q. What is your name, sir?
A. Angus Cowle.
Q. You live in Eustis, don’t you, Mr. Cowle?
A. Yes sir.
Q. How long have you lived there?
A. About 36 years.
Q. What is your business?
A. Cabinet maker.
Q. What is your native state?
A. Ohio.
Q. Have you heard any of the facts and circumstances

in connection with this case discussed?
A. Nothing except what I have read in the paper. I

read the Orlando Sentinal and the Eustis Lake Region.
Q. From what you read, did you form or express any

opinions as to the guilt or innocence of the defendants in
this case?

346

A. No. No definite opinion because I bad no way of
knowing whether the paper was stating the facts or not.

Q. Would you have any difficulty in hearing the testi
mony in this case and arriving at a verdict fairly upon the
testimony which you hear from the witness stand?

A. No sir.
[fol. 598] Q. Are you opposed to capital punishment in
those cases where the law authorizes it?

A. No sir.
Q. Have you any prejudice against the colored race that

would in any way affect you in this case?
A. No sir.
Mr. Hunter: You may inquire.

By Mr. Akerman:
Q. Mr. Cowle, you say you read the Orlando Morning

Sentinal?
A. Yes sir.
Q. You say you didn’t arrive at any opinion because you

didn’t know whether they knew anything about the facts
or not. Is that correct?

A. Well, I don’t think anyone should form an opinion
on what they read in the newspapers.

Q. And you believe that if accepted on this jury that you
can dismiss what you have read from your mind and be
the same fair, impartial juror you would have been if
the first you had ever heard of this case was when you
walked in this morning?

A. Yes( sir.
Q. You say you lived over in Eustis about 26 years?
A. 36.
Q. Do you have a family, sir?
A. Yes sir.
Q. What does your family consist of?
A. Wife and two daughters.
Q. Have you served on juries before, sir?
A. Yes.
Q. You are familiar with the instructions that the Court

gives you?
A. Yes sir.

[fol. 599] Q. And you believe then that at the present
moment, Charles Greenlee, Samuel Shepherd and Walter
Irvin are presumed to be innocent of this crime?

347

A. That’s right.
Q. And you will give them that presumption all through

the trial?
A. I will.
Q. And, at the conclusion of the trial, if, even though

you might believe them to be guilty, if from the evidence
that’s introduced or from the lack of sufficient evidence
being introduced you feel that they are guilty but the guilt
has not been proven beyond a reasonable doubt and you
will resolve that doubt in their favor and vote to acquit
them ?

A. That’s right.
Q. You heard the questions concerning the fact that there

are negro counsel in this case?
A. Yes.
Q. Will that in any way affect or prejudice you in the

trial of this case?
A. No sir.
Q. You feel like that if they participate in it, they should

participate just like any other defense counsel and you
would judge them by the same standard of conduct that
you will judge the rest of the lawyers here?

A. That’s right.
Q. You heard the list of the witnesses read off?
A. Yes sir.
Q. Do you know any of them?
A. The only one that I know is the deputy sheriff and

I am not very well acquainted with him.
[fol. 600] A. (Continued) I know him when I see him.
That’s all. The rest of them I don’t know.

Q. You don’t know the Tyson family down in the Bay
Lake area?

A. No sir.

Mr. Akerman: The defendant, Walter Irvin, will excuse
Mr. Wolfe.

Me. L loyd B kowit, was called to the box and sworn.

By Mr. Hunter:
Q. Where do you live, Mr. Brown?
A. I live over south of Leesburg.
Q. What is your business?

348

A. I am in the oil business out in Texas.
Q. What is your business?
A. Oil business. Out in Texas.
Q. How long have you lived in Leesburg?
A. Since about ’42. Off and on. I haven’t been in Lees

burg for the last 3 years.
Q. Where are you from?
A. Texas.
Q. Are you conscientiously opposed to capital punish

ment in those cases where the law authorizes it?
A. No sir.
Q. Have you heard any of the facts and circumstances

in this case discussed?
A. Yes, I have.
Q. By talking with people who purported to know, or,

just from talk?
A. Well one of the witnesses, I heard quite a bit of dis

cussion on the street about it.
[fol. 601] Q. Beg your pardon?

A. I had a discussion with one of the witness- and talked
to him.

Q. From that discussion, did you form or express any
opinion in this case?

A. Well, naturally, I would.
Q. You still have that opinion?
A. Yes sir.
Q. Would not yield readily then to testimony here?
A. Well, I could.
Q. Sir?
A. I could.
Q. Could you disregard what you have heard about this

case, and try it solely on the evidence in the trial?
A. I ’ll try.
Q. Sir?
A. I think so.
Q. Well do you know whether you could or not?
A. Well, I would.
Q. Sir?
A. I think so.
Q. That still doesn’t answer my question.
A. Well, I would say, yes.

Mr. Hunter: You may inquire.

349

By Mr. Akerman:
Q. You say you have talked to one of the witnesses in

this ease1?
A. Yes. (Indicated by head.)
Q. And naturally, after talking to him, and the others,

naturally, you came to an opinion in the case?
A. Well, I heard it discussed so much.
Q. You heard it discussed so much, and it would only

[fol. 602] be natural for you, who had done that, to arrive
at some opinion?

A. That’s right.
Q. And you would take some evidence to change that

opinion, wouldn’t it?
A. That’s right.
Q. You have an opinion?
A. That’s right.
Q. And before you would change your opinion about it,

why, you would have to have something to show you to
the contrary?

A. That’s right.
Q. Did you express this opinion to anybody?
A. No.
Q. Do you feel that, having heard the facts discussed,

having arrived at an opinion, that you could be just as
impartial as if you had never heard anything concerning
it?

A. Well, course, that would all be in the evidence in the
case.

Q. It might well be that something that you had heard
that you believe to be a fact that the case might not ever
come out in this evidence.

A. That’s right.
Q. That, of course, you would still retain, wouldn’t you?
A. I might change my mind.
Q. But if you had heard something about it, supposed to

come from the witness that knows something about it, and
it is not brought out in the trial of this case, why, either,
I mean, either denying or affirming it, that you would still
have that evidence in your mind? I mean, still have that
discussion in your mind, there.

A. That’s right.
Q. It would be kind of hard just to completely dismiss

that wouldn’t it?

350

A. That’s right.
[fol. 603] Q. And if you feel that there would have to
be some evidence introduced that would make you change?

A. That’s right.
Q. And if, just the mere failure to introduce any evi

dence along that particular point, you would still retain
that memory of that conversation?

A. Yes.
Q. And would of course retain the opinion of the guilt

or innocence?
A. That’s right.
Mr. Akerman: Defense challenges for cause.
The Court: Sustained.

M r . T. G. B ejstxett w as called to the b ox and sworn.

By Mr. Hunter:
Q. What is your name, sir?
A. T. G. Bennett.
Q. Where do you live ?
A. Eustis.
Q. What business are you in?
A. Groceries and meat.
Q. Are you conscientiously opposed to capital punish

ment in cases where the law authorizes it?
A. No sir.
Q. Do you know anything about the facts and circum

stances in this case?
A. No, I don’t.
Q. Have you ever heard it discussed as to the guilt or

innocence of these particular defendants?
A. No, I haven’t.
Q. Did you read anything about it?
A. Yes.
Q. In the newspapers?
A. Yes sir.

[fol. 604] Q. Did you form or express any opinion as to
the guilt or innocence from what you read in the news
papers?

A. Yes sir.
Q. Still have that opinion?

351

A. Yes sir.
Q. You mean that you read the newspapers and decided

one way or the other, that these men were guilty or inno
cent?

A. Yes sir.
Q. Without ever hearing the evidence?
A. Yes sir.
Q. And you still have that opinion?
A. Yes sir.
Mr. Hunter: I think the grocery business needs this

gentleman pretty bad.
The Court: You can go back to your grocery store.

M b . D onald 8. H aselton , was called to the box and sworn.

By Mr. Hunter:
Q. State your name, sir?
A. Donald S. Haselton.
Q. Are you conscientiously opposed to the infliction of

capital punishment in those cases where the law authorizes
it?

A. No sir.
Mr. Hunter: Your Honor, the State will excuse Mr.

Haselton.

M b . C. D. P ubseb, was called to the box and sworn.

By Mr. Hunter:
[fol. 605] Q. What is your name, sir?

A. C. D. Purser.
Q. Where do you live?
A. Leesburg.
Q. What is your business?
A. I am retired.
Q. You don’t to any work?
A. 2 days a month.
Q. Are you conscientiously opposed to the infliction of

capital punishment in those cases where the law authorizes
it?

352

A. No sir.
Q. Do you have any family?
A. I have got 6 girls and one boy.
Q. Have you heard any of the facts or circumstances in

connection with these three defendants?
A. No sir.
Q. Did you read anything about those cases?
A. Yes, sir. In the papers.
Q. Do you remember anything about what you read?
A. Well, so much in there I can’t remember all of it.
Q. Didn’t pay much attention to it, did you?
A. I paid attention to it in the Florida Times Union.
Q. Read it in the news items one day and the next day

you couldn’t tell what you read? Did you form or express
any opinion as to guilt or innocence of the defendants by
what you read?

A. No sir. I didn’t have no evidence.
Q. Do you have any prejudice against the colored race

that would interfere with you in the trial of this case?
A. No sir.
Q. Do you know any reason why you couldn’t sit as a

fair and impartial juror?
A. I believe I could.

[fol. 606] A. (Continued) I am over 65.

Mr. Hunter: You may inquire.

By Mr. Akerman:
Q. You say you live in Leesburg?
A. Yes sir.
Q. How long have you lived there?
A. I moved there in ’25.
Q. You say you have now reached the position where you

don’t have to work but 2 days a month?
A. Social Security.
Q. Were you engaged in business in Lake County?
A. I was manager of a store over there.
Q. What kind of a store?
A. Purcer’s Store. Now Kestner’s.
Q. Are you acquainted down in the Gtroveland area?
A. I have been in Groveland, yes sir. I have been in

Groveland.
Q. Know quite a number of people down there?

353

A. I know some of them in a business way.
Q. Do you know Norma Padget or her husband, Willie

Padget?
A. No sir.
Q. Did you ever know any of the Tyson family down in

the Bay Lake area?
A. No sir.
Q. Did you hear us read the list of these witnesses?
A. Yes sir.
Q. Do you know any of them?
A. No sir. I don’t know them.
Q. You stated that you read in the Times Union?
A. Yes sir. And also on the radio.

[fol. 607] Q. How' about the Orlando papers? A Do you
take those?

A. Never read them.
Q. You have served before, haven’t you, sir?
A. Sure.
Q. You are familiar with the instructions that the Court

gives you?
A. Hope so.
Q. And then you believe at the present moment that

Charles Greenlee, Samuel Shepherd and Walter Irvin are
presumed to be innocent of this crime?

A. Yes sir. That’s right.
Q. If accepted on the jury, you will listen to the evidence,

and at the conclusion of the evidence, if you believe they
are innocent or even that they might be guilty in your
opinion or belief, if there is any reasonable doubt in your
mind of that guilt you will resolve that doubt in their favor
and vote to acquit them?

A. I think I will.
Q. Pardon me?
A. I think I know all about that.
Q. And you will, once you make up your opinion from

the evidence, of their guilt or innocence, why, you are going
to abide by it?

A. Yes sir.

Mr. Akerman: The defendant, Walter Irvin, will excuse
Mr. Purcer.

23—420

354

M e . J oseph H. B assett, was called to the box and sworn.

By Mr. Hunter:
Q. Mr. Bassett, where do you live!
A. Eustis.
Q. What is your business?
A. Boat business.

[fol. 608] Q. How long* have you lived in Eustis?
A. 35 years.
Q. Are you conscientiously opposed to the infliction of

capital punishment?
A. No sir.
Q. Have you ever heard any of the facts or circumstances

in relation to the guilt or innocence of these three de
fendants or either one of them discussed?

A. Yes sir.
Q. You have heard the facts and circumstances discussed?
A. Yes sir.
Q. Did you form or express an opinion?
A. Yes sir.
Q. As to their guilt or innocence?
A. Yes sir.
Q. You still have that opinion?
A. Yes sir.

The Court: All right, Come down.

Mb. M abion W ingfield , was called to the box and sworn.

By Mr. Hunter:
Q. What is your name, sir?
A. Marion Wingfield.
Q. Where do you live, Mr. Wingfield?
A. Well, I get my mail and sleep in Umatilla. I live in

Eustis.
Q. Are you related to the Wingfields at Umatilla?
A. Yes sir.
Q. Related to the County Judge of Volusia County?
A. Yes sir.

[fol. 609] Q. How long have you been up there, Mr. Wing
field?

355

Q. Are you conscientiously opposed to the infliction of
capital punishment in those cases where the law authorizes
it?

A. No.
Q. Have you ever heard any of the facts and circum

stances in connection with this case discussed?
A. Yes. What I have read in the papers.
Q. Did you ever hear any person that purported to

know the facts discuss them?
A. No sir.
Q. You read about it in the papers?
A. Yes.
Q. Most of the articles you read in the newspapers were

directed at the crime, itself, rather than the three defend
ants here, were they not?

A. I think so.
Q. Did you form or express any opinion as to the guilt

or innocence of these three defendants or either one of
them from what you read?

A. Yes.
Q. You did?
A. Yes.
Q, You still have that opinion?
A. Yes.
Mr. Hunter: OK. Your Honor, he should go back home.
The Court: All right, Mr. Wingfield.

A . 20 y e a rs .

M b . E . G ilbebt A ult was called to the box and sworn.

By Mr. Hunter:
[fol. 610] Q. What is your name?

A. E. Gilbert Ault.
Q. Where do you live?
A. Leesburg.
Q. What is your business?
A. Banking.
Q. How long have you been over there?
A. About 27 years.
Q. Are you conscientiously opposed to the infliction of

capital punishment in those cases where the law authorizes
it?

356

A. No sir.
Q. Have you ever heard any of the facts or circumstances

relating to the guilt or innocence of these defendants dis
cussed?

A. Very little.
Q. Did you ever read anything about them in the news

papers?
A. I read some in the Orlando Sentinal and Leesburg

Commercial.
Q. Most of the stuff that you read in the—I mean, the.

news that you read in the Orlando papers purportedly
directed at these defendants, or at the general news of
what they claimed was going on down there?

A. Just general news.
Q. Did you form or express any opinion as to the guilt

or innocence of these defendants from what you heard
or read?

A. No.
Q. I believe you said you were not opposed to capital

punishment ?
A. That’s right.
Q. Are you opposed to or prejudiced against the negro

race?
A. No sir.

[fol. 611] Mr. Hunter: You may inquire.

By Mr. Akerman:
Q. You say you are in the banking business?
A. Yes sir.
Q. Do you have a family, sir?
A. No sir.
Q. Do you knowT any of these witnesses’ names we have

called out?
A. I know three of them. Curtis Howard, and the dep

uties, Yates and Campbell.
Q. What is the nature of your acquaintanceship with Mr.

Howard?
A. I have just known him about 3 years in business con

nections.
Q. The fact that you know Mr. Howard and do not know

some of the other witnesses, would you tend to give more
or less credence to what Mr. Howard might say from the

357

witness stand than you would from somebody you didn’t
know?

A. No. I don’t believe I would.
Q. There would be no embarrassment on your part at

all in arriving at your verdict if you sincerely thought that
the other witnesses were testifying to the truth and Mr.
Howard was mistaken? You would have no embarrass
ment in returning a verdict?

A. No embarrassment.
Q. You have served on juries before?
A. Yes sir.

[fol. 612] Q. Then you are familiar with the instructions
of the law that the Court gives you?

A. Yes sir.
Q. And then you believe at this time that there is a pre

sumption that Charles Greenlee and Samuel Shepherd and
Walter Irvin, are innocent of this erime?

A. There is a presumption, yes sir.
Q. There is a presumption?
A. Yes sir.
Q. And you will give them the benefit of that presumption

throughout this trial?
A. Yes sir.
Q. And if at the conclusion of all the evidence even

though you may believe they are guilty, but there is a rea
sonable doubt in your mind that they have been proven
guilty of the crime. Will you resolve that doubt in their
favor and vote to acquit them?

A. WTell, there might be something that I didn’t exactly
understand.

Q. I mean by that------
A. The discussion might change my view on it.
Q. If you finally arrive at the conclusion that although

it might be your opinion the preponderance of the evidence
might show their guilt, but still there was a reasonable
doubt,—not a doubt now—but, a reasonable doubt, that
a reasonable man would have as to their guilt, that if you
had to choose between a 50-50 one way or the other, but
still there is a doubt there in your mind, you would resolve
that doubt in their favor, wouldn’t you?

A. Yes sir.
[fol. 613] Q. Let me ask one general question. Are any

358

of you represented by Mr. Hunter, as your attorney? Or
have you been represented by him?

(Answer was indicated in the negative.)
Mr. Akerman: The defendant, Walter Irvin, will excuse

Mr. Cowle.

Mr. H enry G. G atch w as ca lled to the b ox and sworn.

By Mr. Hunter:
Q. What is your name, sir?
A. Gatch.
Q. Where do you live?
A. Eustis. About 5 miles East of Eustis.
Q. How long have you been there?
A. About 15 years.
Q. Do you have a family?
A. Yes sir.
Q. What constitutes the family?
A. Wife and 4 boys.
Q. What business are you in?
A. Fruit business.
Q. Do you have any conscientious scruples against the

infliction of capital punishment where the law authorizes it ?
A. No sir.
Q. Have you ever heard the facts or circumstances in

relation to the guilt or innocence of these three defendants,
here, discussed?

A. No sir.
Q. Have you read anything about it ?
A. A littie.
Q. From what you heard or read, did you form or express

any opinion as to their guilt or innocence?
A. No sir.

[fol. 614] Q. Have you any prejudice against the colored
race?

A. No sir.
Q. If taken as a juror would you give both sides a fair

and impartial trial?
A. Yes sir.
Mr. Hunter: You may inquire.

359

By Mr. Akerman:
Q. Mr. Gatch, you say you read a little bit about it?
A. That’s right.
Q. And you feel that if taken on this jury you will have

no trouble dismissing from your mind what you have read
about it and come in just like you never heard anything
before about the case?

A. I was on a vacation, I think, when it happened.
Q. You say you are in the fruit business, sir!
A. Yes sir.
Q. You have served on juries before, haven’t you?
A. Yes sir.
Q. You are familiar with the instructions that the Court

gives you?
A. Yes.
Q. Never had any trouble following those instructions?
A. No sir.
Q. And you believe now, then, that Charles Greenlee,

Samuel Shepherd, and Walter Irvin, are presumed to be
innocent of this crime?

A. Yes sir.
[fol. 615] Q. And you will continue to give them that pre
sumption unless the State brings in evidence proving to
you beyond a reasonable doubt of their guilt?

A. That’s right.
Q. Are you acquainted down in Groveland?
A. No sir.
Q. Don’t know the Tyson family down there?
A. No sir.
Q. Mrs. Padget? or her husband, Mr. Willie Padget?
A. No sir.
Q. Do you know anything about the three defendants

over there, or their families?
A. No sir.
Q. Don’t know of any reason why you couldn’t serve on

this jury and render a fair and impartial trial?
A. That’s right.
Q. Have you ever been represented by Mr. Hunter as

an attorney?
A. Not yet, no sir.
Mr. Akerman: May we have a short conference, Your

Honor?
The Court: Yes sir.

360

(The Court then took a five minute recess, at the end of
which time, the following proceedings were had:)

Mr. Akerman: The defendant, Walter Irvin, will excuse
Mr. Crutchfield.

[ fo l. 616] Mr. R. M. H olloway w as ca lled to the b ox and
sworn.

By Mr. Hunter:
Q. Where do you live, Mr. Holloway?
A. Leesburg.
Q. What is your business?
A. Citrus.
Q. How long have you lived over there?
A. 20 years.
Q. Are you opposed to the infliction of capital punish

ment in those cases where the law authorizes it?
A. No sir.
Q. Have you heard any of the facts or circumstances

relating to the guilt or innocence of these defendants?
A. No sir. I wasn’t in town at the time.
Q. Have you read any of the newspaper articles in

reference to their guilt or innocence?
A. The only newspaper I read was in Rochester, Minne

sota. I saw it in that paper. That’s the only paper I
have seen.

Q. From what you read in that paper or for any other
reason, have you formed or expressed any opinion as to
the guilt or innocence of these defendants?

A. I didn’t.
Q. At the present time, do you have any other opinion

than what’s cast upon them by law?
A. No.
Q. Do you have any prejudice against the colored race

that would affect you in the trial of this case ?
A. No sir.

Mr. Hunter: You may inquire.

By Mr. Akerman:
[fol. 617] Q. Mr. Holloway, you say you are in the citrus
business?

361

A. Yes sir.
Q. Do you have a family, sir?
A. Yes sir.
Q. What does your family consist of?
A. Wife, boy and girl.
Q. You have lived in Leesburg how long, sir?
A. Approximately 20 years,
Q. You say you were out of the State at the time of this

occurrence ?
A. Yes sir.
Q. Did you hear us read the list of the witnesses, Mr.

Holloway?
A. Yes sir.
Q. And do you know any of them, sir?
A. I know Mr. Camp, the deputy sheriff.
Q. What is the nature of your acquaintanceship with

him?
A. Nothing except I just know him as an officer.
Q. And your knowledge of him would not, the fact that

you know of him, would not tend to give his testimony more
or less credence than any other?

A. No sir.
Q. Mr. Hunter asked you the question that you have no

other opinion than that cast by the law. That being that,
at the present time, there is a presumption that Charles
Greenlee, Samuel Shepherd, and Walter Irvin, are innocent
of this crime?

A. Yes sir.
Q. And that’s your feeling in the matter right at the

present moment?
A. Yes sir.

[fob 618] Q. The fact that negro attorneys are partici
pating in this trial, would not affect you in any way ?

A. Not a bit.
Q. Now I want to ask just a few general questions to each

one of you gentlemen. As you gentlemen well realize, this
is a serious case.

Mr. Hunter: Mr. Akerman, is that the final question you
want to ask?

Mr. Akerman: I am asking a few general questions of
all the jurors.

Mr. Hunter: Well, we may want to challenge one or two
of them and you probably will want to make that, later.

362

Mr. Akerman: Well understood— What says the State?
Mr. Hunter: We will excuse Mr. Bishop.

Mr. J. S. B ispham was called to the stand and sworn.

By Mr. Hunter:
Q. Where do you live, sir?
A. Lake Yale, near Leesburg.
Q. How long have you lived out there?
A. 5 years.
Q. You heard any of the facts and circumstances in con

nection with this case?
A. No sir. I have not.
Q. Have you read anything about it ?
A. Yes sir. I have read a little bit about it in the papers,

[fol. 619] Q. Are you related to any of the attorneys in
this case?

A. Yes sir.

Mr. Hunter: I expect Mr. Bispham had better step down.
He and I are related to each other.

The Court: Let the record show he was discharged for
cause.

Mr. B urton B rown was called.
Mr. Hunter: The State will excuse Mr. Brown.
Next name I call is that of L. P. Fuseli, who was sick and

not able to attend.

Mr. J ohn H enry W ade was called; excused by permission
of counsel for defense.

Mr. Hunter: He was a colored man?
The Court: Yes.
Mr. Akerman: Excused because of a death in the family.

Mr. A rth u r A lexander was called to the box and sworn.

By Mr. Hunter:
Q. Where do you live, sir?
A. Mascotte.
Mr. Hunter: Well, you can just go right on back.

363

[ fo l. 620] M r. J. A. M cCranie was called to the box and
sworn.

By Mr. Hunter:
Q. Where are you from, Mr. McCranief
A. Leesburg.
Q. What is your business?
A. Hardware.
Q. Are you related to the old McCranie family in Marion

County and the North half of Lake County?
A. No sir. Not that I know of.
Q. Where are you from?
A. South Georgia. Sparks. Sparks County.
Q. Have you ever heard any of the facts or circumstances

in reference to the guilt or innocence of these three defend
ants ?

A. Yes sir.
Q. From what you heard, have you formed or expressed

an opinion as to their guilt or innocence?
A. Yes sir.
Q. Do you still have it?
A. Yes sir.
Mr. Hunter: Excuse him, Your Honor.
The Court: Excused for cause.

Mr. R. N. D illard w as called to the box and sworn.

By Mr. Hunter:
Q. What is your name, sir?
A. R. N. Dillard.
Q. Where do you live, Mr. Dillard?
A. Eustis. Between Eustis and Umatilla.

364

[fol. 621] Q. What is your business?
A. Carpenter.
Q. Have you heard any of the facts or circumstances in

reference to the guilt or innocence of these defendants?
A. No sir.
Q. Have you read anything about that case?
A. Yes sir.
Q. From what you read, did you form, or express any

opinion as to their guilt or innocence?
A. No sir.
Q. Are you opposed to capital punishment in those cases

where the law authorizes it?
A. No sir.
Q. Are you in any way prejudiced against the colored

race to such an extent that it would interfere with you in
rendering the verdict in this case ?

A. No sir.
Q. If taken as a juror, will you give both sides a fair and

impartial trial?
A. I will.
Mr. Hunter: You may inquire.

By Mr. Akerman:
Q. Mr. Dillard, do you have a family, sir?
A. Yes sir.
Q. What does that consist of?
A. Consists of One boy, now.
Q. You have lived in Lake County all your life?
A. No sir.

[fol. 622] Q. You say you haven’t heard any discussion
of the case; all you have done is read something in the
newspapers concerning it?

A. Yes sir.
Q. What papers, please, sir ?
A. The Tampa Tribune and St. Petersburg Independent.

I was in Bay Pines when this happened, in the hospital.
Q. And from what you read, you didn’t form any opin

ion as to the guilt or innocence ?
A. No sir.
Q. Do you believe that if you serve as a juror in this case,

that you can readily lay aside what you may have read and
base your decision solely upon what you heard from the
witness stand in this courtroom ?

365

A. Yes sir.
Q. The fact that what you have read will in no way em

barrass you in the trial of this case?
A. Not a bit.
Q. Are you acquainted down in the Groveland section?
A. No sir.
Q. You heard us read the list of the names of the wit

nesses down in this case, do you know any of them, sir?
A. No sir.
Q. The fact that colored attorneys are participating in

this case would make no difference to you, would it, sir?
A. Not a bit in the world.
Q. And you have served as a juror in Lake County, be

fore?
A. No sir.

[fol. 623] Q. This is your first jury experience. You
heard, in qualifying the other jurors, the questions that
have been asked concerning the law of our land here,
haven’t you?

A. Yes sir.
Q. Then you feel that at the present time, there is a pre

sumption that Charles Greenlee, Samuel Shepherd and
Walter Irvin, 3 seated right over there, are innocent of this
crime ?

A. Until proven guilty.
Q. That’s right. No evidence having come in now, you

feel that at the present time, they are innocent of the crime?
A. That’s right.
Q. And you will give them the benefit of that presump

tion all the way through the trial?
A. Yes sir.
Q. And unless and until there is evidence produced prov

ing their guilt beyond a reasonable doubt you will vote to
acquit them?

A. That’s right.
Q. And having arrived at your decision after hearing all

the evidence and considering it, the law given you by the
Judge, you will remain by that decision?

A. I will.
Q. Regardless of what the other members of the jury

may be, with you or against you ?
A. That’s right.

Mr. Akerman: What says the State?

366

By Mr. Hunter:
—. Mr. Baer, how long did you say you had been in this

County?
A. 5 years.

[fol. 624] Q. And where did you come from?
A. Ohio.
Q. What was your business in Ohio?
A. Dry cleaning.
Q. And are you in any business, now?
A. No sir.
Q. Retired?
A. Retired.
Q. Are you living on a farm?
A. On an estate.
Q. Gentlemen, I want to ask you one question that I

might not have asked each of you. And this is the question:
Are you conscientiously opposed to the infliction of capital
punishment in those cases where the law authorizes it?

(Answer was indicated in the negative.)

(At this point, the Court took a 5 minute recess after
which the following proceedings were had:)

Mr. Hunter: State will excuse Mr. Rast, Mr. Ault, Mr.
Baer.

Mr. T. Grady S im pson , was called.
W. A. L. B ooth w as called.

Mr. Hunter: H e’s from Mascotte.
The Court: Mr. Booth excused as being from the Mascotte

area.

Mr. J ohn A rnold was called.

By the Court:
—. Are you from Groveland?
A. Mascotte.
The Court: Mr. Arnold is excused for the same reason.

[fol. 625] Mr. W ilbur T. A dams and Mr. W illiam F eins
were called.

(All new men in the box were sworn.)

By Mr. Hunter:
Q. Mr. Prins, you are in the sand business, and your

business is shut down, isn’t it?
A. Yes. (Indicated by head.)

Mr. Hunter: I promised to excuse him on behalf of the
State.

The Court: All right. Mr. Prins is excused.

36 7

Mr. A lto M. R oyal was called and sworn.

By Mr. Hunter:
Q. Mr. Adams, where do you live?
A. Lady Lake.
Q. How long have you lived up there, Mr. Adams?
A. All my life. A little over 40 years.
Q. What is your business or profession?
A. In the citrus and also real estate.
Q. Have you heard any of the facts or circumstances in

relation to the guilt or innocence of these three defendants
discussed?.

A. What I have read in the papers.
Q. From what you have read in the papers, did you form

or express any opinion as to their guilt or innocence?
A. No sir.
Q. Are you conscientiously opposed to the infliction of

capital punishment in those cases where the law authorizes
it?

A. No sir.
Q. Do you know of any reason why you could not sit as

a fair and impartial juror in this case?
A. No sir.
Q. Do you have any prejudice against the colored race

that would influence you in the trial of the case?
A. No sir.

[fol. 626] Q. Mr. Simpson, where do you live?
A. Mt. Dora.

368

Q. How long have you lived there?
A. Since ’24.
Q. What business are you in?
A. Tourist and citrus.
Q. Have you heard any of the facts or circumstances in

relation to the guilt or innocence of these defendants dis
cussed?

A. No sir.
Q. Have you read any newspaper reports in reference to

it?
A. Yes.
Q. From what you read, did you form or express any

opinion as to their guilt or innocence ?
A. No sir.
Q. Do you have any prejudice against the colored race?
A. No sir.
Q. Are you opposed to the infliction of capital punish

ment in those cases where the law authorizes it?
A. No sir.
Q. Mr. Royal, where do you live?
A. Cassidy.
Q. What is your business?
A. Farmer.
Q. Have you heard any of the facts or circumstances in

connection with this case in reference to the guilt or inno
cence of these defendants discussed?

A. No sir.
Q. Did you read anything about it in the newspapers?
A. Yes sir.
Q. Did you form or express any opinion from what you

read in the newspapers, sir?
A. No, I haven’t.
Q. Are you prejudiced against the colored race?
A. No.

[fol. 627] Q. Do you know of any reason why you couldn’t
sit as a fair and impartial juror in this case?

A. No, I don’t.
Mr. Hunter: You may inquire.

By Mr. Akerman:
Q. Mr. Adams, you live at Lady Lake, sir?
A. Yes sir.
Q. You say you have lived there about 40 years?

369

A. Yes sir.
Q. Do you have a family, sir?
A. Yes sir.
Q. Of what does your family consist?
A. Wife and one child. Boy.
Q. Did you hear the list of the witnesses read?
A. Yes sir.
Q. Do you know any of the witnesses in this case?
A. There are two of them. One of them is the deputy

and the other is the young man, Curtis Howard. I know
them just casually, you know. I haven’t done any business
with them.

Q. Never have done any business with either of them?
A. No.
Q. How long have you known Mr. Howard?
A. About 3 or 4 years. Something like that.
Q. And you stated you hadn’t heard any of the facts dis

cussed in this case?
A. Only what you can read in the papers.

[fol. 628] Q. I mean, no discussion of it. You have read
the papers concerning the case?

A. That’s right.
Q. What papers do you recall having read about it?
A. Well, the Orlando Sentinal, Tampa Tribune, the Lees

burg Commercial.
Q. Are you a subscriber to each one of those papers?
A. Yes sir.
Q. Do you get them daily?
A. Yes sir.
Q. Did you read the stories fairly thoroughly that ap

peared in them?
A. Yes.
Q. And from those stories, did you arrive at an opinion,

either as to the guilt or innocence?
A. No.
Q. Now it may well be in the trial of this case that some

of the things that were in the papers may never come out
in this trial.

A. That’s true.
Q. With that in mind, do you think that you will have a

memory of certain things that the papers said were sup
posed to be true?

24—420

370

A. No. Because a lot of things you read in the paper is
just hearsay.

Q. So you think you will have no trouble dismissing what
you have read in the paper from your mind?

A. That’s right.
Q. And that you can make a, fair and impartial juror as

you would have made if the first thing you had heard of this
case was when you sat down over there a few minutes ago?

A. Yes sir.
[fol. 629] Q. Have you ever served on a jury before, sir?

A. Yes sir.
Q. You are familiar with the instructions that the Court

gives you?
A. Yes sir.
Q. That the mere fact that a person is arrested and

charged with a crime and brought to trial is no evidence of
their guilt?

A. That’s right.
Q. And they are presumed to be innocent?
A. Until proven guilty.
Q. That’s right. And so then at the present time there

is a presumption of innocence which you agree, that Charles
Greenlee, Samuel Shepherd, and Walter Irvin are, as a pre
sumption, that they are now innocent of the crime?

A. That’s right.
Q. And you will give them the benefit of that presump

tion?
A. That’s right.
Q. And you will give them the benefit of that presump

tion? All the way through the trial and unless the State
proves to you by evidence from the witness stand of their
guilt beyond a reasonable doubt, then you will vote to acquit
them?

A. That’s right.
Q. And if at the conclusion of all the evidence, while

though it might be your impression that they are guilty,
if from the evidence there is a reasonable doubt in your
mind of their guilt,—could you catch that? I mean that it
might, things might point towards their guilt but still there
is a reasonable doubt in your mind of their guilt, you would
[fol. 630] vote to acquit them?

A. Yes. If the evidence showed it.
Q. Or, if they fail to bring in the evidence or, the lack

of the evidence?

371

A. That’s right.
Q. And, having once arrived at the conclusion from the

evidence, the instructions by the Court and, having once ar
rived at your sincere opinion in this case, you will abide
by that opinion?

A. That’s right.
Q. Regardless of whether you are joined by the other

members of the jury or not?
A. That’s right.
Q. As you see, there are two colored men, two negroes,

serving as defense counsel in this case. Maybe in the trial
of this case, in their participation in their duties as de
fense counsel that they will have to cross examine the wit
nesses, most of the witnesses being white. What effect, if
any, would it have on you of a vigorous cross examination
by one of the colored counsel of a white witness?

A. None, whatever. Only it does seem rather odd.
Q. Well now, can you kind of explain your feeling on

that, Mr. Adams?
A. Well, we are used to white people mostly, as lawyers,

especially. And it does seem rather strange to sit with
colored lawyers.

Q. Now, you said it is strange. Do you mean it is kind
of unique?

A. It is just a little different, so to speak.
Q. What effect, if any, wdll that difference have on you?
A. None, whatever.

[fol. 631] Q. In other words, you will judge them, your
judgment of them will be by the same standard that you
are going to judge Mr. Hunter, Mr. Buoy, and myself and
the other counsel here in the case?

A. That’s right.
Q. And if, in the course of the trial, as you no doubt

have experienced as a juror, you know that questions are
asked and by one attorney and the other lawyer gets up and
objects to the questions and then it is argued before the
Court. What effect, if any, would that have on you, if Mr.
Hunter was asking the questions and one of the colored
counsel jumped up to place an objection? Do you think
that would be perfectly proper? In other words, you would
judge them just like you would judge us? Or, vice versa,
if I was asking a question and Mr. Hunter objected to it?

A. Yes sir.
Q. Mr. Simpson, you live in Mt. Dora?

372

A. I do.
Q. You are in the citrus and tourist business?
A. Yes sir.
Q. How long have you lived over in Mt. Dora?
A. Since ’24.
Q. Do you have a family, sir?
A. I do. Wife and three children.
Q. I believe you stated you had read something about

the case, but hadn’t heard anybody discussing the facts?
A. No facts. Haven’t heard anyone say anything of any

facts.
Q. You have heard discussion concerning the case but

not anybody purporting to know what the facts are?
A. No. I haven’t been in any discussions.

[fol. 632] Q. No discussions?
A. That’s right.
Q. What papers did you read?
A. The Orlando Sentinal and Mt. Dora Topic.
Q. And from what you read, did you form any opinion as

to the guilt or innocence of the accused?
A. No sir.
Q. Do you feel that, as may well be in this case, that

certain statements were made in the press which will not
be introduced in evidence, do you feel that you can dismiss
those statements you saw in the papers from your mind?

A. Yes.
Q. And in no way feel like, ‘ wonder why the paper said

so-and-so,’ and that it wasn’t brought out here in the court
room?

A. I don’t believe them, anyway. The papers.
Q. I think we can move on to other questions, then. For

get the papers. Are you acquainted down in the Grove-
land area?

A. No, I am not.
Q. Did you hear the list of witnesses read?
A. Yes.
Q, Do you know any of them, sir?
A. No, I don’t.
Q. Before this occurrence, you didn’t know anything

about the three defendants over there?
A. No.
Q. Don’t know anything about their families; reputa

tion of the families?

373

A. No.
Q. Have you served on juries before, sir?
A. Yes.
Q. And then you are familiar with the general rules of

[fol. 633] law that the Court gives you?
A. Yes.
Q. Then you believe that at the present time, there is a

presumption of innocence for Charles Greenlee, Samuel
Shepherd and Walter Irvin?

A. They are.
Q. And that presumption you will give the benefit of

throughout this entire trial and require the State to prove
their guilt beyond any reasonable doubt before you would
render a verdict of guilty?

A. That’s right.
Q. And even though you might believe of a probability

of their guilt, unless you were convinced beyond a reason
able doubt, you would never vote for a verdict of guilty,
would you?

A. That’s right. It would have to be proved guilty.
Q. Beyond any reasonable doubt?
A. That’s right.
Q. And once having arrived at a conclusion of their in

nocence, you would abide by that regardless of whether the
other 11 gentleman here joined with you or not?

A. That’s right.
Q. You have heard the questions concerning the colored

defense lawyers?
A. Yes.
Q. Do you have any comments to make on that?
A. No, I haven’t.
Q. You would just judge them by the same course and

standard of conduct that you judge the other attorneys?
A. That’s right.
Q. And if, during the trial, they had to jump up and ob

ject to evidence, vigorously cross examine witnesses, why,
it would have no effect on you at all?

A. No.
[fol. 634] Q. Mr. Royal, where did you say you lived?

A. Cassia.
Q. Did you hear any discussion concerning this case?
A. No. '
Q. You did read something in the papers about it?

374

A. Yes sir.
Q. What papers did you read, sir!
A. Orlando.
Q. Orlando papers?
A. Yes.
Q. And, from what you read, did you form any opinion

as to the guilt or innocence!
A. No.
Q. Then it may well be in the trial of this case that cer

tain things that were stated in the papers will never be
brought out as evidence, will it?

A. Yes.
Q. Will you have any trouble dismissing those things

from your mind?
A. No sir.
Q. Do you think that you would be just as fair and im

partial as if you had never heard of this case until this
day?

A. That’s right.
Q. Do you have a family, sir?
A. No.
Q. Have you served on juries before, sir?
A. Yes sir.
Q. Are you familiar with the general instructions of

law that the Judge gives?
A. Yes sir.
Q. Then do you feel at the present time that there is a

presumption that Charles Greenlee, Samuel Shepherd and
Walter Irvin are innocent of this crime?

A. Yes.
[fol. 635] Q. You would give them the benefit of that
presumption not only right now but all through this trial?

A. Yes.
Q. And unless and until the State brings in evidence that

will convince you beyond a reasonable doubt of their guilt,
then you will of course vote for a verdict of not guilty?

A. Yes.
Q. And having arrived at your sincere opinion in the

case, you will abide by it, will you not?
A. Yes.
Q. Regardless of whether the other 11 gentlemen join

with you or differ with you?
A. Yes.

375

Q. I ask all of you three gentlemen that have just been
called, and any others I haven’t asked the question, are
any of you now, or have you been represented by any of
the counsel for the State, Mr. Hunter, or his firm ?

(Answer indicated in the negative.)
Q. You say you have, sir!
A. (Mr. Royal) I have been.
Q. How long ago ?
A. 3 years.
Q. About 3 years ago. That case is not pending now?
A. Ho sir.
Q. All through and clear?
A. Yes.
Q. Was it just a representation in one matter or some

thing* extending over a long period of time?
A. No. About 2 years.
Q. For about 2 years, he acted as your attorney?
A. Yes. (Indicated by head.)

[fol. 636] Q. Now, Mr. Royal, of course, in the trial of
the case, your final instructions as to the law will come
from Judge Futch. But it is proper for attorneys on both
sides to express their opinion of the law to, the jury. And
it may be in this case, that in our arguments to the jury,
we may discuss with you what we believe the law to be. As
I say, the final authority is the Judge and of course, I
know you will follow his instructions on it. But would
the fact that you were represented by Mr. Walton Hunter
naturally, he gave advice in your matters, and you accepted
his advice because he was your lawyer, would the fact that
you had been represented by him and had been advised
as to the law by Mr. Hunter, would that tend for you to
give more weight to what Mr. Walton Hunter said the law
was than what I said it would be ?

A. No.

Mr. Akerman: What says the State?

By Mr. Hunter:
Q. Mr. Royal, you would take the law from Judge Futch,

wouldn’t you?
A. Sure.

Mr. Hunter: The State tenders the jury.

376

By Mr. Akerman:
Q. Gentlemen, I am going to ask you just a few general

questions directed to the whole panel. As you know, this
is a very serious case. It is a capital case. Lives are at
stake. We have attempted on our questions to question
[fol. 637] you about what we considered material matters
going toward your qualifications as jurors. We didn’t
attempt to go thoroughly into all of your affairs, drag it
out. So, I am not going to attempt to, at this time. But
I am going to ask each one of you gentlemen before accept
ing the jury, do you know of any reason, even though our
questions might not have come anywhere near there, any
reason why you can’t serve on this case, be a fair and
impartial jury and discharge your duties as such!

Bather than attempting to ask a lot of questions, I am
going to ask that general question knowing that any of
you who do would certainly speak up and say so.

(No answer.)

Q. Do you know any reasons, Mr. Jones? You sir?
(All answers were indicated in the negative.)

Q. You feel that each and every one of you will give a
fair and impartial trial in the case? (Answer indicated in
the affirmative.)

Mr. Akerman: Defense accepts the jury.
Mr. Hunter: Swear the jury.

(Whereupon, the jury was sworn, polled by the Court
and the names recorded by the Clerk)

Mr. Hunter: Now, Your Honor, I would like to ask that
all State witnesses come to this courtroom at 1 o ’clock,
promptly, and I am going to ask the Court to adjourn
until 2 o ’clock when we will be ready to proceed.
[fol. 638] The Court: Is that satisfactory to you, Mr.
Akerman ?

Mr. Akerman: Yes sir. We would like to have all wit
nesses placed under the rule from now on out.

The Court: Well, as soon as they are called to Court. At
two o ’clock, we will.

Now, gentlemen of the jury, up to this stage, you haven’t
been under any restraint or anything else. But from now

3 7 7

on, until the case is completed and you have brought in
your final decision, you will be kept together and in charge
of one or more bailiffs that the sheriff’s office will furnish.
They will look after your needs and comforts, anything
that you want in reason, why, make it known to your bailiff
and he, in turn, will make it known to the Court and, if it
is necessary. But you will be in charge of the bailiff or
bailiffs whom the sheriff will appoint and will remain to
gether at all times until this case is concluded.

Mr. Sheriff,------
Mr. Buoy: I suggest that you discharge all the other

jurors.
The Court: Now you jurors who have not been called in

this case will be excused for the term and Mr. Dykes will
[fols. 639-840] meet you at his office downstairs at 1 o ’clock.

The Court will now recess until 2 o ’clock.

(The Court then adjourned until 2 o ’clock, PM, Septem
ber 2nd, 1949, at which time, Court was reopened and the
following proceedings were had.)

[fo ls . 841-842] 1st the Circuit C ourt of th e F ifth J udicial
Circuit of th e S tate of F lorida, in and for L ak e Co u nty .

S tate of F lorida

vs.
S am uel S heppard , W alter L. I rvin and Charles Greenlee .

Transcript of Testimony and Proceedings on Motion of
Defendants to Withdraw Pleas of Not Guilty and to Set
Aside Arraignment

[fol. 843] At a hearing on motion of defendants to
withdraw the pleas of not guilty and to set aside ar
raignment, before Hon. Truman G. Futeh, Judge of
the Circuit Court of the Fifth Judicial Circuit of
Florida, in and for Lake County, in the court room at
Tavares, Florida, on the 25th day of August 1949, the
following proceedings ivere had:

By J. W. Hunter. Let the record show that the State
is represented by State Attorney, J. W. Hunter, and A.

378

P. Buie, Assistant State Attorney, and I would like to
have W. B. Hunter sworn as Assistant State Attorney for
this whole trial. W. B. Hunter sworn by Geo. J. Dykes,
Clerk of the Circuit Court, as Assistant State Attorney.

By Alex Akerman Jr. I am appearing as counsel for the
defendants, and Joseph Evans Price, of Orlando, Florida,
is appearing as counsel for the defendants, and at this
time I would like to ask permission of the Court for Frank
lin H. Williams, a member of the bar of the State of New
York, to appear as counsel in this case.

Mr. Hunter. No objection.
The Court. The request is granted.
Mr. Akerman. I would like at this time to have filed

motion of defendants to withdraw pleas of not guilty and
to set aside arraignment.

Motion read to the Court by Mr. Akerman.
Mr. Hunter. In reply to that I have filed the following-

paper which I will ask the Court also to file.
Answer read to the Court by Mr. Hunter.
Mr. Hunter. If it is necessary to swear to this document

let the record show it is sworn to before the Court.
The Court. I don’t think it is necessary.

[fo l. 844] A lex A kerm an J r ., being first duly sw orn, testi
fied as fo l lo w s :

My name is Alex Akerman Jr. I am a member of the
bar of the State of Florida, with offices in Orlando, Florida.
I was employed as counsel in this case the night of August
22nd, 1949. Shortly before August 12, 1949, I was con
tacted with reference to employment in the Case. On the
11th or 12th I phoned Mr. Hunter, the State Attorney,
concerning the arraignment. My memory is not clear
whether he said they had just been arraigned or were going
to be arraigned at that time. I explained to him at that
time that I was not employed in the case. I explained to
him what steps, of which there have been quite a number,
asking me to act as defense counsel, and that I did not desire
to act as defense counsel in this cause, and would only do
so in the event it became apparent that no other attorney
in the State would represent said defendants, and would
exhaust every legal remedy available under the law for

379

their defense. I have not since my employment had the
opportunity to inquire into the summoning, empaneling
and qualification or disqualification of the grand jury by
which this indictment was returned. If I am to properly
represent these defendants I consider it my duty to make
a complete and thorough investigation into all of the mat
ters and thus discharge my duty without having to file
hasty and dilatory motions which may or may not be proven.
That is all.

Cross-examination.

By Mr. Hunter:
Q. Mr. Akerman I believe you stated that you call- me

with reference to this case, do you remember whether it
was on the 11th or 12th that you called me?

A. Mr. Hunter I am not absolutely sure whether it was
just before or after the arraignment. I believe it was a
[fob 845] couple of hours before arraignment. What I
recall particularly, it was with reference to the arraign
ment.

Q. You do remember then that it was before the arraign
ment ?

A. That is my recollection, that it was an hour or so
before arraignment. It might have been afterwards. I
was not retained in the case at that time.
' Q. Do you remember my telling you that the arraign

ment had been set for the 12tli and that if private counsel
did not appear the court would appoint an attorney to
represent these defendants?

A. You either told me that or you told me one had been
appointed. I am not sure.

Q. Do you remember my telling you that these defend
ants and the State were entitled to a trial of this case
without unnecessary delay?

A. Yes.
Q. Do you remember telling me that if you were finally

retained that you would be busy in court work until the
22nd of August, and asked me not to set the case prior to
that time?

A. My memory is—it may not be correct—that you said
the case would not be set for two weeks from the date of
the phone call.

380

Q. Don’t you remember that you stated that you would
be busy prior to that time, and asked that the case be set
for a date after the 22nd of August?

A. I do not recall. I do recall the “ two weeks” being
mentioned.

Q. You wouldn’t say whether you did that or not?
A. I could not say one way or the other.

[fol. 846] Q. Do you recall further saying that any time
after the 22nd, if you were retained, would be satisfactory
to you?

A. No I don’t recall that.
Q. Would you say you didn’t do it?
A. No I couldn’t say that. At that time I was not re

tained in the case. I was merely asking about the arraign
ment. It didn’t make any correct impression on me. Your
memory would be probably better than mine.

F ran k lin H. W illiam s , being first duly sworn, testified
as follows:

Direct Examination.

By Mr. Akerman:
Q. State your name?
A. Franklin H. Williams.
Q. Your residence?
A. 2235 Fifth Avenue, New York City, New York.
Q. Are you a member of the bar of any court in the

United States?
A. I am a member of the bar of the State of New York,

and the Southern District of the Federal Court, and a
member of the bar of several Circuit Courts, and the
Supreme Court.

Q. Are you admitted to practice in the State of Florida?
A. I am not.
Q. Do you recall when you first saw the defendants in

this case?
A. July 31, 1949.
Q. Did they make a request of you?
A. Yes, sir. They did.
Q. What was their request?
A. That I continue my investigation of their case and

381

[fol. 847 ] if in my opinion their statements that they were
innocent were true I would obtain competent counsel to
defend them.

Q. Did you act upon this request!
A. I did.
Q. State to the court what efforts were made, and the

time consumed by the efforts in obtaining a member of the
bar of the State of Florida to represent them!

A. I believe my answer would be more complete to begin
with July 31st, and a few days prior thereto. With this
permission I will go ahead. I am employed by the National
Association for the Advancement of Colored People, Legal
Defense Funds, Educational Funds, Inc., a New York
Corporation. I was sent down here by Chief Counsel,
Thurgood Marshall, to investigate the facts and circum
stances surrounding the recent race rioting at Groveland,
Florida, and to ascertain to the best of my ability whether
the three negroes who were charged with having com
mitted rape according to the Associated Press reports were
innocent or guilty. I was sent here because prior to that
time we had made numerous efforts by telephone to obtain
a report from some competent person in the State of
Florida as to the true facts in this case. Mr. Marshall had
contacted a Mr. L. C. Thomas, an attorney in Miami, I
believe, and had requested, that he seek to locate these
three defendants and obtain statements from them and
send them to New York City. This was not done because
at that time the Associated Press report stated that these
men were being held at an undisclosed place. This news
was given to Attorney Thomas on or about July 25th.
Prior to that time I had been informed that Mr. Harry T.
Moore, as Secretary of the NAACP in the State of Florida,
had requested a young attorney of some three months
experience before the bar of this State, located in Tampa,
[fol. 848] Florida, by the name of William Fordham, to
make similar efforts and obtain sworn statements from
these boys. Up to and including the 27th day of July we
had not received any such statement, and it was for tins
reason that I was dispatched to Florida. I arrived in the
State on the 29th or 30th, I am not definite which day, and
was successful in obtaining several sworn affidavits, both
from these defendants and some other persons who had
some information concerning the circumstances surround-

ing their detention. I returned to the City of New York
a few days later, to the best of my recollection on or about
the 2nd or 3rd day of August, and reported my findings to
my chief counsel. Subsequently we attempted by tele
phone, after we had considered the statements contained
in these affidavits and concluded there was reasonable
doubt as to the innocence or guilt of these defendants, and
that in our opinion, as attorneys, they were absolutely in
nocent of the crime with which they were charged, accord
ing to the press. We contacted some time subsequent to
that Attorney Alex Akerman Jr. by telephone, and he
informed us that he did not desire to defend these men.
Accordingly I was again sent to Florida for the specific
purpose of enlisting the legal assistance for the defense
of these boys of a competent member of the bar of this
state. I arrived here on the 17th day of August, and from
that day until the night of the 22nd day of August I have
been contacting and personally talking to a large number
of the members of the bar of this state in various parts of
the state with the request that they act as defense counsel
for these three defendants. I contacted approximately
eleven such attorneys, all of whom are competent and
qualified, and of the eleven only two stated that they would
be willing to act in such capacity. One requested a re-
[fol. 849] tainer of $10,000.00, and another a retainer of
$25,000.00. I informed these men that the defendants and
their families were paupers and could not pay such re
tainer; that they were entirely dependent upon charity
to obtain funds to pay defense counsel. The other at
torneys stated that they considered the case of such a
nature that in their opinion it would be harmful to them to
act as defense counsel, and several after examining state
ments and other information which I had obtained, express
ing an opinion concerning the innocence of these defend
ants, steadfastly refused to act in such capacity. On the
evening of August 22nd, this year, at approximately five
P. M. I went to the office of Alex Akerman Jr., and from
five until approximately eight-thirty I explained to him
in great detail the efforts I had expended in trying to
obtain defense counsel, and I pleaded with him to act in
such capacity for these boys. With great reluctance Mr.
Akerman agreed to do so, and is presently acting in such
capacity.

383

Q. In your statement you mentioned contacting Attorney
L. E. Thomas in Miami in connection with this case, and
attempting to locate the prisoners and attempting to learn
of the arraignment, did you receive a reply from him?

A. Yes I did.
Q. I will ask you if this is the reply?
A. Yes it is, or a copy thereof. I believe it is the original.
Q. It was sent to you by Western Union?
A. Yes, sir. It was sent to us by Western Union and

signed by Attorney L. E. Thomas.

Mr. Akerman. We offer this telegram in evidence.
Mr. Hunter. No objection.
The Court. The telegram, datelined Miami, Florida,

[fol. 850] addressed to Attorney Franklin H. Williams, 20
West 40th Street, and purporting to be signed by Attorney
L. E. Thomas, offered in evidence, and received in evidence
without objection, as Defendants’ Exhibit #1.

Q. From your preliminary examination of the case is
there a question in your mind that it it is properly investi
gated that certain facts and law will reveal that for the
adequate defense in this case certain motions should be
made, such as a motion to quash the indictment, and motion
for change of venue?

A. I have such very definite opinion.
Q. Has it been explained to you that under the Florida

law a motion for change of venue requires certain affidavits
by at least two citizens of the county?

A. Yes, sir, and that it is also supposed to be made prior
to arraignment.

Q. Have efforts been made to secure this information?
A. They have.
Q, Have refusals been obtained and on what grounds?
A. Several efforts have been made to secure such infor

mation, which efforts have been met by refusal on the
ground that the parties requested were residents of this
county, and both frightened and afraid to sign such affi
davits.

Q. Are efforts being made today to ascertain that infor
mation?

A. They are.
Q. Are efforts being made to inquire into the forming

and impaneling of the grand jury?

384

A. They are.
Q. Did you discuss with Mr. Harry E. Gaylord, the at

torney appointed by the court, the question of filing motion
[fol. 851] to quash, and motion for change of venue?

A. I did, in great detail, and in addition I requested Mr.
Gaylord, or inquired of Mr. Gaylord whether or not he
would be willing to act as retained counsel in this case.

Q. Did he state he would not?
A. He did so state.
Q. And would not file a motion for change of venue?
A. He did so state, and he further informed me that at

the time he appeared in court as the appointed attorney
for the defendants at the arraignment------

Mr. Hunter. I object to him stating anything that was
said by Mr. Gaylord as being hearsay testimony.

The Court. The objection is sustained.

Cross-examination.

By J. W. Hunter, State Attorney:
Q. You came to this state on the 31st day of July?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. And began your investigation?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. You came because you couldn’t find out anything about

what had taken place down here?
A. That is true.
Q. Did you ever contact the Sheriff’s office?
A. I did not.
Q. Did you ever contact the State Attorney’s office?
A. I did not.
Q. Did you know an indictment had been found against

these defendants on the 20th day of July, ten days before
you came here?

A. Not until I arrived and got a back issue of the Orlando
paper.
[fol. 852] Q. You didn’t make any effort to secure a copy
of the indictment?

A. I did not.
Q. Did you ever contact the State Attorney for infor

mation about this case?
A. I did not.
Q. Did you know that J. W. Hunter, State Attorney, had

385

told a lawyer in Tampa by the name of Fordham that he
would be glad to give him any information he had about
this case?

A. I did not know that.
Q. Did you know that an attorney in Miami, I believe

his name is Thomas, had been told by the State Attorney
that he would be glad to give him any information he de
sired with reference to this case?

A. I did not.
Q. Did you undertake to determine who the witnesses

were against these defendants?
A. I did not directly, no, sir.
Q. Did you make any request from the State Attorney

for the witnesses in this case?
A. I did not. I was not retained as counsel for the

defense and did not think I had a right to make such request.
Q. You had been sent here as attorney for this associa

tion, whatever its name is, to make an investigation had
you not?

A. Yes, sir.
Q. And you didn’t think you had the right to ask the

State Attorney for the witnesses or a copy of the indict
ment ?

A. That is true.
Q. Or any other information?
A. That is right.

[fol. 853] Q. Are you retained by this association to rep
resent them ?

A. No, sir. I am a salaried employee of the Legal De
fense Fund. I was sent here to obtain information and
locate the defendants and find out if in my opinion they were
innocent or guilty.

Q. In doing that did you go to the source where you
might have found this information?

A. In my opinion I did.
Q. Didn’t you think you could get that information from

the State Attorney?
A. I certainly did not.
Q. Did you have any reason to think the State Attorney

would refuse to give you a copy of the indictment and the
names of the witnesses in this case?

A. I had no right to such indictment. I wasn’t retained
by the defendants.

25—420

386

Q. When were yon retained by the defendants?
A. I have never been retained by the defendants.
Q. When was your association retained by the defend

ants ?
A. The association has never been retained by the de

fendants.
Q. What are you doing about this case then?
A. We were retained at defendants’ request to investi

gate their case and obtain for them adequate counsel.
I am in the case because of the charter of our association.
We are a New York corporation with powers and the main
function of assisting negroes who are innocent of crime,
and who have been charged with same, and where in our
ffol. 854] opinion they have their rights guaranteed by
the United States Constitution violated.

Q. You came here without authority then to go to the
public records, or to the State Attorney’s office, or the
Sheriff’s office and obtain any of those things?

A. At the time I came to this state I had no intention of
coming in Lake County unannounced.

Q. How did you find where the defendants were ?
A. When I got to Orlando I obtained the information

from the president of our local branch, whose name is
J. F. Ellis. A young attorney, by the name of Fordham,
in Tampa had been requested by our State Secretary to
obtain their whereabouts. How Fordham found out I
don’t know. I went to Tampa and talked to him. He told
me that a day or so previously he had gone to ftaiford but
he had not obtained sworn statements. I could place no
reliance on those statements. On the 31st, in company
with Fordham and a notary public I went to the State
Prison and interviewed them and obtained sworn affi
davits.

Q. Did you obtain affidavits or evidence other than from
the defendants as to their guilt or innocence?

A. I did.
Q. Did you make a thorough investigation as to their

guilt or innocence?
A. I did not.
Q. Why didn’t you?
A. The purpose for which I was sent here was, first to

locate them, to obtain statements from them, and to make
other inquiries and obtain sufficient information to enable

387

my chief counsel to decide whether or not these boys were
guilty beyond a reasonable doubt, or whether they were
innocent.

Q. You made that investigation for that purpose?
[fol. 855] A. I did.

Q. Did you turn the result of your investigation over to
Mr. Akerman?

A. I did on the night he agreed to defend the boys.
Q. That was on the 22nd?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. How long have you been in this investigation?
A. I came down here early on the 29th, I believe, of July.
Q. How many times did you go to Raiford to interview

the boys?
A. Once. Sunday, the 31st.
Q. Did you send, or did your association send other

persons there to see the defendants?
A. Prior thereto I learned, the night of the 30th, that

Fordham had gone up and interviewed them.
Q. Did your association send other persons there except

you and Fordham?
A. We attempted to get some one else but were unsuccess

ful. My office did not even sent Fordham. We had no
knowledge of the fact that he had gone. I didn’t know
him.

Q. Did you know that other lawyers, colored lawyers,
and stenographers, had been sent from New York to Rai
ford to. interview these men?

A. On the 31st, at the time I spoke to the defendants, I
didn’t know that, and I do not believe it to be a fact.

Q. You don’t believe then that any one else has gone
from your association to Raiford to interview these men?

A. Now I know they have. That has been subsequent
to the 31st.

Q. Who was that?
[fol. 856] A. Attorney Horace Hill from Daytona Beach,
an attorney of some three month’s admission to the bar, and
a Doctor by the name of Spaulding, of Jacksonville, and a
Dentist also from Jacksonville whose name I do not recall.

Q. Did they carry a stenographer with them?
A. I do not know.
Q. Was that information furnished to Mr. Akerman?
A On the night of the 22nd it was. Prior thereto it had

been furnished the FBI.

388

Q. In the issue of the Pittsburgh Courier of Saturday,
August 13th, 1949, appears dissertation from Raiford,
Florida, in which it is said that “ Assistant Special Counsel
Franklin II. Williams of the NAACP announced, on his
return from an on-the-spot investigation of violence and
race rioting in the Groveland, Fla, area, that the three
young men charged with attaching Mrs. Willie Padgett of
Groveland have retained the NAACP to handle their de
fense,” is that correct?

A. That is not.
Q. That statement made by the Pittsburgh Courier on

the 13th day of August 1949 was untrue was it?
A. Inaccurate would be a better word.
Q. You didn’t authorize that statement?
A. Not that we were retained. We were retained not

to handle the defense, but we were retained to obtain com
petent defense counsel to act in the defense and we were
to assist them.

Q. Then this paper misquoted you in that case?
A. I would say yes. I never spoke to any one connected

with that paper.
Q. I will ask you if this part of their report is correct,

as coming from you? “ Retainers have been signed by
[fol. 857] Samuel Shepherd, Walter Lee Irvin and Charles
Greenlee, the prisoners,” did you make that statement to
them ?

A. I certainly did.
Q. That was true?
A. Yes.
Q. I believe you did say that you were convinced that

the three young men are entirely innocent of the charge?
A. I did, and I am still so convinced.
Q. At the time you are alleged to have given this inter

view you had completed your investigation had you?
A. The purpose of my investigation was to obtain infor

mation to enable me to decide whether they were innocent
or guilty, not information for the defense. I had no way of
knowing whether we could assist them or not.

Q. Do you agree that this was correct or incorrect in the
same report as coming from you, in the Pittsburgh Courier
of Saturday, August 13, 1949: “ The NAACP announced
that as a result of investigations by its local branches, the
State Conference of Branches, and Mr. Williams, they are

389

convinced that the ‘ ‘ trumped-up rape charge, ’ ’ the burning
of Negro property, the open participation of the Ku Klux
Klan, and the continued intimidation of Negroes in the
area is “ all a part of one great plot to intimidate the
Negroes in the community, to force them to work for little
or no wages and to stop them from being so “ uppity” ?

Mr. Akerman. I object to the question on the ground that
it is irrelevant and immaterial to the issues in this case.

The Court: The objection is overruled.
A. I stated that and I believe it.
Q. Did you know when you made that statement that the

vast majority of the lawabiding colored men in that com-
[fol. 858] munity, fruit pickers, made from $15.00 to $25.00
per day every day they wished to work?

A. I did not.
Q. You didn’t know that?
A. No.
Q. You jumped at conclusions?
A. I didn’t jump at conclusions.
Mr. Akerman: I object to that line of questions. He is

getting away from the issue.
The Court: The objection is overruled.
Q. You still affirm that is a fact?
A. I affirm that is my opinion.
Q. You don’t know whether it is a fact or not?
A. It is my opinion.
Mr. Hunter. That is all.
Mr. Akerman. That is our testimony.

J. W. H unter , being first duly sworn, testified as follows:
I would like to say that the answer to the motion filed

here is true and correct, except that part alleged on infor
mation and belief, and I believe those things to be true.

When this matter occurred it went down on my docket
as any other case would, with the expectation of trying it
on its merits, and it is still my intention to present it in
that way. I found that the Association for the Advance
ment of Colored People had come into this case, and were
publishing scandalous and slanderous lies about the whole

390

situation down here, and as it appeared to me in an effort
to create not good feeling among the races, but to create
hatred and disharmony among the people in this county.
I intend that the case against these boys be presented fairly,
[fol. 859] so when I found that an attorney had been em
ployed in Tampa to represent them I called him and told
him the court was in session here at that time, and we would
like to handle this case as we did all others, get it to issue
and try it. This man’s name was Fordham. I told him it
was my policy in all cases, and it would be especially so in
this case, to lay my cards on the table and give him any
information which my office had, including the names of the
witnesses, or any other information I could give him.
I talked to the Superintendent of the State Prison Farm
and requested him to permit Fordham to see the men and
confer with them as their attorney, which I was informed
was done. Fordham made no request of me at all for
information, and I came to the conclusion he was getting
his information from the scandalous stories being published
on the subject in the northern newspapers. He went, I was
informed, to Raiford where he was permitted every facility
necessary to interview these men. I did request him in my
first talk with him to tell me, after he saw the men, when he
would prefer to have the arraignment and the case set. I
didn’t hear anything from him, so on Monday following I
called him again, and again made him the same offer to assist
him in any way I could to bring this case to trial, and to give
him information I had on the subject. I never hide in
formation from opposing counsel. He told me at that time
that he couldn’t make any commitment because he had to
report his findings to the Association for the Advancement
of Colored People. I heard no more from him and later
I was informed that a man by the name of Thomas had
called from Miami to the clerk’s office asking about the
indictment and the arraignment. This was prior to the
arraignment. I called him and made the same statement
to him, that he could have any information I had, the
names of the witnesses, and anything else. He hadn’t
[fol. 860] asked for any information from the Clerk, so I
was informed, except he wanted to know if arraignment
had been had. I would like to say that this telegram from
Thomas, or that part of his telegram in which he says

391

“ Prosecutor declines to arraignment delay” is error. I
told him these boys were entitled to be confronted with
the charge made against them, and I had done everything
I could to get some one from the Association, or for them
to send somebody here to defend them, and I was not going
to delay it any longer, that if no one was here to defend
them the court would appoint as able an attorney as wTe
had in this county to defend them. That part of his
telegram which says “ But will thereafter waive rights
against motions on indictment ” is absolutely false. I never
made any such statement. Why on earth would I want to
make a statement that these men would have an arraign
ment which would be a total farce. I never made that
statement to any one.

Mr. Akerman called me either on the 11th or 12th of
August and stated to me that he was considering being
retained in this case; he didn’t know. I told him I was
going to arraign the prisoners. He requested me not to
set the case for trial until after the 22nd, saying that he
would be busy until that time, and that thereafter he would
be available for trial. I therefore requested the court to
set the case for the 29th.

Now, Your Honor, I want to introduce a carbon copy of
the record of this arraignment.

Mr. Akerman. No objection.
Mr. Hunter. I would like to read this testimony in evi

dence, as follows:

“ In th e C ircuit Court of the F if t h J udicial Circuit of
th e S tate of F lorida, in and for L ak e County

[ fo l. 861] S tate of F lorida

vs.

W alter L. I rvin , Charles Greenlee and S am uel S heppard

Transcript of Proceedings Had at Arraignment of the
Defendants

At the arraignment of the defendants, Walter L. Irvin,
Charles Greenlee and Samuel Sheppard, before Hon. Tru
man G. Futch, Judge of the above entitled court, in open

392

court, at Tavares, Lake County, Florida, on the 12th day
of August 1949, the following proceedings were had:

Appearances:
J. W. Hunter, State Attorney, representing the State.
Harry E. Gaylord, Representing the defendants.
Mr. Hunter. We are now ready for the arraignment of

Samuel Sheppard, Walter L. Irvin and Charles Greenlee.
Let the record show that Ernest R. Thomas is now deceased.

The Court. Let the record show that Mr. Harry E. Gay
lord has been appointed by the court to defend these de
fendants.

Mr. Hunter. Will the defendants-**please stand.
Q. What is your name?
A. Walter L. Irvin.
Q. Are you represented by Mr. Gaylord as your attorney?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. What is your name?
A. Samuel Sheppard sir.
Q. Are you also represented by Mr. Gaylord?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. What is your name?
A. Charles Greenlee.
Q. Are you also represented by Mr. Gaylord?
A. Yes, sir.

[fol. 862] Q. What is your age Samuel Sheppard?
A. Twenty two years.
Q. What is your age Walter L. Irvin?
A. Twenty two years.
Q. What is your age Charles Greenlee?
A. Sixteen years.
Q. Who is your father?
A. Tom Greenlee.
Mr. Hunter: If he is in the court room I would like to

have him come down front.
Tom Greenlee came down front.
Mr. Hunter: Swear Tom Greenlee please sir?
Tom Greenlee sworn by the court.
Mr. Hunter: What is your name?
A. Tom Greenlee.

393

Q. Where do you live?
A. Santafe, Florida.
Q. Are you related to Charles Greenlee?
A. Yes, sir. He is my boy.
Q. He is your son?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. How old is he?
A. He was sixteen last June.
Q. Are you here on his behalf as his father?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. The court prior to coming into the court room ap

pointed Harry E. Gaylord, a member of this bar, to repre
sent your son, is that satisfactory to you?

A. I got a letter from a lawyer saying he was going to
defend the boy.

Q. Who was the lawyer?
[fol. 863] A. Fordham.

Mr. Hunter: Let the record show that William A. Ford-
ham of Tampa has made it known to the State Attorney
that he will not represent Charles Greenlee, or any of the
defendants; that he is not in the case at present, and then
the court appointed Mr. Gaylord, is that satisfactory to
you? You can hire anybody else later if you want to.

A. I haven’t made any arrangements for a lawyer for
the boy. I didn’t know any.

Q. You can make any arrangement before the trial that
you want to. What I am asking you now is it satisfactory
that Mr. Gaylord represent your boy simply for this ar
raignment. I will read the indictment and ask them whether
they are guilty or not guilty?

A. Yes sir, it will be alright.
Mr. Hunter: Mr. Gaylord are you ready for the arraign

ment ?
Mr. Gaylord: Yes, sir, I am ready for the arraignment.
Indictment read to the defendants.

Mr. Hunter: What do you say Walter L. Irvin, guilty
or not guilty?

WTalter L. Irvin: Not guilty.
Q. What do you say Charles Greenlee, guilty or not

guilty ?
Charles Greenlee: Not guilty.

394

Q. What do you say Samuel Sheppard, guilty or not
guilty?

Samuel Sheppard: Not guilty.
Mr. Hunter: The defendants being arraigned in open

court each enters a plea of not guilty.
Mr. Hunter: I would like to ask that the court set this

[fol. 864] case for trial, and I can say in behalf of the
State that we will be ready by the 29th day of August 1949.

The Court: Is that alright with you Mr. Gaylord?
A. Yes, sir.
The Court: The case is set for trial beginning at ten

o ’clock A. M. August 29, 1949.
The Court: Is there anything further at the present

time?
Mr. Hunter: Nothing further at the present time.
Mr. Hunter: I would like to say that the State will sum

mon any witnesses that counsel for the defendants wish
served, by simply giving us the names of the witnesses.

The Court: Give Mr. Gaylord the names of any witnesses
you want and the State will have them summoned and have
them here on the day of the trial. Give the list of witnesses
to Mr. Gaylord so he can present it to the State Attorney.
At the request of the State Attorney I ask those persons
present in the court room to please retire in an orderly
manner before the defendants are taken out by the sheriff
and his deputies.

Mr. Gaylord: The defendants desire to have a physical
examination by doctors to be appointed by the court of
each of the defendants.

Mr. Hunter: The State will not oppose the motion. We
sanction it, and join counsel for defendants in making it.

The Court: The motion is granted and I will appoint Dr.
C. M. Tyre and Dr. S. C. Colley.

S tate of F lobida,
County of Lake:

I, Jeff Wood, do hereby certify that Walter L. Irvin,
Samuel Sheppard and Charles Greenlee, the defendants
in the case of State of Florida vs. Walter L. Irvin, Samuel
[fol. 865] Sheppard and Charles Greenlee, were arraigned
in open court in the court room in the court house at
Tavares, Lake County, Florida, on the 12th day of August
1949; that I was authorized to and did report in shorthand

395

the proceedings had at said arraignment, and that the
foregoing pages numbered 1 to 4, inclusive, is a true and
correct transcription of my shorthand report of the said
proceedings.

In Witness Whereof I have hereunto affixed my hand this
the 12th day of August 1949.

Jeff Wood, Court Reporter. ”

Cross-examination.
By Mr. Akerman:

Q. Mr. Hunter it is my understanding of your testimony
that the statement contained in the telegram from Attorney
Thomas which has been offered in evidence as Defendants’
Exhibit jp1, “ Will thereafter waive rights against motions
on indictment” is a mistake?

A. My best recollection of it is that I don’t see why I
should have made such statement. All of the defendants
were present at the time of arraignment.

Q. Is it the position of the State at this time that a
motion to quash the indictment returned in this case would
be objectionable because it was not filed prior to the
arraignment ?

A. It is the position of the State that this case has been
handled so far in an orderly and proper manner and I see
no reason why the court should now back up and start
over again.

Q. You would object to a motion to quash the indictment
on the ground that it was not filed prior to arraignment?
[fol. 866] A. I think the law settles that. The question is
not necessarily whether there is any objection to it, or
whether I agree to it, the law is plain on the subject. All
that I am asking is that the case be tried in accordance
with the law.

Mr. Akerman: No further questions.

396

M bs. F lorence R obertson, being first duly sworn, testi
fied as follows:

Direct examination.
By J. W. Hunter:

Q. What position do you occupy in Lake County?
A. Deputy Clerk of the Circuit Court.
Q. Do you remember a man by the name of Thomas, a

lawyer of Miami, calling you some time recently with
reference to the case now before the court?

A. I do.
Q. What did he ask you-—in other words tell the court

what conversation took place?
A. He said he was an attorney from Miami, named L. E.

Thomas, and that he wanted to inquire about the case of
the State of Florida vs. Samuel Sheppard, Walter L. Irvin
and Charles Greenlee; wanted to know if they had been
arraigned and if the indictment had been filed in the Clerk’s
office. I told him they had not been arraigned but the
indictment charging them with rape had been filed.

Q. Did he ask you for a copy of the indictment?
A. He did not.
Q. Did he ask you for any other information?
A. He did not.
Q. You are the deputy who handles correspondence and

other matters for Geo. J. Dykes, the Clerk, are you not?
[fob 867] A. I am.

Mr. Akerman: No questions.

G eorge J. D ykes , being first duly sworn, testified as fol
lows :

Direct examination.
By J. W. Hunter :

Q. You are Clerk of the Circuit Court in this county?
A. I am.
Q. You are the keeper of the records of the county?
A. I am.
Q. Has any attorney for either of these defendants, Sam

uel Sheppard, Walter L. Irvin or Charles Greenlee re
quested any information from you about this case?

397

A. They have not.
Q. Have they requested any copies of the indictment?
A. They have not.

Cross examination.
By Alex Akerman J r .:

Q. I believe you testified that no one asked you for a
copy of the indictment?

A. That is right.
Q. Only an attorney for the defendants is entitled to a

copy of the indictment, is that correct?
A. You are asking me a legal question. I would rather

you ask the attorney.
Mr. Akerman: No further questions.

L awrence E. D ugger, being first duly sworn, testified as
follows:

Direct examination.

By J. W. Hunter :
Q. What is your name?
A. Lawrence E. Dugger.
Q. Are you employed by the State of Florida?

[fol. 868] A. Yes, sir. I am.
Q. What is your position?
A. Record Clerk at the Florida State Prison at Raiford.
Q. Do you have any record of any attorneys appearing

at the State Prison for the purpose of interviewing these
defendants, Charles Greenlee, Walter L. Irvin and Samuel
Sheppard ?

A. I have a telegram, which I believe has been read
before to the court, from William A. Fordham, Attorney
at Law, direct to the Superintendent of the State Prison:
“ I have been retained by the National Association for the
Advancement of Colored People in behalf of Samuel Shep
pard, Walter Irvin and Charles Greenlee. Please inform
as to what hour I may interview the above named on
Friday July 30, 1949” . This is from William A. Fordham,
Attorney at Law, 1404V2 Central Avenue, the 26th of July
1949.

398

Q. Was Friday the 30th?
A. Friday was the 29th.
Q. Bid Fordham come to the prison?
A. He did.
Q. When?
A. He came to the prison on the 29th I believe is the

correct date.
Q. Was he permitted to interview the defendants alone

and discuss anything he wanted to with them?
A. These three defendants were brought to the private

office and turned over to this attorney to interview for as
long period as he wished.

Q. Hid any one else to your knowledge appear there to
interview these defendants?

A. Not this date.
[fol. 869] Q. Any other date?

A. On or about the 31st day of July we had another
negro attorney come to see the men. I am not sure but I
believe there were two attorneys, and they did have a
stenographer with them.

Q. Ho you see either one of the attorneys in the court
room?

A. Sitting directly across from me is one of them.
Q. You are pointing to Franklin H. Williams?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Were they accorded every opportunity to interview

these men? Were they alone?
A. They were alone, yes, sir.
Q. Hid any one else appear there purporting to represent

these defendants?
A. On or about—I am not sure of the date—I believe on

the 7th; anyway it was on Sunday, and I believe it was the
7th, we had attorneys—I don’t recall their names—to come
and interview them. They brought two doctors with them
to examine them.

Q. Hid they have a stenographer?
A. They had a girl with them, the girl was represented

as a nurse. That was the information they furnished me.
Q. Were these colored people?
A. They were.
Q. Were they accorded every opportunity to investigate

and examine these defendants?
A. They were. And furthermore we made an Xray for

them at that time and turned it over to them.

399

Q. Did you give them all of the time they needed?
A. We did.

[fol. 870] Q. In other words no effort of any kind was
made to cover anything or to hamper them in any way in
their investigation ?

A. None whatsoever.
Mr. Akerman: No questions.
Mr. Hunter: That is all Your Honor.
Mr. Akerman: At this time the defendants would like

to file a motion to quash, with the understanding that same
is hastily prepared because of pressure of time, and prob
ably does not include all of the grounds of a motion to quash
which may hereafter be filed.

The Court: Let the record show that on yesterday, August
24, 1949, Mr. Harry E. Gaylord, who had been appointed by
the court to represent the defendants requested that he be
permitted to withdraw from the case, and the request was
granted in view of the fact that other counsel had been
employed by some one to represent the defendants.

Mr. Akerman: We have no further testimony to offer on
this motion.

R ttliug on th e . C ourt

The Court: I want to say first that the allegation con
tained in paragraph six of the petition, to the effect that the
Judge of this Court stated on the day of arraignment that
the entering of a plea to the indictment at said arraignment
did not waive any rights of which they were possessed prior
to such arraignment, and that upon obtaining a retained
defense counsel they would have the right to withdraw their
pleas and to file and enter any plea or motion with the same
force and effect as if said motion or plea had been filed
prior to said arraignment, is not true. This court made no
such statement and no such statement was made in the
[fol. 871] presence in the court.

Considering the allegations in the motion, that they pre
sent nothing more than suspicion on the part of counsel for
the defendants, nothing positively being alleged to war
rant the request, and nothing presented to the court that
would justify the granting of the motion at this time, it is

Ordered that the motion be and the same is denied. How
ever I will change the date of trial from Monday, August
29, to Thursday, the 1st day of September 1949, which I
think will have given counsel ample time to have prepared

400

Ms ease, and if there are any other or further preliminary
motions or pleas to be filed they will be required to be filed
on or before eleven o ’clock A. M. Monday, August 29, 1949.

Mr. Akerman: At this time defendants request a copy
of the indictment, a copy of the names and addresses of the
jurors summoned as petit jurors in this case, a copy of the
minutes of the grand jury returning the indictment, and
the privilege of access to the grand and petit jury lists of
the county for the past thirty years.

ffols. 872-879] Reporter’s Certificate to foregoing tran
script omitted in printing.

[fol. 880] In the S upreme Court of F lorida J anuary
T erm , A. D. 1950

En Banc.

S am uel S hepherd and W alter I rvin , Appellants,

vs.

S tate of F lorida, Appellee

An Appeal from the Circuit Court for Lake County, T. G.
Futch, Judge

Alex Akerman, Jr., Joseph E. Price, Jr., and Akerman,
Akerman & Price, and Franklin H. Williams (New York,
N. Y. ) for Appellants Richard W. Ervin, Attorney Gen
eral and Reeves Bowen, Assistant Attorney General, and
J. W. Hunter, for Appellees.

Opinion F iled May 16, 1950
C h a pm an , J .:

On July 20, 1949, a grand jury of Lake County, Florida
presented an indictment in open court against Samuel
Shepherd, Walter L. Irvin, Charlie Greenlee and Ernest A.
Thomas charging each of them with the crime of rape. It
alleged that each of the defendants with force and violence
did feloniously ravish and carnally know a named female,
then seventeen years of age, on July 16, 1949, in Lake

401

County, Florida. On August 12, 1949, the defendants (ex
cept Ernest A. Thomas) were brought into court, accom
panied by their attorney Harry E. Gaylord, and were asked
if they were ready for arraignment, and, having* answered
through counsel in the affirmative, they were duly arraigned
and each entered a plea of not guilty to the indictment.

It appears by the record that the three defendants are
colored men. When the men were arraigned Samuel Shep
herd was 22 years of age, Walter L. Irvin was 22, and
[fob 881] Charlie Greenlee was about 16, but his father
was in attendance at the arraignment. Samuel Shepherd
and Walter L. Irvin were residing with their parents in the
Groveland area, being the southern portion of Lake County,
while Charlie Greenlee was working at Gainesville but was
visiting with Thomas in the Groveland area of Lake County
on the night of July 15, 1949. These men were not able
financially to employ counsel and at the time of arraign
ment were represented by an attorney appointed by the
court. Each was arrested within a few hours after the
commission of the alleged crime and by an order of the court
transferred for safe-keeping from the Lake County Jail
to the State Prison at Raiford, but each was returned to
Tavares on August 12, 1949. On August 12, 1949, the case
was set by the court for trial on August 29, 1949.

A New York attorney, having a connection with a certain
fund under the control of the National Association for the
Advancement of the colored people, came to Florida and
interviewed the defendants at the Raiford Prison and other
wise made an investigation into the guilt of the defendants.
He returned to New York from Florida with his report. He
came to Florida on the case for the second time for the
purpose of employing counsel for the defendants. He in
terviewed several Florida attorneys prior to obtaining
counsel but succeeded on the night of August 22, 1949. On
August 24, 1949, the recently retained counsel appeared in
court and presented numerous motions. Attorney Gaylord,
of the Eustis bar, declined to accept employment in behalf
of the defendants but stated in open court if he were by the
trial court appointed to represent the defendants he would
honestly endeavor to discharge his duty and obligation as
an officer of the court. After counsel was obtained by the
defendants attorney Gaylord was discharged as counsel by
an order of the court.

26— 420

402

[fol. 882] The record discloses that considerable testi
mony and many exhibits were offered in support of the
several motions presented to the Court for the defendants.
The time between August 24th and 29th, 1949, was largely
consumed in the presentations to the trial court of the
evidence in support of the motions, the merits of which
will later be considered. The trial court, in light of devel
opments, saw fit to reset the date of trial from August 29,
1949 until September 1, 1949, on which date the defendants
were placed upon trial and a verdict of guilty rendered
against each defendant, but the jury recommended mercy
to Charlie Greenlee and as a result he was given a life
sentence, but the death penalty was imposed, in the court
below as against Samuel Shepherd and Walter L. Irvin,
Shepherd and Irvin have perfected their appeal here.

Samuel Shepherd, Walter L. Irvin and Charlie Greenlee,
on August 29, 1949, petitioned the trial court for an order
removing the cause to another county as provided in Chap
ter 911, F. S. A. The petition recited fourteen grounds
for the removal of the cause. The pertinent reasons set
out were: (1) the movants feared mob violence in Lake
County; (2) The delay incident to the employment of satis
factory counsel; (3) the time for counsel to investigate and
prepare for tir&l was insufficient; (4) the hostile public
sentiment against the movants; (5) a mob gathered at the
jail in Tavares and demanded that the movants be turned
over to i t ; the home of the family of one of the movants was
destroyed; members of the Negro race in the Groveland area
were intimidated by the mob; widespread newspaper pub
licity in the area and other Florida counties had inflamed the
public mind in Lake County; the public hostility and in
dignation in Lake County rendered it impossible to obtain
a fair and impartial trial guaranteed by our State and
Federal Constitutions; (6) a hostile atmosphere to the mo
vants “ now exists in Lake County and permeates the
court house where the trial is to be had” ; (7) “ wild rumors
are prevalent and mobs are likely to take the law into
[fol. 883] their hands” ; (8) the inflamed public mind in
Lake County will prevent the movants from testifying in
their own behalf; (9) the movants were beaten by law en
forcement officers of Lake County; (10) the law enforce
ment officers of Lake County were hostile to the movants
and their attorneys; (11) the home of the father and

403

mother of Samuel Shepherd was burned by a mob and the
family and other Negroes were removed from the Grove-
land area to prevent a lynching (but returned to their
homes); (12) troops were called out to maintain order
about Groveland; (13) intimidation of the Negroes pre
vents them from giving testimony in behalf of the movants;
(14) a fair and inrpartial trial guaranteed by both the
State and Federal Constitutions cannot be had in Lake
County.

The State of Florida, by an appropriate pleading, denied
each and every allegation set out by the movants for a
removal of the cause and the trial court heard evidence on
the issues made by the pleadings. This Court is committed
to the rule that an application for a change of venue is
addressed to the sound discretion of the trial court and so
long as the applicable law is substantially complied with,
a ruling refusing to grant a change in venue will not be
disturbed except upon a showing that there has been a
palpable abuse of discretion. Patterson v. State, 157 Fla.
304, 25 So. (2d) 713; Wadsworth v. State, 136 Fla. 134,
186 So. 435, and similar cases.

It is not disputed that Irvin ancl Shepherd lived at or
near Groveland and a mob burned the, Shepherd home and
two other houses about Groveland; that shortly thereafter
troops were called and stationed at Groveland to preserve
order but were removed from the troubled area on July
24, 1949. It is true that strained racial relations existed
in about a five-mile square area which embraced Grove
land, Mascotte and Starkey’s Still. The flare subsided on
or before July 24, 1949, the colored people returned to the
area, order thereafter prevailed and the troops were re
called. Our study of the record reflects the view that har
mony and good will and friendly relations continuously
[fol. 884] existed between the white and colored races in all
other sections of Lake County. The inflamed public senti
ment was against the crime with which the appellants were
charged rather than defendants’ race. It is true that the
newspaper carried reports of the alleged crime, but the
impression of prejudice, if any, made yielded to the sworn
testimony. A venire of 213 jurors issued and 81 jurors
were examined on their voir dire when a jury of 12 men
was obtained satisfactory to counsel and accepted to try
the case.

27— 420

404

Counsel for appellants cite our holding in Johnston v.
State, 112 Fla. 189, 150 So. 278, and similar cases, to sus
tain the contention that the trial court erred in denying
the motion for a change in venue. The facts presented
here are in accord with our holding in Powell v. State, 131
Fla. 254, 175 So. 213; Hysler v. State, 132 Fla. 209, 181 So.
354; Wadsworth v. State, 136 Fla. 134, 186 So. 435, and
Haddock v. State, 141 Fla. 132, 192 So. 802. An abuse of
discretion in denying the motion has not been made to
appear.

The trial court heard evidence in support of a motion by
appellants to quash the indictment in the case at bar on
the ground, among others, that the officials of Lake County,
Florida, systematically and intentionally discriminated
against members of the Negro race in selecting the grand
jury which presented the indictment now before the court.
For this reason it is contended that the grand jury was
unconstitutionally obtained, although one member of the
grand jury, it is admitted, was a colored man. Substan
tially the same motion to quash was directed to the venire
of some 213 summoned to serve on the petit jury. Because
of the similarity of the two questions presented here we
are considering them, as a single assignment. The mem
bers of the grand jury and the petit jurors required to
render jury service during 1949 were taken from the same
jury box.
[fob 885] Qualifications and Disqualifications of Jurors:
Section 40.01 F. S. A., provides:

“ (1) General Qualifications.—Grand and petit ju
rors shall be taken from the male persons over the
age of twenty-one years, who are citizens of the state,
and who have resided in this state for one year and in
their respective counties for six months.

(2) General Disqualifications.—No person, who
shall have been convicted of bribery, forgery, perjury
or larceny, or any felony, unless restored to civil
rights, shall be qualified to serve as a juror.

(3) Duty of Persons Selecting Jury Lists.—In the
selection of jury lists only such persons as the select
ing officers know, or have reason to believe, are law
abiding citizens of approved integrity, good character,
sound judgment and intelligence, and who are not phys

405

ically or mentally infirm, shall be selected for jury
duty” .

Section 40.02, F. S. A., directs the Board of County Com
missioners of Lake County, Florida, during the first week
in January of each year, to prepare and select a jury list.
It is the duty of the Commissioners personally to select,
from the list of male persons who are qualified to serve
as jurors and make out a list of not less than 250 nor more
than 500 persons qualified to serve as jurors, which list
shall be signed and verified by said Commissioners as being*
personally selected and possessing the qualifications ac
cording to their best information and belief.

Section 40.06, F. S. A., provides for the transcription and
preservation of persons selected to serve as jurors and the
list by the Clerk of the Circuit Court, in the presence of the
County Judge, shall write the name of the persons selected
for jury duty on separate pieces of paper and shall deposit
[fol. 886] such pieces of paper in a box constructed so that
it may be closed and locked. The Clerk shall keep such
box in his custody but the key shall be delivered to and
kept by the sheriff. These persons so selected shall render
jury service.

The Supervisor of Registration testified that Lake
County had 14,182 voters. His record disclosed 13,380
white voters and 802 colored voters. Frank E. Owens,
Chairman of the Board of County Commissioners of Lake
County, Florida, testified that he and other members of
the Board prepared the list of jurors during January,
1949, and in so doing selected and placed on the jury list
the names of white and colored persons. The names were
taken from the voters registration list 5f Lake County
iiTprbporSm>irLo~T oF~white and colored persons
*@ dsenaiFes~^ the voters registration books. The
"rule as testified about had been observed in Lake County
for many years. It appears by the testimony of the offi
cials of Lake County that the above statutes were sub
stantially complied with in selecting persons for jury serv
ice.

Counsel for appellants point out that many Negro citi
zens of Lake County, during the year 1949 and prior years,
were home owners; many owned, resided upon and operated
farms situated in the county; some Negro citizens owned

406

and operated private businesses therein; other Negro
citizens held responsible positions and rendered some of
the people of the county a public service; and that many
of the Negro residents of Lake County were honest, de
pendable and substantial citizens. The officials of Lake
County, it is contended, unconstitutionally and intentionally
discriminated against the Negro citizens of Lake County
in selecting persons for jury service for the year 1949
although one colored man was on the grand jury which
presented the indictment against the appellants. Authori
ties are cited in their brief to sustain the contention. We
have examined the authorities relied upon in light of the
contention made and it is our conclusion that the evidence
adduced fails to establish an unconstitutional, intentional
ffol. 887] and systematic discrimination by the officials
against the Negroes of Lake County in January, 1949, when
selecting the names of persons for jury duty as author
ized by the statutes of Florida.

On July 20, 1949, the grand jury of Lake County pre
sented the indictment now before us in the court below.
The defendants-appellants were placed on trial on Sep
tember 1, 1949, or approximately forty-five days after the
commission of the alleged crime. It is contended here by
the appellants that this period of time was insufficient in
which to prepare their case for trial. Section 11 of the
Declaration of Eights of the Constitution of Florida guar
antees persons accused of crime a speedy public trial, by
an impartial jury . . . and shall be heard by themselves
or counsel . . . to meet the witnesses against them face
to face and shall have compulsory process for the attend
ance of witnesses in their favor. . .

Our State and Federal Constitutions accord these Negro
defendants-appellants equal rights of men before the law,
n°t_ only in the enjoyment of life but in the defense of
their lives, liberty and the protection of their property.
All men are equal before the law. A defendant brought
before a tribunal for trial, with power to take his life" or
liberty, wherein the prosecution is represented by experi
enced and learned counsel, then it is consistent with natural
justice, and the policy of modern criminal law, that an
accused, even if he is poor and unable to obtain counsel,
shall be furnished counsel to protect his rights at each
step of the proceeding. It is established law that no per-

407

soil accused of a serious crime should be forced into trial
without a reasonable opportunity to obtain counsel and
properly prepare his defense. Frequently the minds of
reasonable men differ on what constitutes sufficient time to
prepare for trial. The answer is found in the facts of
each particular case.
[fol. 888] It appears by the record that attorney Franklin
H. Williams, of the New York City Bar, contacted the ap
pellants at Raiford about the first, of August, 1949. Some
two weeks thereafter they were returned to Tavares and
attorney Gaylord was by the court appointed to represent
them when they plead to the indictment. Attorney Wil
liams employed counsel for the defendants and organized
their defense. He participated in the trial below and
orally argued the cause, with other counsel, at the bar of
this Court. It is quite true that additional counsel was re
tained around August 22, 1949. The record reflects that
all legal rights of the appellants were ably and thoroughly
presented in the lower court and on appeal here. It is not
clearly shown that the trial court committed reversible error
in placing the defendants-appellants on trial within forty-
five days after the commission of the alleged crime.

It is next contended that the evidence adduced by the
prosecution to estabish the crime of rape was legally in
sufficient; that it was impossible for the crime to have been
committed within the limited time as testified to by the
State witnesses. Two witnesses for the State testified as
to the identity of the four Negroes. From the descrip
tion of the automobile as given by the two witnesses the
same was later located. The three defendants testified
they were driving the car in question during the same
hours of the early morning except they were driving in
the Orlando area, which was in the opposite direction.

The four men during the time kept the woman covered
with a pistol. One of the defendants when taken into
custody shortly after the alleged crime had a pistol, which
was filed as an exhibit by the prosecution. Near the scene
of the crime a handkerchief and some cotton were found.
The woman was found near the scene of the crime about
dawn. A large track about the scene fit the shoe of one of
the appellants. Cotton or lint about the car and broken
glass in the automobile testified to by the woman assisted
the officers in identifying the car which the appellants

408

ffols. 889-890] admit they were riding in at the exact hour
the State charged the crime was committed. We find in
the record detailed corroborative testimony of that as
given by the prosecutrix. As we study the testimony, the
only question presented here is which set of witnesses
would the jury believe, that is, the State’s witnesses or
the testimony, as given by the defendants-appellants. Dis
putes and conflicts in the testimony are for the jury. See
Albritton v. State, 132 Fla. 801, 182 So. 286, and similar
cases.

We fail to find error in the record.
Affirmed.

A dams, C. J., T errell, T homas, S ebring, H obson and
R oberts, J. J. Concur

[fols. 891-896] I n t h e S upreme C ourt of F lorida
J anuary T erm A. D. 1950, L ak e C ounty

S am uel S hepherd and W alter I rvin , appellants

vs.
S tate of F lorida, appellee

J udgment— M ay 16, 1950

This cause having heretofore been submitted to the Court
upon the transcript of record of the judgment herein, and
briefs and argument of counsel for the respective parties,
and the record having been inspected, and the Court being
now advised of its judgment to be given in the premises, it
seems to the Court that there is no error in the said decree;
it is, therefore, considered, ordered and adjudged by the
Court that the said judgment of the Circuit Court be and
the same is hereby affirmed; it is further ordered by the
Court that the costs in this behalf expended be and the
same are hereby taxed against the County of Lake, the
Appellants having been adjudged insolvent, which costs
are taxed in the sum of $—, all of which is ordered to be
certified to the Court below.

The Opinion of the Court in this cause prepared by Mr.
Justice Chapman was this day ordered to be filed.

409

[fols. 897-914] In the S upreme Court op F lorida

[Title omitted]

Order D enying P etition for R ehearing—- July 5, 1950
County for Appellants having filed in this cause Petition

for Rehearing and having been duly considered, it is ordered
by the Court that said Petition be and the same is hereby
denied.

(The mandate in this cause has today been issued and
mailed to the Clerk of the Circuit Court for Lake County.)

[fol. 915] S uprem e C ourt of th e U nited S tates

October Term, 1950

No. 189, Misc.—

On petition for writ of Certiorari to the Supreme Court
of the State of Florida.

Order Granting M otion for L eave to P roceed in F orma
P auperis ; Granting P etition for W rit of Certiorari etc.
—November 27, 1950.
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. The case is transferred to
the appellate docket as No. 420.

It is further ordered that the duly certified copy of the
transcript of the proceedings below which accompanied the
petition shall be treated as though filed in response to such
writ.

(3081)

Copyright notice

This collection and the tools to navigate it (the “Collection”) are available to the public for general educational and research purposes, as well as to preserve and contextualize the history of the content and materials it contains (the “Materials”). Like other archival collections, such as those found in libraries, LDF owns the physical source Materials that have been digitized for the Collection; however, LDF does not own the underlying copyright or other rights in all items and there are limits on how you can use the Materials. By accessing and using the Material, you acknowledge your agreement to the Terms. If you do not agree, please do not use the Materials.

Additional info

To the extent that LDF includes information about the Materials’ origins or ownership or provides summaries or transcripts of original source Materials, LDF does not warrant or guarantee the accuracy of such information, transcripts or summaries, and shall not be responsible for any inaccuracies.

Shepherd v FL Transcript of Record

Impact area

Topic

Collection

Taxonomy

Identifier

Cite this item

Copyright notice

Additional info

You may also be interested in