Murder Trial
|
27 March 1884, Neosho Times The Roberts Trial The Roberts murder case was tried last week at Cassville. Roberts shot and killed Brattin at a country dance, in December 1882. Brattin had been called by his brother, who was a constable, to aid in the suppression of a disturbance out of doors. From the version of the constable and other witnesses, the case seemed a remarkably strong one against the defendant, who was pictured by them as a rioter resisting a peace officer and killing one of his posse. This would be murder in the first degree. We learn from the Cassville papers that Roberts was found not guilty, after a long, hotly contested trial, the prosecution having been vigorous, and able. Such results upon such a state of facts would be a disgrace to any community, but the other side must be understood before we can form any just opinion as to the correctness of the verdict. George Hubbert, Esq., of our city, who led the defense and closed on that side with a speech, which the Cassville Democrat characterizes as one of "consummate cunning and ability," informs us that the witnesses for the defense presented quite a different picture and justified Roberts. Instead of being a rioter he was trying to quiet a fuss between others when the constable, being misinformed as to who were the disturbers of the peace, rushed out and beset Roberts, without asserting any authority as an officer, and called his brother, the deceased, to his aid, although he knew him to be an enemy to Roberts. The deceased had long been furiously jealous of Roberts' attention to his sweetheart, a Miss Utter, and had, on former occasions, virtually driven him away from her, threatening to kill him if he found them together again. At the dance the girl and Roberts were seated together, talking, when Brattin came in. He showed jealousy and anger, and the girl cautioned Roberts, reminding him of previous threats. Brattin contrived to get Brattin out, through another man who began the fuss that Roberts was trying to quell, when the Brattins assaulted him, the deceased first striking him, with a pair of metal knucks in the face, and saying he would kill him. The theory of the defense was: Roberts was acting as a peacemaker; the constable was misinformed as to his role and attempted to arrest him, which, being without warrant, was unlawful; Brattin, having designs on the life of Roberts, found him where he thought he could carry out his threats under cover of a peace officer's authority, and attempted to do so; the defendant only exercised what under the circumstances was his natural right of defense. The jury decided the position well taken, under the evidence, and that settles it. Submitted by Bob Banks |