INVOLUNTARY MANSLAUGHTER
That is Crime Jury Fived Upon HerringSix Months in Jail.
KILLED CHARLES AHEARN
Herring Crazy DrunkFather of Accused on StandInsanity the Defense. |
| John Hunter Herring, charged with the murder of Charles J. Ahearn,
was tried in the Hustings Court yesterday by a Jury of twelve men, and, contrary to expectation, the case
was concluded and a verdict reached in one day. The plea of the defense was insanity at
the time of the killing, and that the prisoner was therefore incapable of forming an intent to kill his friend.
The Commonwealth did not ask for a severer verdict than voluntary manslaughter, the attorney believing
that the testimony and the law did not call for more.
The jury rendered a verdict of involuntary manslaughter, and fixed the punishment at six months in jail,
which was practically a twelve months' sentence, inasmuch as Herring had already been in Jail since the
evening of July 27th last, the day of the killing in a street car on Broad Street.
At the conclusion of the trial the prisoner was congratulated by his friends, and
he and his aged father, who sat by him during the trial, and was a witness for defense, seemed very well
satisfied with the verdict. Mr. Harry Smith represented the accused. |
| Trial in Detail. |
| When the Hustings Court was opened yesterday morning and the
case of John Hunter Herring was called, there was some delay in order to give Mr. Minitree Folkes, the
Commonwealth's attorney, time to confer with his witnesses, he not having had an opportunity to do so
before.
There was but little trouble in securing a jury, and the following took seats in the box: Hugh Miller. James
Heppard, W. A. Mann, E. K. Murray, W. D. Rice, J. E. Rucker, J. W. Hall, C. Blume, William Kirby, A. R.
Nuckols, Salvator Cassatta, E. A. Hill.
Coroner Taylor was the first witness. He described the wound which caused Ahearn's death. The pistol ball
entered the skull just above and behind the left ear, entering the brain and lodging therein. No weapons
were found on the body, and no other wounds were found.
Margaret Hullen was next called. She testified that she had never seen Herring before the day on which
the killing occurred. She had seen Ahearn several times before. Both men were drinking at the time she
saw them on the day of the killing. While in the house Herring proposed marriage to her and she agreed,
thinking he was joking. Ahearn left the house to get a preacher. When the witness found that they were
serious about it she left the house after telling Herring she had thought he was joking and that she would
not consider the proposition seriously. |
| Friends Drinking Together. |
| J. M. Thompson testified that on the day of the killing Herring and
Ahearn came into his bar together; that they drank together and then Herring went out and Ahearn stayed
behind. Herring came back and showed Mr. Thompson a handful of cartridges. He turned to Ahearn and
said, "Charlie, I believe I'll kill you," in a Jocular manner. When he learned that he was armed Mr. Thompson
took the pistol away from Herring and removed all the cartridges. Herring demanded that the pistol be given
back and it was done. Ahearn and Herring left the bar arm-in-arm and appeared to be the best of friends.
Mr. Thompson testified that whenever Herring became intoxicated his mind appeared to be affected. He
stated that while in his bar the day of the killing he appeared to be mentally unsound.
E. L. Morris next testified that he saw Herring load a pistol while in Thompson's bar and point it at Ahearn,
saying that he was going to kill him. Herring then left the bar but came back and again said that he was
going to kill Ahearn. Later Herring told the bartender he intended killing a man before sunset.
Captain A. W. Miller, who was also present in Thompson's bar when Herring and Ahearn were there, was
next called. Captain Miller stated that he saw Herring flourishing a pistol and was warned that he was liable
to be shot. He said that he did not believe Herring would shoot. Herring looked at him when he made the
remark, and his eyes were those of an insane man. Before leaving the stand Captain Miller said he did not
believe Herring was mentally sound at the time. |
| Sameness in Testimony. |
| R. K. Moran was the next witness. His testimony was much the
same as the other witnesses, saying that he and Ahearn were the best of friends and that the pistol
affair was a joke.
J. J. Orange came next to the stand. He testified that he had met Herring and Ahearn in Mike Moore's bar,
in West Broad Street. He stated that when he first saw Herring he was in the yard back of the bar, snapping
a pistol in a fence corner. Herring came into the bar and said the pistol was in good order. Ahearn asked
Herring to buy drinks. Herring refused, and Ahearn bought them. While Ahearn was drinking Herring put
the muzzle of the pistol to Ahearn's head and said that he had a great mind to kill him. Ahearn told him
not to talk that way, as he did not like it. Witness said they both seemed the best of friends and that they
left the bar and got on a car together.
W. H. Blankenship next took the stand. His testimony corroborated all that Mr. Orange had said.
The next witness called was C. A. Clark, who was the conductor on the car on which Ahearn was
killed. The two men, he said, boarded the car and made no particular disturbance until Herring fired
the pistol into the roof of the car. He then shot Ahearn, after which he attempted to kill himself, but
the pistol snapped. After the shooting Herring was very quiet and made no attempt to escape. The
witness stated that Herring's eyes were very wild after the shooting and that he did not seem to be sane. |
| Tried to Kill Himself. |
| R. H. Meade, who was on the car when the shooting occurred, next
testified. He heard the shot and looked at Herring, who was waving the pistol before his own eyes. After
waving the pistol for a few seconds Herring put the muzzle of the pistol to his head and snapped the trigger
as if to kill himself. The pistol did not go off. After snapping the trigger, Herring tell over as if he had been
killed. Later, when asked what had happened, he said that Ahearn had first killed himself and then shot
him, pointing to the place on his head where he had placed the muzzle of the pistol.
Delegate Throckmorton testified that Herring's family was afflicted with insanity.
Detective Gibson then described the arrest. Herring stated to him that he had been shot by Ahearn.
Mr. Gibson told him not to say anything there, but to wait for the trial. In the detective's opinion Herring
had been on a prolonged drunk and was hardly responsible.
Policeman Shepherd next testified. He said that he took charge of Herring when the crowd gathered
around the car, leading him some distance away. He again denied having killed Ahearn, saying, "Why
should I kill him?" Herring asked him for a chew of tobacco, and he handed him a plug, which Herring
put in his pocket, saying that he had paid for it. The officer's opinion was that Herring was "wild-eyed"
and not responsible for his actions.
Court here took a recess for dinner. |
| Afternoon Session. |
| At the afternoon session the Commonwealth put two other witnesses
on the stand and recalled Conductor Clark.
Motorman Shepperd did not see or hear of the trouble until he heard two pistol shots. Then he stopped
the car and went inside. Saw Ahearn when he was dying and afterwards; also saw Herring sitting by the
dead man. Prisoner was cool and apparently indifferent. Witness heard Herring say Ahearn had shot him
and then killed himself.
Prisoner touching side of his head, said he had been shot there.
J. Harrison was barkeeper at Thompson's on Broad Street. Waited on Herring and Ahearn in Thompson's.
When they wanted second drink refused to sell them more, as he thought they "had as much as they
needed." Witness saw Herring pull out pistol and load it; also saw him snap it while pointing at the floor in
the front room.
Conductor Clark, being recalled, said the two men got on his car at Laurel Street. Herring paid Ahearn's fare.
They appeared to be perfectly friendly. There was no loud talking and no disturbance of any kind until Herring
fired the two shots.
The Commonwealth here rested its case.
The defense first introduced Henry Moore, who had known prisoner and his family since 1882. Herring's
reputation had always been good. He was always amiable and peaceable. Witness would not have
believed "he would harm a cat." Knew Herring's two sisters and knew that their minds were seriously
unbalanced.
James T. McIntyre, lineman for the Passenger and Power Company, was the next witness. Had known
prisoner three years; had worked with him almost daily for that time. He was as amiable and peaceable a
man as he ever know. Witness was with prisoner when he first met Ahearn on the 27th of July. They were
perfectly friendly, Herring remarking in perfectly friendly manner: "Charlie, you know when my pay day comes
better than I do." Herring had been paid off that morning, receiving $30.40. Witness went with prisoner and
deceased to barroom; all took a drink, and witness left them. Prisoner had been drinking three or four days.
Witness had heard that prisoner's two sisters were more or less crazy.
G. W. Gill had known the prisoner ten or twelve years. He was always gentle and amiable man and a good
and faithful worker. Witness knows the family, and knows the fact that he had two sisters (one now dead)
whose minds were diseased. |
| Father On Stand. |
| W. S. Leake, ex-clerk of Henrico county Circuit Court, knew the
family; knew of the two sisters of diseased minds. He knew prisoner to be of good character and amiable
disposition.
Elbridge Herring, the venerable father of the prisoner, was the last witness introduced. He said he was
sixty-six years old, and his son, the prisoner, is thirty-seven years old. His son had always been a good boy,
barring his weakness for drink; was always kind and gentle toward his parents and his sisters. The witness
had two daughters, one of whom is now dead, whose minds had long been seriously affected. Hampton
Herring, the son of the witness' brother, and a first cousin of the prisoner, is now an inmate of the Western
Hospital for Insane, and is hopelessly insane. |
| Instructions and Argument. |
| The defence here closed the case and a short conference between
court and lawyers were necessary for argument of, and settlement of instructions. The court instructed the
jury at some length on the law, the principal instructions being that if the jury believe from the evidence that
at the time of the killing the prisoner was too drunk to form a malicious purpose they cannot find him guilty
of a heavier offence than voluntary manslaughter.
Second: That if the jury believe from the evidence that the accused was an insane man at the time of killing
Aherne they will find him guilty of no offence although they believe his insanity at the time was the result of
drunkenness. Other instructions were to the effect that while drunkenness is no excuse for crime, it does
lower the degree.
Mr. Folkes addressed the jury very briefly, saying he would not ask for a verdict of murder in the first or
second degree, but would ask for a verdict for voluntary manslaughter, leaving it entirely up the jury to
fix the punishment. Mr. Folkes confined his brief argument to the first instruction quoted above, and to
a review of the testimony applying to it. He claimed that the evidence of the Commonwealth's witnesses
as well as his own showed that the prisoner was incapable at the time of the killing of having a criminal
intenthe was crazy. He asked for a verdict of acquittal on the ground of insanity at the time, but
said if the jury could not agree with him they could not convict of a higher offence than involuntary
manslaughter, the punishment for which is confinement in jail not more than one year.
In reply Mr. Folkes made an earnest plea for punishment for the crime, not to revenge the blood of the
deceased, but for the protection of society. He insisted upon a verdict for voluntary manslaughter and
this not only as a lesson for the prisoner, but as a warning to others.
At 6:18 the jury retired to their room. They were out 12 minutes, and when they came rendered the verdict
as follows: We the jury, find the prisoner guilty of voluntary manslaughter, and assess his punishment at six
months in jail. |
| The Times Dispatch 30 January 1906 |
|