The Coroner's Jury would be charged with fixing official responsibility for a death when it was caused by another person. If in their opinion it was justified, they would say so, if it was criminal they would indicate that.
...of statutes and laws and if I am reading them correctly.
Am I misunderstanding that the Coroner's obligation, based on the statute, was to not only establish the cause of death but also whether ... more
Re: further thought out of ignorance.... — Wayne Sanderson,Sat Jun 04 10:13
To add to the above, while the Inquest verdict was legal and binding with regard to determining the cause of death and identifying whether it was caused by another person, their opinion on criminality... more
...does that mean the Inquest was not determined in either direction? Why would no decision be made one way or the other? Why a Hearing appointed but not a Grand Jury trial? Was the Coroner unwilling ... more
...I am catching on. Before you lose complete patience with me, understand that though I lean toward being analytical, my fourth grade education prevents me from understanding some terminology, especi... more
...that were more aimed toward determining the means and manner of death more than any criminal responsibility. The need for them as a civil process was much greater before modern technical means. Man... more
I am pretty sure you didn't believe me when I said I only have a fourth grade education as I do not understand quite a bit of what you posted for me though I appreciate the information and will file i... more
The statute's wording requiring action under certain circumstances was intended to prevent the Coroner from using discretion to NOT hold an inquest, a check against showing favoritism by letting some ... more
...If I were not so intrigued, I would have disappeared a few posts ago, but old folks like me don't always learn and I think you are having some fun with me.
I have some homework to do, but tho... more
I do have to go along with you on your opinion of the prosecutors- For seemingly smart guys, they were imbeciles. They trotted out their whole case, witness testimony, strategy and everything at a Pre... more
...Wayne, I think our discussion has been really worthwhile from my side and I've learned some stuff I had considered but from a slightly different angle. I am not a historian; I tend to examine thing... more
Don't forget how the McLaury brother with the law degree showed up and insinuated himself into the ongoing hearing on the prosecution side and damn near hijacked the whole side's case. What I said abo... more
...in this situation. Obviously he did not understand what the procedure entailed, he was deeply emotionally involved, time was the enemy as well...and his ignorance of all of this caused him to repea... more
As I said before, this was a badly mishandled preliminary hearing on the government's part. They showed their entire hand and allowed things to be examined and refuted that should have never been hear... more
...My impression is that the Prosecutors were in over their heads (as I often am ) and did not really know how to conduct criminal cases as they mostly dealt with business interests, mining, ect.
My impression of the post-street fight charges were that at one level- Behan and the county Democratic Party- The charges were a political opportunity to hammer two of the strongest Republican contend... more
To follow up: Arizona Territory in 1881 was an interesting place, criminal law-wise. One interesting feature is that even a private citizen could bring a criminal charge as a presentment to the court ... more
...in my overstated opinion. It is hard to get past the carefully planted bias, but well worth the effort.
Regardless of the extended discussions on the subject, the fact remains the statute was... more
...was reviewed by a Coroner's jury. It is, quite frankly a goldmine for my research, not for the details but for how it was documented. I had already figured out that Cochise County in 1882 was emplo... more