Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1907-03-14
THOMAS WILL Be HUNG
Supreme Court of Virginia Re-
fuses New Trial.
ASSAILANT OF MISS RISLEY
Story of the Crime Committed Near
Luna Park.
WAS A DISSENTING OPINION
Majority Does Not Hold the Evidence
Was insufficient for a Ver-
dict Of Guilty.
ASSAILANT OF MISS RISLEY
VAS A DISSENTING OPINION

RICHMOND, Va, March 1.-THE su-
preme court today in an opinion by Judge
Buchanan affirmed the judgment of the cir
cult court of Alexandria county, by which
the negro Joseph Thomas, alias John
Wright, was found guilty Of criminal as
sault near Luna Park last summer and SEN
fenced to be hanged. Judges Cardwen and
Whittle dissented from the decision of the
majority of the court.
The court reviews the record and evil
dence, the identification Of Wright by Miss
Risley (since married to Gooding her es-
cort, the night of the assaulD, the attempt
of Wright to prove an alibi, and goes into
an elaborate opinion on the law applicable.
The majority opinion states that while
several errors are relied on by counsel for
the accused, no exception was taken at the
trial to any of the rulings of the court ex-
cept it's refusal to set aside the verdict be-
cause contrary to the law and evidence
and it's overruling the motion in arrest of
judgment, and the court therefore cannot
consider any other assignment of error.
The law is adverted to that motions for
new trials are governed by the same rules
late court, upon motion to grant a new
trial because the verdict of the jury is con-
trary to the evidence, will not reverse the
judgment and award a new trial unless 1t
finds that the evidence. considered as on a
demurrer to evidence. is plainly insufficient
to warrant the finding of the jury, and
that it will not be justified in granting
new trial even If it's members should think
that if they had been on the jury they
might have found a different verdict
Reviewing the evidence, the court finds
that the preparation of the crime and the
identity of the accused as the perpetrator
were testified to positively and directly; and
tits said that the guilt of the accused is
purely question of fact, and that If the
witnesses of the commonwealth were worthy
of credit of which the jury were the ex-
elusive judges, there can be no question
that the verdict is neither contrary to the
evidence nor without evidence to support
1t.
The Dissenting Opinion.
Judge Cardwell and Judge Whittle both
file dissenting opinions, the former going
into the evidence at considerable length.
Judge Cardwell sets out that the prisoner
being unable to employ counsel the court
assigned two members of the bar to con-
duct his defense, and that during the trial
evidence in rebuttal wholly irrelevant and
of the most damaging character to the pris-
oner was introduced by the prosecution and
admitted by the court, to which no bill
of exception was taken. He also states
that the evidence for the prosecution, as to
the preparation of the crime, discloses
facts and circumstances which are suffi-
Gent to create grave doubt in the mind of
any one freed from the bias and prejudice
which Is unhappily and too often a con-
trolling influence upon juries when dealing
with the heinous and shocking crime of
which the prisoner is accused.
After reviewing the evidence he reaches
the conclusion that the proof is not only
wanting to sustain the verdict of the jury
but constrains the belief that the natural
horror of this particular crime diverted the
attention of the jury from proper con-
sideration of the evidence.
Judge Whittle, concurring in the views
OF Judge Cardwell, states in addition that
he believes where the supreme court is
convinced by an inspection of the record
that the irregularity in the trial of the
case in the vital matter of admitting evil
dence renders it morally certain that in
their finding the jury was materially in
fuenced by incompetent evidence, although
admitted without objection "a condition
which indisputably prevailed in this in
stance), it ought in the due exercise of its
supervisory powers to set aside the verdict
and remand the case for a new trial. Es-
pecially is this true in capital case where
the greatest liberty is allowed in granting
new trials.
Joseph Thomas, alias John Wright. was
indicted and convicted of having criminally
assaulted Miss Mabel Risley, now Mrs
Forrest Gooding of Washington. The as
sault occurred near Luna Park Alexandria
county, the night of September 8 last
Wright was shortly afterward arrested by
the Washington authorities and was identi-
fled by Miss Risey as her asSailant Octo-
Der 10 he was indicted for the offense and
was also indicted for four other criminal
offenses. Commonwealth Attorney Crandal
Mackey decided. however to try the &C
cused for the assault on Miss Risley.
Wright was placed on trial October 81
last, and he again identified by Mrs
Gooding and her husband. A large number
of witnesses were examined. The case was
given to the jury the following night, and
after celebrating forty-five minutes the
jury returned verdict of guilty.
Wright was subsequently sentenced to be
hanged December IA last. Every arrange
ment for the execution had been completed
even to the erection of a scaffold His
counsel, however, carried the case to the
court of appeals and secured stay of exc
cution.
Since that time Wright has been confined
in the jail at Alexandria county The pris-
oner asserts that he is innocent of the crime
and spends a considerable portion of his
time in reading a Bible. He was buoyed
up considerably when he learned that his
counsel had secured for him a stay of exc
cution.