Analysis of a Prosecution

The History of Crime and Punishment in the United States

1. What is the time period of your trial?

The time period of this trial is the year 1904. The defendant was tried on March 15, 1904 and indicted on November 13, 1904.

2. What is the crime on trial? Provide a brief summary.

The crime on trial is for false registration, an election offense. In the early 20th century in New York, election fraud was a serious issue and Teddy Roosevelt as a member of the Board of Commissioners at the end of the 19th century in New York had pledged to crack down on election fraud because of the stronghold on the voting process held by Tammany Hall. Thus, this trial emerged just a few short years after that crackdown began as an example of the type of issues the city was having. This case in particular centered on Edward Lawless, the defendant, charged and then indicted for false registration, an election offense. The presiding judge was John W. Goff; the defense attorney was Patrick Loftus; the prosecuting attorney was Cornelius Collins; the court was the Court of General Sessions. It is recorded on the John Jay website as Trial #414.
The defendant registered under the name of Donnelly though his name was Edward Lawless. Registration in a name other than one’s own is a crime. A review of the Board of Election’s Deputy Clerk’s official records of persons registered in the Third Election District of the Fifth Assembly District showed that this was so.

3. What is the argument of the defense? Select at least two quotes to support this.

The argument of Loftus, the defense attorney, is that the witnesses represent the interests of the Republican Party and cannot be said to be trustworthy or impartial in their testimony that the defendant registered invalidly. In his cross-examination, Loftus asks: “One moment, on that day, in the Third Election District of the Fifth Assembly District, you represented one of the political parties; did you not?” and the answer of course is “Yes, sir” (The People Against Edward Lawless 1904, 20). Loftus’s main argument is that the witnesses are not impartial and therefore their testimony should not be accepted by the judge and jury. He emphasizes this point again and again: “And you are an active and enthusiastic Republican, are you no?” (The People Against Edward Lawless 1904, 20). The Court interjects and says that the Court cannot allow that question as “it matters not what party it is” (The People Against Edward Lawless 1904, 20). Still, if the defense is trying to discredit the witnesses, it certainly does matter what party it is, after all.

4. What is the argument of the prosecution? Select at least two quotes to support this.

The argument of the prosecution is that Lawless registered as Donnelly, was seen by witnesss, who later recognized him as Lawless. The prosecution asks questions like: “Well, when you saw Lawless, subsequent to the time when you saw him frequently, for a period of two months, did you know him?” and the witness eventually responds, “Yes, sir; I am sure that it is Lawless” and this leads to the question of whether the witness recognized him in the registration office and knew him by sight and heard him falsely register—and of course the witness answers, “Yes, sir” (The People Against Edward Lawless 1904, 35). The prosecutor questions several witnesses, all of whom indicate that Lawless registered under a false name.

5. What are three (3) main themes addressed in the trial (ex. class, race, gender, etc.)

The three main themes addressed in the trial are 1) identity, 2) party affiliation, 3) and 3) certainty.
The first theme, identity, is discussed again and again as both the identity of Lawless is dispute and the identities of the witnesses are called into question. In the case of the former, the witnesses assert that they knew him as Lawless though he registered as Donnelly. In the case of the defense, the attorney points out that the witnesses all identify as Republicans and thus are naturally inclined to want to fabricate a story like this.

The second theme, party affiliation, is brought up repeatedly by the defense but the Court has to again and again exclude this line of inquiry, saying that it is immaterial to the facts of the case. The whole argument of the defense, however, is that it is very important to the case as it shows that the only witnesses are those who are working for the Republican party, which stands to benefit from having one less voter on the Democratic ticket.

The third theme is certainty, and the prosecution emphasizes this point again and again because he wants the jury to realize that the witnesses are absolutely certain that the man who registered as Donnelly is actually Lawless. The defense on the other hand attempts to through doubt upon these proceedings by questioning the characters and motives of the witnesses and attempting to paint them as individuals whose certainty cannot be trusted because of their party affiliation. The defense, however, does little to establish that his client was elsewhere when the man who identified as Donnelly was registering to vote—and this inability to show that the defendant was somewhere else only lends to the credibility of the witnesses’ claims. In other words, by failing to show with certainty that the defendant was at another location and therefore could not possibly register as Donnelly at the time and date specified, the defense plays right into the prosecution’s hands.

References

The People Against Edward Lawless. (1904). Retrieved from
http://www.lib.jjay.cuny.edu/crimeinny/trials/pdfs/414.pdf