Violence is the last refuge of the incompetent. Salvor Hardin seems to understand the mentality of a violent conscience. Although Hardin is correct in his stipulation that the incompetent seem to turn to violence to achieve power, his diagnosis of a violent mind does not seem to include the case of The State of Montana vs. Edward Rehberg (1885). In a nineteenth century courtroom, Edward Rehberg was found guilty of murdering his young daughter Clara by means of abuse, despite the evidence and deathbed statement provided during his trial. Today Rehberg would have been found needed to be found guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. He would have been innocent until proven guilty, instead of guilty until proven innocent. Unfortunately, Edward Rehberg’s social status, familial practices, and even his gender were used against him in front of a jury that convicted him of murder; but in today’s court system he would have been exonerated of the murder charge beyond a reasonable doubt.
The prosecution continually tried to suggest that Edward Rehberg was ultimately the only person capable of abusing his daughter Clara. He was a lower class, strong man who put his daughters to work on their land. His demeanor and status alone would suggest that his family would be ill-provided. The coordination of the time he spent on the haystack with Joe Tiebow corroborates with the times that Clara was alone with her step mother Louisa. When asked by the defense if Rehberg if there was any time that Rehberg could have abused his daughter at any time that Sunday Joe Tiebow responded: “A. He did not leave me at all, and I cannot say that he was in the house.” It is clear that Edward Rehberg was not even alone with the child in question that day at all, yet the step mother Louisa was almost constantly alone with the child.* One would question why exactly the step mother was not investigated, and that was so for one reason: Louisa Rehberg was a woman. Women were not seen to be as strong or as forceful as a man. Rehberg’s children did manual labor on his land, they wore overalls and tended to daily chores that most children did not do. Chronemics suggest that it is plausible to assume that the step mother would be an affable suspect to the death of Clara Rehberg. Yet the fact that Louisa Rehberg was a woman kept a nineteenth century jury from considering that she would even have the force to harm and maintain power over the child. The diagnoses of the doctors treating Clara Rehberg suggest that in fact that the child could move around and be active while sustaining the early stages of the injury. The chronemic chain of events suggests that only someone who was in the house and alone with her that Sunday morning could have harmed Clara. Edward Rehberg was never present in this situation.
Historically, children have not been reliable witnesses to crimes. The notion is that children are not mature enough to distinguish the difference between right and wrong. In addition, younger children are not yet able to determine the importance of being truthful and its consequences. The doctors who treated Clara Rehberg questioned her several times about the knowledge the death was inevitable in the near future. Upon being asked the child swore in pain and declared that her step mother had beaten her. Also, she clearly stated that she wished to see her father. Accepting a deathbed confession in the eighteen hundreds was considered valid evidence because the religious factor of death would cause a sweep of mortal honesty from the ill. Although in this case, the deathbed confession did not sway a jury to believe that the step mother alone could harm the child to such a severe degree.
In today’s judicial system, all of the evidence would have been evaluated to a much deeper degree. An investigation of all family members and friends who were present would have secured the evidence needed to exonerate Edward Rehberg. An autopsy of Clara Rehberg would show the times of the inflictions of her wounds and even the angles and degrees of which she was struck. The instrumental marks on her face and body would have been investigated, as would the work being done by Edward Rehberg on the day of her trip to the hospital. To a twentieth or twenty-first century court, the social status of the Rehberg family would have been considered an intriguing and noteworthy avenue to investigate because it would give more insight in the dysfunction of the family. The years following the women’s rights movements in the early nineteen hundreds would have opened up more cause to investigate Louisa Rehberg. In addition, the deathbed statements of Clara Rehberg would not only have opened up cause for research into the step mother, but they would set the investigation of her daily activity on that day in he correct direction.
So, is violence really the last resort of the incompetent? Surely in a nineteenth century court the answer to that would be contrary to the answer in a modern day court system, but what is definite is that the outcome of the trial in both centuries would have been worlds apart. In one case it would have been a world away from justice.
Report:
For this blog, our group decided to use writeboard to earn some extra credit. Some of the group members utilized the website more than others. This made it difficult to find out who was going to fulfill each task that was necessary for the blog’s completion. The jobs were finally worked out after a few phone calls were made. Thanks to Kath, who posted her notes on the site, everyone had the notes that pertained to the assignment. Through the writeboard, Kimberly decided that she would write the draft, Kath would proofread, Bruce would write the group report and Christian would look for links and pictures. Kyle put input into the draft of the blog and helped Kimberly. Overall, the writeboard was O.K. but it would have been more effective if people wrote more on it and/or if our group had been able to schedule a group meeting.
Case Record:
http://college.hmco.com/history/us/norton/people_nation/6e/students/primary/
Comments