Other Free Encyclopedias » Law Library - American Law and Legal Information » Notable Trials and Court Cases - 1973 to 1980 » Lockett v. Ohio - Significance, Did She Deserve To Die?, Deciding Who Shall Die, The Mitigating Factors, The Evidence A Defendant Can Present

Lockett v. Ohio - Knapp Brothers Murder Trials

perpetrator crowninshield render joseph

In 1830, brothers John Francis Knapp and Joseph Jenkins Knapp conspired to have their wealthy uncle, Captain Joseph White, murdered. They hired Richard Crowninshield to carry out the deed. On the night of 6 April 1830, Crowninshield slew Captain White in his sleep, while the brothers waited outside on the street, 300-feet away.

The case was significant because it was the first time that accessories to murder had been tried, convicted, and executed. The eloquence of prosecutor Daniel Webster in defeating an old English common law that an accessory to murder could not be convicted without being present at the time of the murder brought the Knapp brothers to justice. Webster in his prosecution redefined the legality of being present during the murder by raising the issue " . . . to constitute a presence, it is sufficient if the accomplice is in a place, either where he may render aid to the perpetrator of the felony, or where the perpetrator supposes he may render aid. If they selected the place to afford assistance, whether it was well or ill chosen for that purpose is immaterial. The perpetrator would derive courage and confidence from the knowledge that his associate was in the place appointed."

[back] Lockett v. Ohio - Mitigating Circumstances

User Comments

Your email address will be altered so spam harvesting bots can't read it easily.
Hide my email completely instead?

Cancel or