Onze site gebruikt cookies om diensten te leveren, prestaties te verbeteren, voor analyse en (indien je niet ingelogd bent) voor advertenties. Door LibraryThing te gebruiken erken je dat je onze Servicevoorwaarden en Privacybeleid gelezen en begrepen hebt. Je gebruik van de site en diensten is onderhevig aan dit beleid en deze voorwaarden.
It could be said that the Joe Hill murder trial rates as one of the most important trials in Utah's history. Hill, a prolific Labor Union songwriter, was accused of murdering a Salt Lake City shopkeeper and his son during a robbery in 1914. In Pie in the Sky, author and trial lawyer Kenneth Lougee analyzes this case and explains the errors that were committed during the trial, which resulted in Hill's guilty verdict and subsequent execution. Interested in more than Hill's guilt or innocence, Lougee provides a thorough discussion of the case including Hill's background with the Industrial Workers of the World, the political and religious climate in Utah at the time, the particulars of the trial, and the failings of the legal process. In this analysis, Lougee focuses on those involved in the trial, most especially the lawyers, which he describes in the text as the worst pieces of lawyering of all time. Pie in the Sky presents a breakdown of this case from a lawyer's perspective and shows why this trial is still a matter of interest in the twenty-first century.… (meer)
waltzmn: Most books about the execution of Joe Hill are tendentious: Either Hill was a patently innocent martyr or he was guilty of murder. Yet the actual information we have is limited and conflicting. For those who are trying to determine what actually happened, as far as we know it, should probably start with Gibbs Smith's "Joe Hill" (about the historical events) and Kenneth Lougee's "Pie in the Sky" (about Hill's trial), so as to read actual balanced reporting, before taking on the propaganda works.… (meer)
▾Lijsten
Geen
▾Iets voor jou?
Bezig met laden...
Meld je aan bij LibraryThing om erachter te komen of je dit boek goed zult vinden.
▾Discussies (Over links)
Op dit moment geen Discussie gesprekken over dit boek.
▾Besprekingen door leden
This book won't tell you whether Joe Hill was guilty or innocent of murder. But it will tell you why he died.
Hill, as he called himself (he was born under a different name in Sweden), was the leading songwriter of the Industrial Workers of the World (the IWW, or Wobblies), who was convicted of murder and executed in Utah in 1915. It is an article of faith in labor circles that Hill was innocent. In fact there was significant reason to suspect him of the murder of which he was convicted. What is certain is that there was a murder, and that several men were involved; based on the testimony of the sole surviving witness, a child named Merlin Morrison, several people barged into his father's shop, and in the altercation which followed, Merlin's father and older brother were killed. Merlin was unable to identify the attackers, but he did believe that his older brother had shot and probably wounded one of them.
And there was Joe Hill, in the area, living without a real source of income (meaning that he needed to acquire money for living somehow) -- and with a bullet hole in his chest which he had acquired on the night of the robbery.
Proof? Of course not. Particularly since there were no witnesses to the robbery who could identify him and only one woman who claimed to have seen him in the vicinity. But it was genuinely enough reason to take Hill into custody and investigate further. Especially since he wouldn't explain what he was doing at the time of the murder.
It's what happened next that is disturbing. There was little investigation, and that not very good. Hill was put on trial anyway.
Hill had no money for lawyers, and this was a time when the right to counsel was not guaranteed. Two lawyers volunteered to represent him. He accepted (although he would later try to fire them for incompetence).
What followed was ugly. The prosecution presented their flimsy case. It was flimsy; they had very little evidence. But the prosecutor was a good lawyer. And he at least had some facts.
What Hill's lawyers had was a client who would not explain what he had been doing at the time of the murder, who had a wound consistent with the testimony of Merlin Morrison, who was a known radical although certainly not a violent radical. Good lawyers could have shown that the prosecution did not have evidence enough to offer proof, and probably would have offered alternative explanations. At minimum, they would have offered some facts the prosecution didn't have. They did none of this. Hill was convicted. Armed with a new lawyer, he appealed -- but he still offered no facts, so there was no real basis for the appeal. It was rejected, and Hill was shot.
Was Hill guilty? Unlike every other writer on the topic, Lougee doesn't even try to answer that. All he does is study the trial, and the actions of the lawyers. And his conclusion is clear: Hill's lawyers were incompetent and did not defend him properly. Had they been competent, they would have either gotten Hill off or forced the prosecution to come up with enough additional information to prove his guilt. They failed utterly, and Hill died as a result.
This book will not teach you all you need to know about the history of Hill's case. For that, you should probably start with the one unbiased book on the case, Joe Hill by Gibbs Smith. But Smith was not a lawyer. This book is a good supplement to Smith to explain what went wrong at trial. Once you've read Smith and this book, you can perhaps start on the rest of the literature, most of which (except for a work of fiction by Wallace Stegner) is pro-Hill. The best of the pro-Hill books is probably The Man Who Never Died: The Life, Times, and Legacy of Joe Hill by William Adler, which makes the one serious attempt to find an alibi for Hill. Is it correct? I can't know. Do I think Hill innocent? I think it more likely than not, but I'm not sure. I wish I were. But I appreciate books like this that try to study the matter without prejudgment. So I recommend this for everyone interested in the Hill case. ( )
Informatie afkomstig uit de Engelse Algemene Kennis.Bewerk om naar jouw taal over te brengen.
To Jan, who put up with this obsession.
To Ned Siegfried, Mitch Jensen, and Joe Steele, who believed in me and gave me a chance.
Eerste woorden
Informatie afkomstig uit de Engelse Algemene Kennis.Bewerk om naar jouw taal over te brengen.
Preface It sees to me that at this time we need education in the obvious more than investigation of the obscure. Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes Joe Hill, the labor songwriter, was executed by the state of Utah on November 19, 1915, for a murder he may or may not have committed.
Citaten
Laatste woorden
Ontwarringsbericht
Uitgevers redacteuren
Auteur van flaptekst/aanprijzing
Oorspronkelijke taal
Gangbare DDC/MDS
Canonieke LCC
▾Verwijzingen
Verwijzingen naar dit werk in externe bronnen.
Wikipedia in het Engels
Geen
▾Boekbeschrijvingen
It could be said that the Joe Hill murder trial rates as one of the most important trials in Utah's history. Hill, a prolific Labor Union songwriter, was accused of murdering a Salt Lake City shopkeeper and his son during a robbery in 1914. In Pie in the Sky, author and trial lawyer Kenneth Lougee analyzes this case and explains the errors that were committed during the trial, which resulted in Hill's guilty verdict and subsequent execution. Interested in more than Hill's guilt or innocence, Lougee provides a thorough discussion of the case including Hill's background with the Industrial Workers of the World, the political and religious climate in Utah at the time, the particulars of the trial, and the failings of the legal process. In this analysis, Lougee focuses on those involved in the trial, most especially the lawyers, which he describes in the text as the worst pieces of lawyering of all time. Pie in the Sky presents a breakdown of this case from a lawyer's perspective and shows why this trial is still a matter of interest in the twenty-first century.
Google Books — Bezig met laden...
(4)
1
Hill, as he called himself (he was born under a different name in Sweden), was the leading songwriter of the Industrial Workers of the World (the IWW, or Wobblies), who was convicted of murder and executed in Utah in 1915. It is an article of faith in labor circles that Hill was innocent. In fact there was significant reason to suspect him of the murder of which he was convicted. What is certain is that there was a murder, and that several men were involved; based on the testimony of the sole surviving witness, a child named Merlin Morrison, several people barged into his father's shop, and in the altercation which followed, Merlin's father and older brother were killed. Merlin was unable to identify the attackers, but he did believe that his older brother had shot and probably wounded one of them.
And there was Joe Hill, in the area, living without a real source of income (meaning that he needed to acquire money for living somehow) -- and with a bullet hole in his chest which he had acquired on the night of the robbery.
Proof? Of course not. Particularly since there were no witnesses to the robbery who could identify him and only one woman who claimed to have seen him in the vicinity. But it was genuinely enough reason to take Hill into custody and investigate further. Especially since he wouldn't explain what he was doing at the time of the murder.
It's what happened next that is disturbing. There was little investigation, and that not very good. Hill was put on trial anyway.
Hill had no money for lawyers, and this was a time when the right to counsel was not guaranteed. Two lawyers volunteered to represent him. He accepted (although he would later try to fire them for incompetence).
What followed was ugly. The prosecution presented their flimsy case. It was flimsy; they had very little evidence. But the prosecutor was a good lawyer. And he at least had some facts.
What Hill's lawyers had was a client who would not explain what he had been doing at the time of the murder, who had a wound consistent with the testimony of Merlin Morrison, who was a known radical although certainly not a violent radical. Good lawyers could have shown that the prosecution did not have evidence enough to offer proof, and probably would have offered alternative explanations. At minimum, they would have offered some facts the prosecution didn't have. They did none of this. Hill was convicted. Armed with a new lawyer, he appealed -- but he still offered no facts, so there was no real basis for the appeal. It was rejected, and Hill was shot.
Was Hill guilty? Unlike every other writer on the topic, Lougee doesn't even try to answer that. All he does is study the trial, and the actions of the lawyers. And his conclusion is clear: Hill's lawyers were incompetent and did not defend him properly. Had they been competent, they would have either gotten Hill off or forced the prosecution to come up with enough additional information to prove his guilt. They failed utterly, and Hill died as a result.
This book will not teach you all you need to know about the history of Hill's case. For that, you should probably start with the one unbiased book on the case, Joe Hill by Gibbs Smith. But Smith was not a lawyer. This book is a good supplement to Smith to explain what went wrong at trial. Once you've read Smith and this book, you can perhaps start on the rest of the literature, most of which (except for a work of fiction by Wallace Stegner) is pro-Hill. The best of the pro-Hill books is probably The Man Who Never Died: The Life, Times, and Legacy of Joe Hill by William Adler, which makes the one serious attempt to find an alibi for Hill. Is it correct? I can't know. Do I think Hill innocent? I think it more likely than not, but I'm not sure. I wish I were. But I appreciate books like this that try to study the matter without prejudgment. So I recommend this for everyone interested in the Hill case. (