History 120: #8 We the Jury: Not Guilty

December 2004

Sun	Mon	Tue	Wed	Thu	Fri	Sat
			1	2	3	4
5	6	7	8	9	10	11
12	13	14	15	16	17	18
19	20	21	22	23	24	25
26	27	28	29	30	31

[2] Courthouse image

Whenever there is a serious case of child abuse, people tend to find someone to point their fingers at. This is obviously what is going on in State v. Rehberg. Mr. Edward Rehberg is put on trial for the murder of his daughter, Clara Rehberg. We, the jury, are responsible to answer the question at hand: Was he guilty? Based on the testimonies of witnesses and experts and Clara’s deathbed declaration, we have reached our verdict. As a twentieth century jury, we find Mr. Edward Rehberg not guilty for the murder of Clara Rehberg in State v. Rehberg.

A reason for this not guilty verdict is from Dr. Van Holzschuher’s expert testimony. Dr. Van Holzschuher thought that the surface of Clara’s skin was red “as though there had been hot water thrown on her. [1]” This established that the injuries could have been committed in the Rehberg’s kitchen area. Emma Rehberg had stated that her father was out working in the field the whole time. Dr. Van Holzschuher and Emma’s testimonies supported that “the defendant did not and could not have inflicted the injuries [1].” Another evidence that confirms Mr. Edward Rehberg’s innocence is Dr. Steele’s testimony. Dr. Steele revealed that the assailant must have long fingernails because of the “marks on the child’s neck [1].” Long fingernails are typically not seen on males. This rules out Mr. Edward Rehberg as a possible suspect for the injuries inflicted upon Clara.

One hard-core evidence that proves Mr. Edward Rehberg’s innocence is the dying declaration of Clara Rehberg. When Clara was asked whether or not her father had hurt her leg, she clearly stated that her father did not hurt her at all but instead it was caused by her step-mother. She gave details of the incidents where her step-mother, Louisa Rehberg, abused her. Clara confessed that her step-mother had whipped her with “a stick of wood and with a stove lifter [1].” There was a time when Louisa even kicked her step-daughter with “wooden shoes [1.” An important thing to note is that Clara said her step-mother “threw a bucket of water [1]” on her. This connects with what Dr. Van Holzschuher pointed out about Clara’s redden skin in his testimony. Clara Rehberg’s deathbed declaration clearly reveals that Mr. Edward Rehberg was not responsible for her injuries.

In the nineteenth century, Mr. Edward Rehberg may have been judged as not guilty for the murder of Clara Rehberg. The nineteenth century jury would have interpreted Clara’s declaration as the main evidence to prove Mr. Edward Rehberg’s innocence. However knowing someone is being abused and not doing anything about it is just as guilty. Mr. Edward Rehberg did not hurt his child directly, but he did contribute to her murder. The jury would have held Mr. Edward Rehberg responsible for child negligence and for allowing such serious case of child abuse to happen. The nineteenth century jury would have based their accusation from Dr. Van Holzschuher’s testimony, which revealed that Clara Rehberg “died in consequence of gangrene [1].” She had blood clots from all the whipping and that “the nutrition of the surrounding parts was stopped. [1]” This reveals that her abuse had been occurring for an extended period, a period in which Mr. Edward Rehberg did nothing about.

Since Mr. Edward Rehberg is put on trial for the murder of Clara Rehberg and not child negligence, both nineteenth and twentieth century juries find the defendant not guilty.

[1] Reader, State v. Rehberg (1885) pg. 17 – pg. 33.

Group Commentary:

For our eight group post everyone had written their own separate verdicts and opinions about the court case beforehand. We then came together and had a debate about the court case. There were many good arguments but lastly we settled for the scientific testimony over everything else. Anh wrote the draft, Nhat edited, and Anh rewrote it. Nhat and Justin added their opinions about the importances and significances of each key witness's testimonies. Shannon and Laura searched for an image. Nhat wrote the group commentary.

Court House Photo:

[2][Collier County Courthouse] Florida's 10th Judicial Circuit. Judge Anne Kaylor. [Online]
Available HTTP:
www.jud10.org/Courthouses/Collier/collier.html

Verify your Comment

Previewing your Comment

Posted by: |

This is only a preview. Your comment has not yet been posted.

Your comment could not be posted. Error type:

Your comment has been posted. Post another comment

The letters and numbers you entered did not match the image. Please try again.

As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.

Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.

History 120

December 2004

My Group

Group 8

Photo Albums

#8 We the Jury: Not Guilty

Comments

Verify your Comment

Previewing your Comment

Post a comment

Recent Posts

Recent Comments