Saturday, March 9, 2013

Christmas Morning Murderer, Part 2

In October, I finally had the opportunity to view the criminal case file for Joe Salpatrick for murdering my grandma's sister on Christmas. When I first hoped to view these records I discovered they were not kept on-site. As I don't visit Kalamazoo very often I had to wait an entire year to examine them. You can imagine my anticipation. I discovered several new things, though I won't belabor all that I found.

For a little more background on Mildred's brief and turbulent life before she met her murderer (it's only a couple of paragraphs) read Understanding Ancestors Using Timelines. The nutshell version of Mildred's life after she met Joe is this. They dated for five or six years, living together toward the end of that period. On 3 Dec 1941, Mildred took her two children (from a failed marriage) and moved in with her sister. Joe came to the house on numerous occasions begging her to reconcile, but she refused. On Christmas eve, Joe went out drinking, borrowed a shot gun from his brother-in-law and drove about twenty minutes across town to Mildred's sister's home. Through the window, he saw Mildred wrapping presents for her children, raised the gun and fired two or three blasts at Mildred. Joe failed to locate his car in the dark, hitch-hiked into town and was found hiding under a bed on Christmas morning. To learn more about her murder, read Christmas Morning Murderer Gets Off Easy

The last thing the defense wanted was for Joe's case to reach trial. Mildred's sister's testimony would surely be damning and few jurors could hear it without shedding tears. On the day of jury selection, Joe's lawyers directed his family to petition the court for a competency hearing. Judge Weimer would now have the final say. The defense's strategy, simply speaking, was to convince the judge that Joe was incapable of understanding that he had done anything wrong when he shot Mildred in cold blood.

Joe's lawyers didn't opt for a traditional temporary insanity defense, but proposed that Joe had always been dim-witted and more importantly, had always lacked any moral sense. They presented four witnesses: Joe's father, two psychiatrists and a man who supposedly had known Joe since childhood (I'll call him Bob to protect the privacy of my family, upon whom he was trying to exact revenge). Although he was not called as a witness on his own behalf, we mustn't forget Joe's performance at the hearing. Most likely coached, he sat stock still and stared vacantly throughout the proceedings. [1] This was probably easy for him as there were no rebuttal witnesses presented by the prosecution and therefore no reason for him to become either anxious or angry.

The defense strategies were as follows:

Attempt to demonstrate a family history of craziness
Joe's father, Vincent, testified that both his own brother and his son had “crazy spells,” his brother allegedly experiencing these fits his entire life. [2] Vincent also recounted how blood seeped out of his brother's ears, nose and mouth when he died and at various times throughout his life. [3] He described his brother thus “One day he would be crazy and another day he would feel all right. After the blood out, he stayed all right.” [3] Vincent then testified that Joe also bled from his ears. [4] After one of Joe's accidents, that he failed to describe, he claimed Joe was hospitalized, unconscious, for five days and that doctors put cloth in his ears to prevent blood from oozing out. [5] Before the accidents, Vincent said, Joe “never act like another boy have good brains; just monkey around, something like that you know. He act crazy. Sometimes he is all right.” [6] I should note that Vincent had not mastered the English language as he was a Polish immigrant and spoke mostly Polish at home. [7]

Suggest that Joe had experienced several head injuries
Vincent explained that when Joe went outside after his hospitalization “he get right away sick.” [4] The lawyer asked if Joe got “sick in the head,” to which Joe's father replied “just in the head and about the body, because that Model T Ford tip over for him, you know, and bump him in the telegraph pole across him. The cops come and get him to the hospital.” [4] This was the only accident Vincent actually described.

Bob testified that he knew Joe from childhood “practically from the early 20's” and that they went to school together and played together. [8] Bob said that when Joe was about thirteen or fourteen years old they were playing tag on (train) box cars, jumping between them. [9] Joe made a misstep and fell on the coupling mechanism between two cars. [9] “For about an hour we worked over him and his legs was pretty weak and his head was all bloody, so we tried to take him home and we met his mother on the way and she took him on in there, and from that time we didn't come in contact with Joe for six or seven weeks. He was laid up.” [9] Bob said that after that he didn't see Joe for seven or eight years until about 1930. [10] It was then, he claimed, he heard about an incident Joe supposedly had in Albion in 1928, but provided no particulars. [9, 10]
In a report from the Ionia State Hospital, (for the criminally insane) Joe's personal history indicated the “box car” incident occurred when Joe was twelve. [7] (NOTE: the source of this history is not stated, but it likely come from the histories taken by the defense psychiatrists, as information from their testimony at the competency hearing immediately precedes it. Also, information from the Kalamazoo State Hospital and information from the Ionia Hospital are presented in later sections of the report) The personal history also related that Joe was beaten by his father, was hit by a train and fell while playing in a barn. [7]

While questioning Dr. Davis, the lawyer suggested the box car incident occurred when Joe was fifteen or sixteen (about the time Joe was in the Industrial School for Boys) [11] “and not very long after that he was hit by a train.” [12]

Interestingly, Joe's father made no mention of any accidents around box cars, being hit by a train or anything that happened in Albion and he wasn't questioned about them either.

My rebuttal
Bob testified that he knew Joe from childhood “practically from the early 20's” and that they went to school together and played together though Bob was two years older. [8]. I don't believe this because, though they lived 2.5 miles apart, on opposite sides of downtown, they each lived about two blocks from their neighborhood school. [13-16] Joe would have attended the Frank St. School (later Lincoln School) and Bob the Burdick School (later McKinley School). While there was just one high school, Joe probably never set foot in the place as he never advanced past the eighth grade. Actually, I don't believe Joe and Bob even knew each other during childhood, though proving that would be nearly impossible. I cannot rule out that Joe and Bob did meet outside of school while growing up, but in addition to the distance between their homes, I don't know how much inter-racial mixing there was even among juvenile delinquents like Joe. It is possible they met while boxing in the 1930s. [17] I believe the only reason Bob testified was to exact revenge on my family, by doing his part to ensure that Joe was never imprisoned for killing Mildred.

My other problem with this testimony is that there was no consistent account of any of Joe's “accidents.” Every witness presented a different story. Bob said Joe was playing on box cars and was in an undescribed accident in Albion. Joe claimed to a psychiatrist he was hit by a train. Joe's father said he was hit by a car. If Joe's accidents were as serious as alleged I'm surprised that no two accounts were even similar. If Joe were hit by a train surely everyone would have remembered that and commented on it.


Suggest that Joe was never “normal” after said head injuries and could neither think clearly nor carry on a conversation
When asked, both Bob and Vincent declared that after the accidents Joe never behaved normally. [9, 18, 19]
Bob testified that Joe and Mildred lived with him “for a considerable period” allowing him to observe Joe's state of mind. [9, 19] He “couldn't express himself at all. . . It was very jumbled up there. You would have to figure it out for yourself.” [20] In demonstrating how Joe had difficulty carrying on a conversation (after the accidents) Bob said that Joe rapidly switched from topic to topic. [19, 21] Then he claimed exactly the opposite, saying Joe repeatedly returned to a certain subject no matter how Bob attempted to change it. [21] Bob said “well, after the friend he was going with, [Mildred], left him, he would be talking on something else and turn right back to [Mildred] continuously.” [21]

The defense psychiatrists described their observations of Joe and stated that he could not carry on a conversation, yet admitted he was able to tell them exactly what happened on the night he shot Mildred. [22, 23] They also said Joe appeared to have amnesia at the time surrounding the killing, though when questioned, he provided details of his movements on Christmas eve. [22, 23]

My rebuttal
I would like to point out two things. First, when someone is very upset about something they usually talk about that topic continually because it is uppermost in their minds. When the conversation turns elsewhere they quickly return to it. That seems pretty normal to me. Second, how would Bob have had these conversations with Joe after Mildred “left him” (not that Joe kicked her out as Joe alleged)? Bob was only released from his eighteen-month prison stay for statutory rape [24] on Dec. 24th, 1941, [25] the night Joe went out drinking and ultimately murdered Mildred.

The report from the Kalamazoo State Hospital, where Joe was evaluated before his competency hearing, stated “His stream of thought clear . . . Memory good for both remote and recent events. Occasionally he seems confused about events. Later questioning brought out the fact that he could recall accurately practically everything that transpired immediately before and during the time of the tragedy and everything that happened after.” [26] This report also stated “There is no history, however, of an abrupt change of character or that he has had an actual psychosis, either organic, or psychogenic in origin.” [26]


Suggest that Joe was mentally deficient
Both Dr. Davis and Dr. Gregg declared that Joe had the mental capacity of a nine-year-old. [27, 28] They averred that Joe would never be capable of assisting in his own defense were he put on trial or even simply understanding the nature of the case against him. [29, 30]

It is clear that Joe did not have scholarly tendencies. There are three different stories of his schooling. In one account Joe claimed he reached the 7th grade at the age of fifteen. [7] In another he said he repeated the third grade from age seven to sixteen. [31] Joe's court hearing in 1929 for breaking parole on an earlier charge of “unlawful use” of an automobile and larceny over $25, indicated that he “completed the eighth grade in school at the age of sixteen.” [32]

My rebuttal
I'll just admit right now that I don't believe for a minute that Joe had a mental age of a nine-year-old. It is true that Joe didn't receive much schooling, but I would like to point out that just because a person doesn't complete high school doesn't mean they are inherently unintelligent. I also know Joe had problems with the law from a young age, but that is not the same as saying he was intellectually challenged.
Three state psychiatrists noticed no mental deficit. [33] They stated that after they examined Joe they “found no evidence of his ever having had an attack of nervous or mental disease” and that he was “sane on December 25, 1941 at the time of the alleged shooting. . . We further believe that he is sane today and capable of understanding the nature and object of the proceedings against him.” [33]

Information from the Kalamazoo State Hospital, where Joe was examined prior to his hearing, stated “the more one studies his background, the stronger is the impression that he is more emotionally inadequate than he is intellectually inferior.” [26]

The court records from 1928-1929 when Joe was arrested for stealing a car, larceny and violating probation (and noted he was recently arrested for drunkenness and stealing a bicycle) made absolutely no mention of any potential incompetency. [32]

Lastly, I find it impossible to believe that Mildred, or any other woman, would stay in a relationship with a man for five to six years and even live with him, if he had the mental capacity of a child.


Attempt to demonstrate that Joe had no moral judgement
Dr. Davis and Dr. Gregg declared that Joe was “devoid of ethical understanding.” [27, 28] As proof that he had no moral sense they discussed how Joe saw nothing wrong with living with Mildred though they were unmarried. [34] Not only that, the psychiatrists stated Joe couldn't even grasp the concept of right versus wrong. [27, 35] According to Dr. Davis “If you tell him not to take something, he perhaps would consider that as wrong, but when you say 'It is wrong to take something,' he does not understand exactly what you mean.” [27] Dr. Greg said that Joe felt one had only done something wrong if one was caught. [35] “He didn't have any idea that he had committed any crime until he was told that he had by the officers,” claimed Dr. Gregg. [36]

My rebuttal
I understand it was not socially acceptable to live “in sin,” but to equate it with not understanding that it was wrong to steal something seems to me to weaken the argument rather than strengthen it. Also, if Joe really had no moral sense and saw nothing wrong with living with Mildred, why did Joe repeatedly ask Mildred to get a divorce [31, 37, 38, 39] so he could marry her. [37, 38, 39] Joe admitted that he drove to Mildred's sister's house on several occasions attempting to get her to marry him [31, 39, 40] (and thus get a dependency deferment as Pearl Harbor had just been attacked, drawing the U.S. into WWII). [39]

Also, if Joe didn't understand that he had done anything wrong when he shot Mildred, why was he found cowering under a bed? [7, 41] If he didn't comprehend that he had committed a crime, why wasn't he peacefully sleeping off his hangover? Why would Joe say that he must have gone crazy and the next moment say he should be electrocuted? [26]


Blame the victim
According to the defense, Mildred was an immoral woman who after many years of living with Joe started seeing other men. [40, 42, 43] Dr. Gregg testified that Joe claimed he kicked Mildred out because he believed she was “running around with married men.” [40] According to Dr. Gregg, Joe “knew that she was keeping company with other men; had made trips with other men; had done many immoral acts with other men, and he had forgiven her, trying to forget it; gave her money for a divorce; bought a car and got a house.” [40]

My rebuttal
I won't paint Mildred as a wronged saint because I don't have any evidence one way or the other. I will say that I believe Mildred took her children (from a previous marriage) and left Joe because he apparently physically abused her. [39] Mildred's sister also reported that Joe fractured Mildred's ribs shortly prior to Mildred moving in with her. [39] Remember that Joe was a boxer (or had been in the 1930s) [7, 10, 32, 41] who was not unfamiliar with physical violence and who also, allegedly, was beaten by his father as a youngster. [7]


Suggest that Joe was depressed at the time of the murder
The defense psychiatrists declared that Joe was a primitive, sexual being and that he basically could not restrain himself from giving in to those desires. [42] Dr. Davis was asked whether Joe “had sustained any shocks with respect to his ego.” [42] “Why, yes,” Dr. Davis answered, “This man because of his previous life [no mention or even allusion was made to what this referred], of course, placed a great deal of emphasis on his sexual ability.” [42, 43] He then said that after Mildred allegedly told Joe that “he was no longer of value sexually to her” it threw him into a depression. [42, 43] The psychiatrists declared this a terrible blow to Joe, a man whose sexual prowess was of critical importance to his self-esteem. [31, 40, 43] Joe's “depression” resulted in him drowning his sorrows in alcohol on Christmas eve, [7, 23, 44], something he had been known to do previously [11] and actually arrested for. [32] He then borrowed a shot gun from his brother-in-law [7, 23, 39] and drove about 20 minutes across town to “scare” Mildred. [7, 44]

My rebuttal
Joe claimed that he merely wanted to scare Mildred. If that was truly his intention then why didn't he knock on the door and brandish the gun? It's difficult to scare someone if they only have a couple of seconds to respond before they are dead.


What the prosecutor did
After the final witness for the defense stepped down, the prosecutor had his opportunity to present a case. He had briefly cross-examined the defense witnesses, but he evidently felt that was sufficient. He called not a single rebuttal witness. Judge Weimer even asked if he wished to call anyone to the stand to which he replied “I would like to suggest lots of witnesses, including the respondent himself. I would like to have the Court examine the respondent among others. We realize that it is the Court's proceeding.” [45] After deciding that he shouldn't question the defendant the judge announced a recess. Afterward, the Judge again asked if there was any further testimony to suggest. Responded the prosecutor, “If the Court please, just to say that the Court, I am sure, is cognizant of all the witnesses who would have been subpoenaed, and any that the Court might wish to call will be agreeable, but I don't wish to insist that any be called.” [46] Judge Weimer said that if neither side wanted to call additional witnesses “we may as well consider the hearing closed.” [47] The judge then commented on Joe's performance during the hearing, how he “was absolutely immobile except for the opening and closing of his eyes.. . . I do not assume, of course, that that has any particular significance. It may or may not, but I think it is noteworthy.” [47, 48] And that was it.

What the prosecutor could/should have done
Mr. Fox could have called the three state psychiatrists to contradict the testimony of the defense doctors. They had all examined Joe and declared him to be sane. [33] He also could have asked Mildred's sisters to testify about Mildred and Joe's relationship (how long had he beaten her, was she afraid for herself and/or her children). They also could have provided information about Joe's behavior or commented on his apparent level of intelligence as they must have known him for several years through their sister. In addition, Joe's co-workers could have testified about his conversational ability or approximate intelligence. He could even have tried to present witnesses to demonstrate Joe's past run-ins with the law [32], time in the Industrial School for Boys [11] or the Michigan Reformatory [11] to indicate a history of trouble. But, he did none of these things.

What happened
Judge Weimer also seemed to ignore the fact that thirteen years previously Joe had sauntered into court smoking a cigarette at his hearing for violating parole (and after recently being arrested for being drunk and stealing a bike) for his previous offense of stealing a car. [32] Back then the judge had declared that Joe possessed a “lawless, indifferent, irresponsible disposition and temperament.“ [32]
Not surprisingly, since the prosecutor didn't raise a finger in protest, the judge declared Joe insane and committed him to the Ionia State Hospital for the criminally insane. [48]


SOURCES
  1. Kalamazoo County, Michigan, Circuit Court Case 436, The People of the State of Michigan v. Joseph L. Salpatrick, Stenographer's Record, Testimony of Dr. Sherman Gregg, p. 54-55, 10 Mar 1942, Circuit Clerk's Office, Kalamazoo.
  2. Kalamazoo County, Michigan, Circuit Court Case 436, The People of the State of Michigan v. Joseph L. Salpatrick, Stenographer's Record, Testimony of Wicenty Salapatek, p. 13, 10 Mar 1942, Circuit Clerk's Office, Kalamazoo.
  3. Kalamazoo Co., Mich., Circuit Court Case 436, People v. Salpatrick, Testimony of Salapatek, p. 13-14, 10 Mar 1942.
  4. Kalamazoo Co., Mich., Circuit Court Case 436, People v. Salpatrick, Testimony of Salapatek, p. 16, 10 Mar 1942.
  5. Kalamazoo Co., Mich., Circuit Court Case 436, People v. Salpatrick, Testimony of Salapatek, p. 15-16, 10 Mar 1942.
  6. Kalamazoo Co., Mich., Circuit Court Case 436, People v. Salpatrick, Testimony of Salapatek, p. 15, 10 Mar 1942.
  7. Kalamazoo County, Michigan, Circuit Court Case 436, The People of the State of Michigan v. Joseph L. Salpatrick, Personal History, Report from the Ionia State Hospital, Filed with the court 08 Dec 1947 (stamped), Circuit Clerk's Office, Kalamazoo.
  8. Kalamazoo County, Michigan, Circuit Court Case 436, The People of the State of Michigan v. Joseph L. Salpatrick, Stenographer's Record, Testimony of “Bob” (name withheld for privacy), p. 1, 10 Mar 1942, Circuit Clerk's Office, Kalamazoo.
  9. Kalamazoo Co., Mich., Circuit Court Case 436, People v. Salpatrick, Testimony of “Bob” (name withheld for privacy), p. 3, 10 Mar 1942.
  10. Kalamazoo Co., Mich., Circuit Court Case 436, People v. Salpatrick, Testimony of “Bob” (name withheld for privacy), p. 8, 10 Mar 1942.
  11. Joe Salpatrick, Convict Record, Reg. No. 21355, Received 30 Dec 1929, Michigan Reformatory, Ionia, Michigan, Archives of Michigan, Lansing, Michigan, Archives Control Number: RG 64-53.
  12. Kalamazoo County, Michigan, Circuit Court Case 436, The People of the State of Michigan v. Joseph L. Salpatrick, Stenographer's Record, Testimony of Dr. David B. Davis, p. 24, 10 Mar 1942, Circuit Clerk's Office, Kalamazoo.
  13. R.L. Polk & Co.'s Kalamazoo Directory 1921 Comprising . . . Public And Private Schools . . . and a Buyer's Guide (Detroit: R.L. Polk & Co., Publishers), 25.
  14. Polk's Kalamazoo City Directory 1924 Comprising . . . Public And Private Schools . . . A Complete Classified Business Directory (Detroit: R.L. Polk & Co., Publishers), 23.
  15. Polk's Kalamazoo City Directory 1926 Comprising . . . Public And Private Schools . . . A Complete Classified Business Directory (Detroit: R.L. Polk & Co., Publishers), 27.
  16. Polk's Kalamazoo (Michigan) City Directory 1927 Comprising . . . Public Schools . . . A Complete Classified Business Directory (Detroit: R.L. Polk & Co., Publishers), 33.
  17. Kalamazoo Co., Mich., Circuit Court Case 436, People v. Salpatrick, Testimony of “Bob” (name withheld for privacy), p. 5-6, 10 Mar 1942.
  18. Kalamazoo Co., Mich., Circuit Court Case 436, People v. Salpatrick, Testimony of Salapatek, p. 17, 10 Mar 1942.
  19. Kalamazoo Co., Mich., Circuit Court Case 436, People v. Salpatrick, Testimony of “Bob” (name withheld for privacy), p. 5, 10 Mar 1942.
  20. Kalamazoo Co., Mich., Circuit Court Case 436, People v. Salpatrick, Testimony of “Bob” (name withheld for privacy), p. 7, 10 Mar 1942.
  21. Kalamazoo Co., Mich., Circuit Court Case 436, People v. Salpatrick, Testimony of “Bob” (name withheld for privacy), p. 6, 10 Mar 1942.
  22. Kalamazoo Co., Mich., Circuit Court Case 436, People v. Salpatrick, Testimony of Davis, p. 26, 10 Mar 1942.
  23. Kalamazoo Co., Mich., Circuit Court Case 436, People v. Salpatrick, Testimony of Gregg, p. 49, 10 Mar 1942.
  24. Kalamazoo County, Michigan, Circuit Court Case S-18908, The People of the State of Michigan v. “Bob” (name withheld for privacy), In The Matter Of Sentence (Judge Weimer), 02 Nov 1940, Circuit Clerk's Office, Kalamazoo.
  25. Kalamazoo Co., Mich., Circuit Court Case 436, People v. Salpatrick, Testimony of “Bob” (name withheld for privacy), p. 10, 10 Mar 1942.
  26. Kalamazoo County, Michigan, Circuit Court Case 436, The People of the State of Michigan v. Joseph L. Salpatrick, Information From Kalamazoo State Hospital, Report from the Ionia State Hospital, Filed with the court 08 Dec 1947 (stamped), Circuit Clerk's Office, Kalamazoo.
  27. Kalamazoo Co., Mich., Circuit Court Case 436, People v. Salpatrick, Testimony of Davis, p. 21, 10 Mar 1942.
  28. Kalamazoo Co., Mich., Circuit Court Case 436, People v. Salpatrick, Testimony of Gregg, p. 40, 10 Mar 1942.
  29. Kalamazoo Co., Mich., Circuit Court Case 436, People v. Salpatrick, Testimony of Davis, p. 34, 10 Mar 1942.
  30. Kalamazoo Co., Mich., Circuit Court Case 436, People v. Salpatrick, Testimony of Gregg, p. 54, 10 Mar 1942.
  31. Kalamazoo County, Michigan, Circuit Court Case 436, The People of the State of Michigan v. Joseph L. Salpatrick, Mental Status (General Attitude On Admission [to Ionia Hospital]), Report from the Ionia State Hospital, Filed with the court 08 Dec 1947 (stamped), Circuit Clerk's Office, Kalamazoo.
  32. Kalamazoo County, Michigan, Circuit Court Case S-10428, The People of the State of Michigan v. Joe Salpatrick, In The Matter Of Sentence (Judge Weimer), 28 Dec 1929, Western Michigan Archives and Regional History Collections, Kalamazoo, Michigan.
  33. Kalamazoo County, Michigan, Circuit Court Case 436, The People of the State of Michigan v. Joseph L. Salpatrick, Report of Psychiatrists, Signed by H.A. Sears, Fred P. Currier and J.S. McCarthy, 04 Mar 1942, Circuit Clerk's Office, Kalamazoo.
  34. Kalamazoo Co., Mich., Circuit Court Case 436, People v. Salpatrick, Testimony of Gregg, p. 51-52, 10 Mar 1942.
  35. Kalamazoo Co., Mich., Circuit Court Case 436, People v. Salpatrick, Testimony of Gregg, p. 42, 10 Mar 1942.
  36. Kalamazoo Co., Mich., Circuit Court Case 436, People v. Salpatrick, Testimony of Gregg, p. 45, 10 Mar 1942.
  37. Kalamazoo Co., Mich., Circuit Court Case 436, People v. Salpatrick, Testimony of “Bob” (name withheld for privacy), p. 9, 10 Mar 1942.
  38. Kalamazoo Co., Mich., Circuit Court Case 436, People v. Salpatrick, Testimony of Gregg, p. 52, 10 Mar 1942.
  39. Mother of 2 Slain as She Trims Tree. Kalamazoo Gazette. Kalamazoo, Michigan, 25 Dec 1941, p.2 column 1.
  40. Kalamazoo Co., Mich., Circuit Court Case 436, People v. Salpatrick, Testimony of Gregg, p. 53, 10 Mar 1942.
  41. Mother of 2 Slain as She Trims Tree. Kalamazoo Gazette. Kalamazoo, Michigan, 25 Dec 1941, p.1 (column unknown, from clipping in the author's file).
  42. Kalamazoo Co., Mich., Circuit Court Case 436, People v. Salpatrick, Testimony of Davis, p. 22, 10 Mar 1942.
  43. Kalamazoo Co., Mich., Circuit Court Case 436, People v. Salpatrick, Testimony of Davis, p. 23, 10 Mar 1942.
  44. Kalamazoo Co., Mich., Circuit Court Case 436, People v. Salpatrick, Testimony of Gregg, p. 47, 10 Mar 1942.
  45. Kalamazoo County, Michigan, Circuit Court Case 436, The People of the State of Michigan v. Joseph L. Salpatrick, Stenographer's Record, Statement of Prosecutor Raymond W. Fox, p. 55, 10 Mar 1942, Circuit Clerk's Office, Kalamazoo.
  46. Kalamazoo Co., Mich., Circuit Court Case 436, People v. Salpatrick, Statement of Fox, p. 56, 10 Mar 1942.
  47. Kalamazoo County, Michigan, Circuit Court Case 436, The People of the State of Michigan v. Joseph L. Salpatrick, Stenographer's Record, Statement of Judge George Weimer, p. 56, 10 Mar 1942, Circuit Clerk's Office, Kalamazoo.
  48. Kalamazoo Co., Mich., Circuit Court Case 436, People v. Salpatrick, Statement of Judge Weimer, p. 57, 10 Mar 1942.

2 comments:

  1. Fascinating story and interesting research. Thank you for sharing.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Thank you! I'm glad it was interesting to more than just my family.

    ReplyDelete