Laura Jane Harvey Murder: Part Eleven

In the afternoon of Thursday, June 9, 1864, the trial of Lant McComb for the murder of Laura Jane Harvey and George Lawrence, continued on with D. F. Gaylord being recalled to the witness stand. This time the questioning focused on his effort to track down McComb in the days after the murder. Gaylord said he had traveled at first in several directions trying to locate McComb and finally stopped for the night at a house seven miles north of Sigourney. There he learned that a team of horses had passed by some time ago which led him to travel onto South English and from there to Iowa City. It was in Iowa City that Gaylord found the brown and bay horses, harness and both of the bridles. The brown horse was in the possession of the livery man and the bay with a man named Craft. Gaylord continued onto Rockford where he stopped at the Harvey family farm and then returned back to Ottumwa, bringing the bridles with him and handing them over to Judge Aaron Beardslee. Two months had passed by since Laura's body had been found in the river. 

The questions then focused on Gaylord's interaction with McComb when the trio had initially arrived in Ottumwa. Gaylord testified that he had first seen McComb at Mr. Abraham's livery stable two or three days before the murder. Gaylord has been coming out of the livery stable office when he had seen McComb on climbing the steps with a newspaper in his hand as he was descending. McComb had asked if the proprietor was in. When asked, Gaylord couldn't recall that there had been a horse at the time nearby and he didn't know how McComb had been traveling.

Upon cross examination, Gaylord expounded upon his meeting with McComb who had come to the livery in a buggy with some other men but couldn't positively say that McComb had been one of them due to the four years that have gone by since. His only conversation with McComb had been for only those two minutes on the steps of the livery and it was this conversation that he was relying on to identify McComb.

Gaylord stepped down and John W. Wilkenson was sworn to testify. Wilkenson testified that McComb and two others, a lady and a gentleman, had stopped at his hotel in Eddyville for the evening about four years ago.  They had arrived in a two-horse wagon with a third tied to the back. Wilkenson said that McComb had spent the night at his house and had breakfast the following morning while the other two spent the night at Mr. Slemmons' place. McComb had left after breakfast and he didn't see the lady again until two days later when he had viewed the corpse when the coroner's jury was being held.

During cross examination, Wilkenson said he had never met McComb before that night. Wilkerson denied telling Mr. Blogget that the man in the jail, who he had visited again a couple weeks ago, was older than the man who stayed at his house and might not be the same person. 

The prosecution recalled Laura's brother Frank Harvey to the stand to answer questions about George Lawrence and his team of horses, which he recalled being a bay and a brown. Of note was the harness which had a large ivory ring on the lines where the checks joined the main line. Frank Harvey said he had known Lawrence for six months before he left for Ottumwa and hadn't seen him since.

The defense didn't cross-examine Harvey so Mr. Ormick was recalled again and questioned about how he had first come to meet George Lawrence. Ormick said he had seen Lawrence and McComb at Mr. Clifton's blacksmith shop on the 28th of March, two days before the body of Laura had been found in the river. Ormick had been leaving when Lawrence had asked him for the best horseshoer in town and he had referred Lawrence to the Smith shop where Ormick later saw him.

The defense did cross-examine Ormick to ask him how long the two men had been at the shop getting their horses shod to which Ormick responded a couple hours. Ormick said he didn't have any business with the two men and admitted that he had been examined yesterday by the State that he could recognize the prisoner McComb.

Next Mr. Slemmons, the owner of the house where George and Laura had spent the night in Eddyville, was called to the stand and sworn in. He testified that he had no recollection of seeing McComb at his house and that George and Laura had stayed in a room with two beds. He said they had left the following morning before breakfast but had returned later that evening. Slemmons said they had told him that they had returned from the Union house and then they left again in that direction. They had left driving a wagon being led by two bays with a sorel hitched to the back.

Finally, ferryman John Prosser, Sr. was recalled to testify that the same team had been pulling the wagon the night before Laura's body was found. He testified that the locals hadn't been fording the river at the location of his ferry because it was 4 inches deeper than at the lower ford where they normally cross. Prosser said there was a deep hole about four feet deep right below his ferry and that if a wagon were driving right next to his boat, it would fall into the hole. 

After a long day, court was finally adjourned until the following morning at 8 o'clock.

Comments

  1. I'm telling you, there's a book in all of this!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I don't disagree but putting it in fluid format that reads like other books is evidently beyond my skill set.

      Delete
    2. I think what you have is an outline. First you write the story, and then you've got to set the story into a readable format. Perhaps tell the story from her parents' view. Their daughter married and gone, their concern, the silence that followed, and then the horrifying news, followed by a slow unveiling of the facts.

      Delete
    3. That was my thought when I started this project, to force a rough draft that could be smoothed over later. Perhaps that might still be the case but I suspect now that the genie is out of the bottle, that ship has sailed.

      Delete
    4. Let it work around in your mind for a while and see what happens.

      Delete
  2. I have trouble remember things from four weeks ago, much less four years ago. But I guess if a murdered woman had been found along with all this other excitement, it might have seared certain details into my brain. Still.... you have to wonder about unreliable witnesses.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I too question how much was remembered outright and how much was sort of force remembering just to participate in a trial of obvious importance. I modern defense lawyer would have a field day with a lot of the claims.

      Delete
  3. The details of the case are overwhelming but that's how crimes get solved. As a mystery reader, I can appreciate the complexities.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. There are a lot of details to keep track. I wonder how they did this back in 1860? Did they have cork boards with sketched tacked up with strings running between tacks, just like we see on television?

      Delete
  4. Odd how much we take modern criminology for granted anymore.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I've always had a fantasy of time traveling back to the past to meet up with some ancestor and see what they were like.... but I wouldn't want to run afoul of the law while there!

      Delete
  5. I almost feel that I need to draw a timeline/diagram to keep track of things. Sure hope this does not end as a mystery. You wouldn't do that to us, right?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I drew a timeline for myself during my research stages of this project to keep track of days which proved hard to do when reading these accounts from newspapers which often referred to things happing on "last Thursday". There are several twists and turns ahead, but no cliff hangars, well at least for the overall story.

      Delete
  6. We're getting a lot of details from the witnesses, and I can't help but wonder how the prosecutors think they can pull it all together. Makes me want to keep reading!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Not to spoil anything, but there was really no "pulling things together" in this trial, or at least not one that was reported by the newspaper account that I use as my source for the trial. It just sort of ends matter of factly.

      Delete
  7. I am not sure I could recall anyone and describe them much less identify them after only a brief meeting:) You are doing a great job with all the information!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thank you for your words of encouragement.

      Delete
  8. It's crazy and sad to think of how many thousands/millions of miscarriages of justice there must have been in human history.

    Not saying this will turn out to be one. But it makes me think of how easily it could happen. And that's with seemingly good faith actors for the most part. At least thus far.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I am in agreement. While I doubt justice was wrongly assigned here, it doesn't leave me with any warm and fuzzy feelings.

      Delete

Post a Comment