The Lynchburg News, Thursday Morning, July 11, 1912


Rustburg, Va., July 10, 1912
The Commonwealth rested its case against Leewood and Tommie Thurman, on trial for the murder of D.S. Scruggs, March 23, in the Hell Bend neighborhood of this county at 10:15 o'clock this morning and Commonwealth's Attorney Light addressed the jury from 6 o'clock until almost 7 o'clock this evening, at which time court adjourned until 8:30 o'clock tommorrow morning, when Duncan Drysdale and W.M. Murrell, attorneys for the defense, will argue for the lives of the youthful defendants. Attorney Aubrey E. Strode will conclude the argument for the Commonwealth and the case is likely to go to the jury by noon tomorrow. Interest in the case is still very acute here and the process of building up the strong chain of circumstantial evidence has been watched with growing interest since the trial was commenced Tuesday morning. The Commonwealth greatly strengthened its case today through a number of their own and several of the defendants witnesses through the questioning of Attorneys Strode and Light. The alibi which the defense had promised to settle the result of the trail failed to materialize, as they were unable to account for the time of the boys from 1o'clock until 2 o'clock on the fateful Saturday. The alibi was sworn to by brothers and sisters of the defendants. Probably no witnesses have damaged the two youths as has the evidence of Bob Allen and Jim Baylus, both of whose testimony was considered ominous and weighty by the prosecution, as may be judged from the stress laid on it by Attorney Light in his argument before the jury later. Allen's testimony was reguarding alleged statements made by Mrs. Thurman, Mr. Thurman and Leewood Thurman on the Sunday afternoon following the finding of the bullet pierced body of Scruggs in the road near the barn of Morgan Erby. Allen is an intimate friend of the Thurmans. He testified that when the Thurmans, that is, the three above mentioned, learned of the finding of the body, they decided to go the scene of the tragedy, all except Leewood, who never did go near the corpse of the slain Scruggs, Mrs. Scruggs is alleged to have said, "Afraid he would "blab." "Don't go down there with any whiskey in you, or you are likely to blab and say things you should not say." Allen also testified that when it became apparent that old man Thurman was going to the scene of the murder where a large crowd had already gathered, Leewood said, " Let's don't let the old man go down there. He has no business down there and is likely to say things he has no business saying." Coming as it did from a friend, it was declared by Attorney Light to be little short of a confession of guilt on the part of Leewood. It is towards him that the Commonwealth is bending all it's efforts to show that he fired the fatal shots which killed "Udy" Scruggs. The testimony of Baylus was equally as deadly. He it was who took dinner with the Thurmans on the day Scruggs was killed. He stated that Scruggs was there that day and took dinner, playing cards and having a general good time. Shortly after dinner Scruggs stated that he was going to Erby's to buy corn to make whiskey with. He left the Thurman home in company with the two defendants and did not have any overcoat on, which the Thurman's had stated they let him have to wear to the neighbors, according to the witness. This point was considered a very strong one. It refuted the explanation of why a Thurman overcoat was found at the place where the body of Scruggs was discovered. There were a few other minor points which clearly established several minor facts. Baylus, though an ignorant man, proved to be one of the best witnesses in the case, answering in his own way the questions that were asked him and leaving a clear meaning which made a good impression on those who heard him. He could not be caught. " I don't intend to mix my testifyrations." he said several times. He didn't. When asked where he lived, he replied: " In the suburbs of Hell Bend." So accurate was he in his efforts to tell the truth that when asked if he were invited to take dinner and if he liked the meal, he stated that he wasn't asked he didn't believe, but he stayed anyway. He said the only fault he found with the meal was that there was a "mite" too little salt in the "creeses." The Commonwealth fixed the death of Scruggs at 1 o'clock or a little later, by the evidence of Bryant Harris , Mrs. Erby , and Walter Gilbert, colored, who heard several pistol shots in the direction of the barn at about that time, or according to the time set for leaving the house by Baylus and members of the Thurman family, of Scruggs, just about time for the victim to have walked from the Thurman home to the barn where he was slain. Only a few hundred yards further down the road he was on, near the home of Morgan Erby, where he was to purchase the corn and which place he never reached. The Commonwealth only put on four witnesses today and rested its case at 10:15 this morning. Here is some more of the article: " The first witness for the defense was J.L. Thurman, father of the two defendants. His testimony appeared to weaken the cause of his sons by it's inconsistency and the thorough grilling brought out by Attorney Strode. He was on the stand from 10:15 until the court adjourned at 1 o'clock for the noon recess, being on the stand for over three hours. Thurman was caught in a number of errors, one being that regarding the flask of whiskey which was found at the barn with Scruggs. This bottle was said by Baylus to have been first opened before dinner at the Thurman home and they all took a drink. had previously said that he loaned the pint of whiskey to Scruggs but on the stand today he stated he didn't know there was a drop of whiskey in the house until Scruggs pulled it out and asked the crowd to take a drink. He stated that he had forgotten giving the whiskey to Scruggs, though it was given only a few minutes before. He also had stated that he put the overcoat on Scruggs in the house before Baylus, but as has been said Baylus testified that Scruggs left the home without the overcoat on. Thurman when confronted with this, stated that he put the overcoat on Scruggs out on the porch. These and other statements were made to a crowd at the side of the slain Scruggs on the day his lifeless body was found, and Thurman was explaining the presence of his overcoat and making out an albi before his two sons were even accused of having slain Scruggs. This evidence, under the cross examination, was very damaging and was made much capital of by Attorney Light in his speech before the jury. The defense then put on about a dozen other witnesses showing that Leewood Thurman and Scruggs had made up their differences regarding the "beer cutting" and were getting along as friends. It was even shown by three different witnesses that Leewood and Scruggs had been working together on several different occasions at the still of Scruggs, making ______ ______ , together in __ ___ wood had become quite an adept at turning out the white fluid under Scruggs masterful directions, it seemed. Frank Rice was on the stand and he told of a visit to Scruggs' still and of watching he and Leewood making whiskey. " You saw them making whiskey," asked Attorney Strode, " and never went and reported the matter to the revenue officers?" " What-- " said the witness and he was thunderstruck at the idea of such an action as that would have been on his part. They could get no more satisfaction out of the witness and was dismissed from the stand. The defense also showed by the brothers and sisters and the parents of the two boys that they left the Thurman home near or just before 1 o'clock and arrived at the home of another brother about a mile distant somewhere between 1 and 2 o'clock on the day of the killing. Only one witness, Wiley Miles, was placed on the stand by the Commonwealth in rebuttal. He was working on a road which the boys claimed to have traveled to the home of the other brother. Miles stated that he was on the road from 11 o'clock until 2 o'clock, on the day of the tragedy and that the boys never passed that way. He mentioned putting a scoop up on the bank when he stopped. The defense then called Buddie Scruggs, who was with Ulam Thurman on that day and was walking just ahead of Leewood and Tommie, according to their testimony, and he remembered seeing the scoop, but not seeing Miles. The Commonwealth showed by this that it must have therefore been later than 2 o'clock when the boys passed that way. Scruggs is a nephew of the two defendants on his maternal side, and a nephew of the slain man on his paternal side, a brother of "Udy" Scruggs, the victim, having married a sister of Leewood and Tommie Thurman, but who is now dead. The defense then submitted six instructions to the court for the benefit of the jury, four of which were read to the twelve men. " As it was 6 o'clock the attorneys requested that court adjourn, but he held on for another hour and told them to continue the case. Attorney Light then opened for Commonwealth and announced that attorney Aubrey Strode would conclude for the Commonwealth. The attorney launched at once into a bitter arraignment of the two defendants, calling them assassins, in that they had shot Scruggs in the back. He used this point to show conclusively that murder had been committed and that there was no possible chance for a suicide. He laid much stress on the alleged threats of Leewood Thurman to "kill Scruggs" and stated that he had kept those promises. He summed up carefully in a telling manner the chain of circumstantial evidence and alluded to Scruggs as the "Cock of Hell Bend," saying that was why he was shot in the back, for the reason that none in the locality dared to face him openly. He attempted to show how the three, Scruggs, Leewood and Tommie had left the Thurman home, gone to the barn, got to drinking and card playing and said how it was probable that one of the boys took Scrugg's pistol unawares and shot him in the back and then again in the side as he ran away wounded to death. The manner in which the cards were strewn from the box around the corner of the barn he said showed how the hurt man had run to escape the leaden bullets of death. Then he maintained that the track at the dead man's side demonstrated how the assassin placed the man's own gun back into his pocket. He stated that in no other manner could the two exploded shells in the pistol be accounted for. He spoke forty minutes and his speech was considered a strong re-capitulation of the evidence for the opening speech of a murder trist. Court will reconvene at 8:30 in the morning and a decision is looked for sometime tomorrow afternoon, after Attorneys, Drysdale, Murrell and Strode have concluded. It was suggested that the speeches be limited to forty minutes each but this had not been decided tonight."

The News, Lynchburg VA. Friday Morning, July 12, 1912


" Rustburg, July 11, 1912
After being out on the case for three hours and announcing that there was absolutely no chance of agreeing, the jury in the Thurman case was this afternoon, at 4:30 o'clock dismissed for the term by Judge W.R. Barksdale, who presided during the trial. It was later learned that the jury stood seven for second degree murder and would give ten years to both defendants, two for acquittal, and three for murder in the first degree. The jury could not compromise in any way and they so announced to the court who discharged them with his regrets at their not being able to agree. The case has been marked with interest throughout, the neighbors of the Thurmans and Scruggs having come here the first day and have remained since, very few having gone home. Last night the court house was filled with them having been run from the courthouse lawn where they spent the first night by a heavy rain. Speculation as to the outcome has been rife, though it was the general opinion that Leewood Thurman would be convicted and that Tommie stood a good chance of dismissal. The Commonwealth has bent all it's efforts towards Leewood, believing him to be the one who fired the fatal shots, on account of the nature of the wounds, they being directly in the back, or rather one of them. And the _____ arranged in the barn apparently showed that Leewood had sat directly behind Scruggs, from the prints of the shoe nails. If it was not Leewood, it was neither of the others for the reason that the tracks resembled only Leewood's shoes, the special marks being from a patch on the shoe and the heavy hob-nails. " The session of court was resumed this morning at 8:30 o'clock, when Duncan Drysdale addressed the jury for an hour in defense of the two boys. When he concluded, Attorney W.M. Murrell addressed the jury and the case for the Commenwealth was concluded by Attorney Aubrey Strode. Attorney Drysdale went over in detail the bits of testimony which were inimical to his clients and made a careful explanation of each, in an effort to show that each bit of testimony might be construed in a different light from that given by the Commonwealth's Attorney. The attorney then spoke at some length on the danger of convicting a man on circumstantial evidence, stating that if a doubt that any other person could have committed the crime were excluded, the jury should find the defendants guilty, but that if it were in the least possible, that that some other person might have done the deed then they would be compelled to find the defendants not guilty. He made light of the evidence and circumstantial chain to connect his clients with the killing, as deduced by the Commonwealth. At the conclusion of Attorney Drysdale's argument the court allowed the jury to recess for several minutes and upon their return, Attorney Murrell began his remarks. He commented at some length on the zeal of T.S. Scruggs, a brother of the dead man in his efforts to run to earth the murders of his brother. He stated that it was right that he should do so, but that he should exercise care in not letting his zeal carry him to far and thus place innocent people in peril. He also commented on the chain of circumstantial evidence which had been deduced by the Commonwealth and attempted to break it down in places. He laid much stress on the cutting down of the beer and said it was almost a crime in itself, in the Hell Bend neighborhood to do such a thing at Christmas time and thus spoil the pleasure of the whole season. Taking the expression of Attorney Light regarding "Udy" Scruggs, the attorney this morning characterized him as " King of the Hellbenders" and asked if it were not reasonable being such a bad man as was shown, that he probably had other enemies in the community than the two Thurman boys. The desire for vegeance for the part of the Scruggs family Attorney Murrell stated, had caused them to bring their dead brother's name from the grave and hang his character up in a court of justice to be spread, broadcast throughout the land, when modesty should have caused them to blush at such a ___tation. "Udy" Scruggs the victim can ____ for one of the _____ ___ ______ ever heard here. He was declared to be the man who was debauching the youths of the community, giving the boys whiskey, even as he was fattening all the neighborhood hogs on the slops from his still. Regarding the cutting down of the beer, it was testified yesterday, that, " That dam Sam Robertson" was the one who cut it down, to use the alleged words of the murdered man himself. Attorney Murrell used that point to show that a male, or even a female member of the Robertson family might well have done the deed for being cursed regarding the cutting down of the still hops and wasting the beer. " When I was Commonwealth's Attorney of this county, said Mr. Murrell there were a number of murders down there and we have never found out who did them." " There were seven unsolved murders in Hell Bend during that time" said Attorney Light interrupting him. When Attorney Murrell concluded after speaking nearly three hours, court again recessed after which Attorney Aubrey Strode began his speech for the Commonwealth in the conclusion of the case. " Attorney Strode addressed the jury for about an hour and a half in a telling manner. He began his remarks by stating that it was always unpleasant to prosecute any human being for any offence, but that it was a duty he owed his commonwealth as well as it would be the duty of the jury to convict in the evidence was of a nature as to make it their duty to the commonwealth to return a verdict. He then aaunched upon a careful summary of the evidence in the case from the finding of Scrugg's dead body and began to weave the threads of the evidence so as to point to the Thurman boys, connecting them with the killing. He told of how thr first question asked when the body was found was " Who was last seen with the dead man," and showed by the evidence of Jim Baylus that Leewood and Tommie were the last persons seen with Scruggs on the day he was killed, and according to the pistol shots, just a small amount of time before the deed was consumated. The next question was, who had malice against the victim. The attorney endeavered to show that Leewood Thurman had malice against him for several months and that while evidence showed that Scruggs had forgiven him for believing that he cut down the beer, there was no evidence to show that Leewood had forgiven Scruggs for the accusation. He next went into the attempted alibi on the part of the accused and showed that it would not hold water, being at least an hour and a half of time which was unaccounted for, even by the family of the accused boys. His account of theoretical killing of Scruggs was dramatic, and detailing how they had all acted themselves in the barn for the game, how Scruggs had lain his bottle and gun side, and got ready to play, and how his gun was slipped away and he was shot in the back and sprang from the doorway and ran wounded to death, the face of the two youthful prisoners turned deadly pale and neither took their eyes from the attorney during the terrific arraignment of them, as he turned and pointing to them said: " Here they sit, gentlemen of the jury. There sit the men who took "Udy Scruggs" gun away from him and assassinated him, shooting him in the back and leaving him to die in the road, or already dead. And the track was there by the side of the slain man where Leewood Thurman stood over him as he replaced his pistol back into his pocket after he had killed him." Mr. Strode concluded at 1:30 o'clock and the court gave the case to the jury, who retired for dinner and returning went into the jury room about an hour later. They returned to the court room several times for instructions and at 4:30 o'clock the foreman stated that there was no hope of agreeing, and the court discharged them and held the defendants in bonds of $2000 each for their appearance at the September term of court."

Return to Callahan Cemetery page

This page hosted by GeoCities Get your own Free WebPage