Testimony played a significant role in presentations by both the prosecution and defense during trial of Patrick Eugene Prendergast in 1893, on murder charges for killing (assassinating) Chicago Mayor Carter Harrison III. The assassination and trial was a prominent affair, being heavily covered by news media. Some contemporary journal literature related to the trial has called into question the relevant expertise of medical professionals that had testified in the trial as expert witnesses.
Prendergast's action of having killing Harrison was not contested in the trial. Instead, the defense argued an insanity plea. Since outcome of the case rested on determining whether Prendergast was sane (guilty) or insane (not guilty by reason of insanity), the cases presented by both the defense and prosecution relied heavily on testimony. Expert witnesses testified on their professional opinions about Prendergast's sanity. Lay witnesses' testified about Prendergast's history, personality, and behavior.
The trial resulted in a guilty verdict, and Prendergast was sentenced to death by hanging.
Importance and qualifications of expert witnesses Expert testimony (by the era's understanding of expertise) made up a very large portion of the testimony heard in the trial.
At the time, expert witnesses for matters of sanity tended to be medical doctors regardless of whether they held any specialty granting them understanding of behavior. The specialized fields of psychiatry and psychology had not yet been properly established. Additionally, nonprofessionals were held by courts as permissible expert witnesses. This meant that a mere "common sense" view of sanity could be admitted as expert opinion. Resultantly, when the prosecution brought a medical doctor to testify that Prendergast's display of fear while jailed was an indication of sanity, the medical doctor was not an alienist (psychiatrist). During the trial, several medical doctors testified on behalf of the prosecution to assert that, while Prendergast was paranoid, he still knew right from wrong and that he was capable of standing trial for the murder.
In a journal article published in The American Law Register and Review in 1894, H. M. Bannister cast doubt on the psychiatric knowledge of several of the prosecution's expert witnesses (including Dr. Bluthardt).Also available at:
An editorial in the February 1894 edition of The Journal of the American Medical Association called into question the ethics involved with much of the expert testimony given in the trial, suggesting,
An editorial in the July 1894 edition of The Journal of the American Medical Association (which expressed agreement with the outcome of the trial) called into question the expertise of many of the expert witnesses both the prosecution and defense had called to the stand.
In a July 1895 journal article published in Medical Record, physician J. R. Ransom opined that, "the case was clearly one for medical testimony to decide on. Ransom believed that the physicians that case opted against calling (due to their determination that he was insane) had more relevant credentials towards determining sanity than the medical doctor the state called to testify to the opinion that Prendergast was sane. Ransom characterized the latter as, "a surgeon with considerable local reputation making no claim, however, to expert knowledge of insanity."
A 2002 journal article by Edward M. Burke that was published in the Journal of Criminal Law & Criminology notes that the prosecution's expert witnesses ignored key aspects of Prendergast's biography that had been outlined by lay witnesses for the defense,
Testimony during the prosecution's presentation After Wade finished the defense's opening statement, the prosecution's arguments began.
In the two days which followed the end of opening remarks, a parade of witnesses for the prosecution were questioned before the court to establish facts.Also available at: The prosecution relied primarily on laypeople as witnesses, rather than expert witnesses. Thirty non-medical witnesses were called, many of them being individuals casual connections of Prendergast who they brought to illustrate that Prendergast was sane. This included the judge that had presided over the arraignment, despite the fact that Prendergast had only appeared before that judge for less than ten minutes.
December 13 The prosecution's first witnesses included several house staff of Harrison's. The first witness to testify was parlor maid Mary Hansen, who had let Pendergast into the residence on the evening of the murder. Her testimony was followed by the testimonies of Helma Johnson (Harrison's other housemaid), Harrison's cook, and Bartha Reisberg (Harrison's coachman). Also testifying about the circumstances of the night of the assassination was Harrison's son William Preston Harrison.
December 14: close of the prosecution's presentation News reporter Edward P. Stone testified that he had interviewed Prendergast at the Chicago Police Department's Central Station on the night the murder occurred and that Prendergast had divulged details of the murder, including that his motivation for murdering Harrison was both Harrison's failure to appoint him as corporation counsel, as well as his own deeply-held concerns about the need for the city to grade-separate the city's railroad tracks through elevation. Desk sergeant O. Z. Barbour testified about Prendergast's surrender at the Des Plains Street police station and the confession he delivered there.
Harrison's daughter Sophie Harrison was called to testify. She was noted to have been highly emotionally overwhelmed while providing testimony about her father's murder. Her emotional state led to the prosecution deciding to cut short their questioning of her. Consequentially, prosecutors opted to keep her testimony short, only asking her questions that established a handful of important facts about the killing. The defense declined to cross examine her. Her testimony was followed by that of Frank A. McDonald, another desk sergeant of the Des Plains police station. McDonald testified that he had overheard Prendergast tell John S. Walsh (an operator at the station) that he had shot Harrison because believed that Harrison had betrayed his confidence. Walsh testified next, and corroborated McDonald's account.
Next to testify was Harrison's neighbor W. J. Chalmers, who recounted the mayor's death. Several other neighbors of Prendergast also testified about witnessing aspects of that night (including some testimony of witness accounts Prendergast entering the residence, sounds of gunshots, and the sight of Prendergast fleeing). Benjamin Price, a deputy jailer that had supervised Prendergast's detention, testified that in the morning after the murder Prendergast had personally asked him for the morning's newspaper because he wanted to read the news coverage of the assassination. Detective S. D. McCarthy testified that he had attempted to get Prendergast to divulge where he had purchased the murder weapon, but that Prendergast would only share that he had purchased it from a second-hand shoe salesman who operated on Milwaukee Avenue.
An adjournment took place until 2pm local time, due to the inability of the prosecutor's only remaining witnesses to be available to testify until then. When the court reconvened at 2pm for its afternoon session, the prosecutor's called the final witness' of their presentation: Dr. Louis G. Mitchell and Dr. Ludvig Hektoen, the two doctors that had conducted Harrison's autopsy. Mitchell testified about his findings. Dr. Hektoen's testimony corroborated Mitchell's. The three bullets that had been extracted from Harrison's corpse were produced. The final action in the prosecution's presentation was entering the bullets into evidence. On December 14 at 2:25pm local time, the prosecution rested.
Testimony during the defense's presentation December 14: start of the defense's presentation Testimony of Ellen (mother of the defendant)
The defense's presentation began on December 14 after the prosecution rested their's. The first witness they called was Prendergast's mother, Ellen Prendergast. They regarded her to be their strongest and most important witness. The purpose of her testimony was to provide evidence that Prendergast was insane. She also established general biographic information about his life, his education, and his employment history. She testified that Prendergast had been a reserved and studious child, but had suffered from a poor memory. Mrs. Prendergast testified that, as a child, Prendergast had also experienced a personality change following his father's death.
She testified that at the age of 16, Prendergast had left home without cause for four weeks, and that not too long after he left school amid his father's poor health to take a job as a courier for Western Union. However, not too long later he had believed himself to be entering a decline in health, and traveled to New Mexico for twelve weeks, upon returning from which he had the appearance of a tramp. She testified that had the age of seventeen, he became more antisocial, and began to demand that he sleep in private rather than share a sleeping quarters with his brother. She also testified that it was around this time had he developed his obsessive fascination with the writings of Henry George. She also testified to his increasing obsession with Henry George's economic philosophies and with religion.
Mrs. Prendergast testified further than roughly a year prior to the trial, she had believed her son was becoming crazy in his obsession with city politics and the matter of elevating railroad tracks above grade. She testified that it was around this time that began expressing his delusional confidence that he would receive an appointment as corporation counsel, and that when she had attempted to reason with him on the matter he became angry and ranted at her before disappearing from her life for the following three months. She testified that he, at some point then, traveled to Wisconsin, only returning in July 1893. She testified that two weeks prior to the assassination, he visited her and asked for her to return to his possession his dumbbells because he wanted to exercise and gain strength in order to provide for his personal defense. She testified that this exchange ended with a tirade in which he mentioned his concern of what he believed to be severe problems in the Catholic Church and told her he had written instructions to all of the priests and to the Archbishop on how to fix. She testified that was the last he had heard from him prior to the assassination.
In cross examination, Trude had Mrs. Prendergast confirm that she had initially commented shortly following the assassination that her son was sane. He also had her confirm that she had never before shared beliefs of her son's insanity prior to the assassination. She admitted that she did not notice that her son had any symptoms of insanity and that nobody had previously told her than they considered his behavior peculiar, with the exception of his more recent obsession with George's single tax theory. Also during the cross-examination, by seeming accident, brought up that Prendergast had been seriously injured as a baby after hitting his head after a fall from a height of four feet, and that this incident had left lasting damage to his eyesight. Trude questioned her further on this, amid which Prendergast lost his temper and shouted, "Trude, you are a scoundrel to talk to my mother that way." A reporter for the Chicago Tribune opined that during the proceedings on December 14, Prendergast had, "exhibited the greatest insolence towards everyone around him, and made running comments on all that occurred."
Testimony of Brother Baldwin (former superintendent of St. Patrick's Academy)