Neither Fear Nor Favor: Deputy United States Marshal John Tom Sisemore

by Wesley Harris

  The one person in Ruston respected more than Judge Barksdale was Evander Graham. He was Barksdale’s predecessor, having served as district judge for many years. People still urged him to run for office, but his campaigning days were over.

  Graham had risen to lieutenant colonel in the 12th Louisiana Regiment during the War. Unlike many veterans who were still called by their military rank, Graham was always referred to as “the Judge.”

  Judge Graham would help in the planning of strategy but would not appear in the courtroom. At sixty-one, he was the oldest of the attorneys participating in the case.

  Seek to quash the indictment, Graham had recommended. Inexplicably, the D.A. had failed to present the case to the June grand jury. Graham suspected improprieties in the selection of the August grand jury. Get it thrown out, Graham urged, and the district attorney might not be able to obtain a second indictment.

  Price and the others set to work.

  CHAPTER TWENTY-FOUR

  Special to the Times.

  Ruston, La., Sept. 14---District court has been occupied this week with criminal business. Today the case against J. T. Sisemore was begun and after several hours only three jurors have been accepted. This case will be fought hard on both sides, as both the state and defense have some of the ablest attorneys in this section of the state employed. A large majority of the citizens of the parish feel sure that Sisemore will be acquitted and no blame attached to him for the killing of Mullins. Mr. Sisemore was acting in the capacity of town marshal at the time of the killing. The town is crowded with people from all parts of the parish who feel an interest in the trial.

  Cotton continues to come in briskly, this place having received something near 1000 bales this season.

  Wednesday, September 14, 1898

  September brought the harvest to town. Cotton wagons and people jammed the streets of Ruston. Frenzied farmers and shopkeepers rushed to complete their work in hopes to have a few moments to attend the trial.

  The courtroom was packed. Spectators filled the oak benches and lined the walls. Beyond the bar sat two tables of lawyers. C. B. Roberts and George Wear conferred at the prosecutor’s table. One man was the contrast of the other. Wear was tall and dignified and the older of the two by a decade. Roberts sweated in an ill-fitting suit. Fred Price and B. P. Edwards sat on one side of John Sisemore. About two years earlier, Price had formed a partnership with Joseph Barksdale, the judge’s son. Joe had graduated from Ruston College and gone on to Tulane. The two lawyers had decided it would be better if Joe did not appear in front of his father. Most of their business did not involve appearing in a courtroom, anyway. Edwards was a new addition to the firm. When his conversational style with witnesses did not work, he could quickly change to a skilled interrogator, eliciting the desired testimony from witnesses.

  On Sisemore’s other side sat C. W. Seals, another new member of the firm. Seals’s addition was a temporary one. He was a partner with E. H. McClendon in Homer. McClendon had served the region as district attorney for twelve consecutive years before Roberts took office.

  Stephen D. Pearce, Judge Graham’s partner, sat beside Seals. Like Seals, Pearce had learned much from his much older partner and mentor.

  The attempt to quash the indictment had failed. Judge Barksdale refused to dismiss the charge. The attorneys had split up the witnesses among themselves and prepared thoroughly for the battle ahead.

  The splendor of the courthouse exterior failed to extend inside. The courtroom was plain and nondescript. The walls were devoid of any decoration, the floor bare planks. The lack of seating stirred talk of the need for a new courthouse.

  A door opened, prompting the bailiff to stand.

  “O yez, o yez, o yez, the Court for the Third Judicial District of the State of Louisiana is now in session. The honorable Allen Barksdale presiding.”

  ***

  The opposing sides spent much of the morning choosing the jury. Selection moved with speed, as the attorneys knew where most of the prospective jurors stood on matters of law and order and prohibition.

  The prosecution and defense used five strikes each to remove prospective jurors not to their liking. Roberts struck William Mullin, one of Ruston’s early mayors, and J. N. Simonton and Milton Riser, both prominent parish residents.

  Eight men were removed for cause. They either opposed capital punishment or stated they have already drawn strong conclusions regarding the guilt or innocence of the defendant.

  By lunch, twelve jurors had been selected and a recess was called. “Roberts struck off some good folks, but I think we did alright.” Price handed the list to Sisemore. “What do you think, John?”

  “Fine by me.” He passed the list back to Price.

  ***

  After lunch, it was finally time for opening statements. Roberts cleared his throat as he left his chair and walked to the jury box.

  “Gentlemen, the State intends to prove, well beyond any doubt I might add, that the hatred and enmity John Sisemore held for the deceased were overwhelming. That John Sisemore’s judgment was clouded by this hatred when dealing with Frank Mullins. That on the night in question, John Sisemore seized an opportunity to vent his wrath upon Frank Mullins, murdering him.”

  The heat rose in the crowded courtroom. Roberts stopped to pull a handkerchief from his coat pocket and wiped his brow.

  “Now,” Roberts continued, “there is no doubt in my mind, nor in the minds of most in this courtroom that John Sisemore has done much good in this town and the surrounding country. He has performed his duties with unparalleled zeal and unusual vigor. I have prosecuted many of his cases and worked with him closely.”

  Roberts paused and moved closer to the jury, placing his hands on the railing and leaning forward. He changed to a deeper tone and in measured breaths said, “But I am afraid the evidence in this case will shock you. It will show you a John Sisemore few people know. The State will prove that not only did John Sisemore murder Frank Mullins in cold blood, but that he planned for some time to do so. The State also intends to prove that the defendant John Sisemore shot and killed an unarmed, defenseless man.

  “We intend to show that on the night in question Frank Mullins did not have a gun and was not shooting up the town as some contend. The defense would have you believe Frank Mullins was a threat to the safety of the town and the defendant. We will prove that contention untrue and without basis. We will show that several shotgun blasts fired by John Tom Sisemore were the sole cause of death of the deceased.

  “I derive no pleasure from prosecuting this man. Admittedly, he has made this community a safer place to live. But the ends do not justify the means. Justice must prevail, gentlemen, and despite our personal feelings, we must uphold the law. I call upon you to hear the evidence and render a verdict that avenges the death of Frank Mullins.”

  Edwards had been chosen to give the defense’s opening statement.

  “John Tom Sisemore,” he began, “in the course of his duties, arrested Frank Mullins numerous times. On at least two occasions, the deceased attempted to kill the defendant. Why? John Sisemore is the one man who effectively disrupted Frank Mullins’s illegal operations. Mullins felt great animus for Mr. Sisemore and even went to great lengths to make this justified shooting look like murder.

  “That, gentlemen, is what we intend to prove. The evidence will demonstrate just the opposite of what the district attorney has described. Frank Mullins was armed that night. He threatened John Sisemore and would have killed him had the marshal not defended himself.”

  ***

  Dr. Griffin was called as the first witness. “I went to the Duty House at the request of Dr. Harrell,” he recalled. “We consulted and decided there was nothing we could do for Mr. Mullins. His wounds were fatal. We gave him something to quieten him and relieve the pain. There were sixteen wounds in the abdomen and one on the back of his right thigh and one near the knee. The shots entered the abdomen at somewhat of an angle, some of the balls remaining ju
st under the skin. The bowels were punctured and possibly the liver.”

  “How close would you estimate the shooter was to Mr. Mullins?” Roberts asked.

  “I would say very close. The wounds to the abdomen were within an area roughly within eight inches in diameter.”

  “Tell us about the wound to the thigh.”

  “There was one wound to the right thigh, apparently buckshot.”

  “Could this wound have been inflicted at the same time as the wound to the abdomen?” asked Roberts.

  “No, it probably came from another blast.”

  “Would you presume that the victim had his back to the shooter at the time he received that wound?” asked Roberts.

  “He could have, yes.” Griffin continued. “As I said earlier, the wound to the abdomen entered from an angle which could have had the effect of spinning the body around. Or, after the wound to the abdomen, Mr. Mullins could have been staggering or falling, exposing the back of the thigh to the shooter.”

  “You testified the wound to the abdomen was inflicted from a short distance. Wouldn’t the wounds to the leg indicate the victim was much further away and did not receive the full impact of all the pellets?”

  “Yes, that’s one possibility.”

  “Or it could be,” surmised Roberts, “that the deceased was running away from the gunfire when the shot to the thigh was fired.”

  “Objection!” Price rose to his feet. “The question does not call for the doctor’s qualified opinion, but pure speculation.”

  “Sustained,” ruled the judge.

  “No more questions for this witness,” Roberts announced.

  Price took over. “Dr. Griffin, from your examination, is there any way to determine the sequence of the shots?”

  “No.”

  “Have you examined gunshot victims before?”

  The physician nodded. “On many occasions.”

  “Has it been your experience that strange things can occur regarding the location of wounds and how projectiles travel through the body?”

  “Yes, quite so.”

  “So, any conclusions we draw from the wound locations are, at best, educated opinions and at worst, wild conjecture.”

  “I would agree with that description. It is difficult to draw definite conclusions regarding the distance between shooter and victim, or angle of the gunfire. It is not an exact science.”

  “When Mr. Roberts asked you if the presence of only two balls in the leg indicated those wounds were inflicted from at greater distance, you said that was one possibility. What are the others?”

  “The shooter may simply have missed,” Griffin answered. “Or they could have ricocheted off something. There are many explanations for those two wounds. Unless the shot was at point-blank range where the pattern from a shotgun would still be tight, there is no reason to find these solitary pellets unusual.”

  While the physician left the courtroom to attend his patients, Roberts studied papers at the prosecutors’ table.Judge Barksdale looked at Roberts impatiently.

  “Who is your next witness?” the judge asked.

  “Ah...Dan Roane, Your Honor,” Roberts replied.

  “Dan Roane, come forward,” called Barksdale.

  The young man walked slowly to the witness stand, obviously uncomfortable in a suit.

  “On the night of February 26, did you have occasion to be near Gullatt’s store?” Roberts inquired.

  “Yes, I walked by there.”

  “Did you see anything unusual?”

  “I saw a man crouched beside a post near the store. Like he was waiting for someone. I couldn’t tell who he was, but he had a gun.”

  “What kind of gun?”

  “A pistol...I don’t know what kind.”

  “What happened then?”

  “I just kept on walking. Not long after that, I heard gunfire and someone told me what had happened.”

  Roberts looked over at Price and his associates. “Your witness.”

  Price asked, “Mr. Roane, you cannot identify the person you saw, can you?”

  “No, it was too dark.”

  “Since you don’t know who it was, you could have no idea of his purpose for being there, could you?”

  “No, I guess not.”

  “Did you hear the gunfire earlier that evening?”

  “Yes, I did.”

  “Would it be reasonable for an officer of the law to have his gun out while he was searching for whoever was shooting up the town?”

  “Objection.” Charles Roberts rose from his chair. “Calls for speculation by the witness.”

  “I will withdraw the question, Your Honor,” Price said.

  Turning back to Roane, Price asked, “So, you do not know if the person you saw crouching behind a post with a pistol in his hand was John Sisemore, Frank Mullins, or someone else, do you?

  “No, it was too dark.”

  “Nothing further, Your Honor.”

  ***

  “Your next witness, Mr. Roberts?” asked the judge. It was obvious Barksdale wanted to keep the trial moving.

  “Yes, Your Honor; the State calls Sam Barksdale.”

  The judge’s second son, Samuel, took the stand. Roberts asked him what he was doing on the night in question.

  “I was in Mayor Price’s office working on some papers.”

  “What brought your attention to the matter at hand?”

  Barksdale took a deep breath and continued. “I heard a gunshot and then Mr. Mullins yelled, ‘Oh! Oh! Oh!’ quite loud. I opened the door and heard Mullins say, ‘John, quit shooting at me. That was not me that shot.’ Then I heard two more shots and then I heard Mr. Sisemore say, ‘You are a damn liar’.”

  “Did you know Mr. Mullins?” asked Roberts.

  “Not well, but yes, I knew him.”

  “Then you had no problem recognizing his voice?”

  “No.”

  “And of course you know Mr. Sisemore as well and recognized his voice?”

  “Yes.”

  “Are you sure of those words, Mr. Barksdale? He called Mr. Mullins a ‘damn liar’?”

  “Yes, he did.”

  “What did you do after the shooting?”

  “Once I knew the street was clear, I left the office, went up the Brick Row and by the bank and then by Burgess’s store and the barber shop. I found some other men on the street and we talked. About thirty minutes later, I went to the Duty House where Mr. Mullins was being tended.”

  “Did you hear Mr. Mullins make any statements before he died?”

  “Yes.”

  “What were those statements, as accurately as you can recall them?”

  “He said he was coming down the Brick Row toward the Duty House and had reached Gullatt’s when he heard Sisemore say, ‘Who is that?’ Mr. Mullins said he answered, ‘It is me’ and Sisemore asked, ‘Is that you, Frank?’ Mr. Mullins said he answered him and Sisemore asked him, ‘Was that you that shot?’ and Mullins replied that he did not.”

  “What else did Mr. Mullins say?”

  “He said he was face to face with Mr. Sisemore and Sisemore shot him in the stomach. He told ‘John’ to quit shooting him, that it was not him that shot, and ran off toward the livery stable. He said as he ran away, Sisemore shot at him twice, hitting him in the leg.”

  “Mr. Barksdale, how many shots did you hear on the night of February 26?”

  “I heard three.”

  “Those are the shots you heard as Mullins and Sisemore were speaking?”

  “Yes.”

  “As I understand your testimony, you heard one shot and then Mr. Mullins screaming for Sisemore to quit shooting, and then two more shots in rapid succession?”

  “Yes.”

  Roberts walked back towards his chair. “Your Honor, I have no further questions for this witness.”

  The judge nodded to the defense table. “Your witness.”

  “Sam, I only have a few questions.” Price stated. “You did not see the shooting a
t all, did you?”

  “No sir, I did not.”

  “You were inside a building with the doors and windows closed, is that correct?”

  “Yes, it is.”

  “When you went to the Duty House, did you see Mr. Mullins’s gun?”

  “No. I heard it was there, but I did not see it.”

  ***

  Judge Barksdale called a recess for one hour. John Tom stood up and stretched. Melancholy and fatigue marked his face with dark wrinkles.

  CHAPTER TWENTY-FIVE

  Wednesday, September 14, 1898

  The State calls Mrs. E. M. Sherwood.” The buxom woman marched to the witness stand.

  “Do you recall seeing Frank Mullins on the night of February 26?” Roberts asked.

  Sherwood nodded. “I was standing on the porch and Mr. Mullins came limping up. He said, ‘Mrs. Sherwood, John Sisemore has shot me, but I don’t know how bad. What must I do?’ I told him to come into the nearest room and get in bed. I sent someone for the doctor because I could tell it was bad.”

  “Did Mr. Mullins have a room there?”

  “Yes, he stayed there from time to time. I did not think he could make it to his room, so I put him in a vacant bed downstairs.”

  “Did Mr. Mullins say anything else to you?”

  “He began to tell me about the shooting. He said he ran into Mr. Sisemore out on the street. Sisemore said ‘who is that?’ and Mr. Mullins said he answered him. He said Sisemore asked him if he had been shooting and Mullins said no, he had not. That’s when Mr. Sisemore shot him.”

  “What else did Mr. Mullins say?”

  “He said, ‘Mrs. Sherwood, you go up in my room and look under the head of my bed and you will find my pistol.’”

  “Did you do so?”

  “Well, at first I hesitated, and he begged me twice more, so I went and got the pistol. When I got back, the doctors were there.”

  “Please tell the jury exactly where you found the pistol.”