Skip to main content

Judge Caverly’s Sentencing

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Retrying Leopold and Loeb

Part of the book series: SpringerBriefs in Psychology ((BRIEFSBC))

  • 186 Accesses

Abstract

Judge Caverly indicated that, “[T]he State was in possession not only of the essential substantiating facts, but also of voluntary confessions on the part of the defendants. The plea of guilty, therefore, does not make a special case in favor of the defendants… The testimony introduced both by the prosecution and the defense has been detailed and elaborate, as though the case had been tried before a jury. It has been given the widest publicity and the public is so fully familiar with all its phases that it would serve no useful purpose to restate or analyze the evidence.”

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 44.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 59.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2018 Springer International Publishing AG

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Shapiro, D.L., Golden, C., Ferguson, S. (2018). Judge Caverly’s Sentencing. In: Retrying Leopold and Loeb. SpringerBriefs in Psychology(). Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-74600-5_4

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics