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.”
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2018 Springer International Publishing AG
About this chapter
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
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-74600-5_4
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-74599-2
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-74600-5
eBook Packages: Behavioral Science and PsychologyBehavioral Science and Psychology (R0)