Volume 8 , Issue 19

Old Opera House Murder - The Preliminary...

(left - Judge R. A. Cameron)

The preliminary hearing was originally scheduled for Nov. 24, 1910, but by mutual consent of attorneys it was postponed until December 1, 1910, Thursday, 10 o'clock a.m. County Judge Cameron came down with a serious illness and the 10 o'clock a.m. hearing had to be postponed until 2:00 p.m. By the time 2:00 p.m. rolled around Judge Cameron still felt unequal to the task of presiding and the preliminary was again postponed until 9 a.m., Friday, December 2, 1910. And... Again postponed to December 8, 1910 because of Judge R. A. Cameron's ill health.

When the preliminary finally took place, Justice N. L. Miller, charged with the murder of Mabel Oakes in the Old Opera House, November 9th, which had been set for 10 o'clock Thursday morning, December 1, was postponed until 2 o'clock p.m., Thursday, owing to the indisposition of County Judge R. A. Cameron. The Judge's condition had been so serious for some days preceding this date, that Attorney J. N. Tincher, of Medicine Lodge, employed by Mr. Oakes for the prosecution, had been notified that the preliminary could not possibly proceed and sequently he was not present in the morning.

December 8, 1910 came around with Judge Cameron on the bench, with County Attorney Claud McCrory, Attorneys J. N. Tincher and Moman Pruiett for the Prosecution and Attorneys Erskine W. Snoddy, Judge L. T. Wilson and C. H. Mauntel for the Defense. The accused N. L. Miller was also present and the court room was crowded with spectators, except for the students of the Normal school.

On the opening of the preliminary, the attorneys for the defense announced that, they would waive preliminary examination. The counsel for the state then announced that they wished to introduce and perpetuate the testimony of Dr. Saffold. The reasons assigned were, "Dr. Saffold was a most important witness in the case, that he had removed his residence from the county, that he was now present in court and that by perpetuating his testimony it would not be necessary to require his attendance during the subsequent trial of the case."

This introduction of testimony of Dr. Saffold brought an objection to the proceeding from the defense counsel as irregular on the grounds that when the defendant waived preliminary examination that no further proceedings in the case should be taken.

Judge Cameron over-ruled the objection of the counsel for the defense taking the position that he saw no reason why Dr. Saffold's testimony should not be taken. What was the real reason why the Judge over-rule the Defense's objection?

There was sparring between Judge L. T. Wilson and Attorney Moman Pruiett in the preliminary, but the local newspapers reported that it produced no serious results.

The Old Opera House Mystery of 1910 will continue in the July/August edition of the Prairie Connection with more testimony from the September, 1911 murder trial of Nelson L. Miller. Stay tuned. Wouldn't it have been interesting if DNA would have been in use back in 1910?

  |  View or Add Comments (1 Comments)   |   Receive updates ( subscribers)  |   Unsubscribe

---