The State vs. Rehberg case of 1885 was a very controversial one. The decision reached in the nineteenth century was not solely based on evidence. Many other factors such as social class, cultural beliefs about childhood, pre-conceived ideas about men and women, as well as religious beliefs also played a major role in the decision. While a nineteenth century jury may have declared Edward Rehberg guilty of murder, a twentieth century jury may believe that he was innocent based on many pieces of evidence found in the State vs. Rehberg.
Many factors went into play when deciding a nineteenth century verdict. In the nineteenth century, many things were based on social class and wealth. In the State vs. Rehberg case, the Rehberg family was a lower class family. Nineteenth century men were thought of to be the aggressors and disciplinarians of the family. In lower class families, men were "looked down upon" because they had a low social status. Lower class men also made their daughter’s work and the daughters often wore overalls which would never happen in wealthy families. The women of the nineteenth century were often seen as the caregivers. They took care of the family and were often viewed as passive. They were said to be physically weaker than men but had good moral judgment. In nineteenth century trials, a man’s word was often more important than a woman’s.
Nineteenth century juries also took other factors into consideration. Since the nation was a primarily Christian nation at the time, they accepted deathbed statements because almost everyone believed in an afterlife. "She whipped me (my step-mother) with a stick of wood and with a stove lifter, and then went to the corral and got a strap, and whipped me with that on the face and legs and all over." [1] In this quote from her deathbed statement, Clara confessed that is was actually her stepmother who abused her and caused her injuries which led to her death. This factor could have helped Edward Rehberg but didn’t. Clara Rehberg was quizzed to test her values to see if she would make a good witness but she had many factors against her. "When we dressed her wounds and would hurt her a little she would swear at us." [2] This statement given by Dr. Steele shows that Clara swore which was viewed as morally wrong. Clara also came from a lower class family which was a second strike against her. When Clara gave her deathbed statement, she was in a lot of pain and "she could not see so well." [3] She also had "a strong fever." [4] This fever could have made her delusional and makes the jury believe she could not think straight. These factors would lead one to believe that the jury threw away her deathbed statement. Due to these factors, it would be safe to assume that the jury comes in with pre-conceived ideas about the trial and the people involved. Since Edward Rehberg was a low class male and since Clara’s statement was thrown probably thrown out, they most likely found Edward guilty.
Twentieth century juries would have looked at the case differently. They would have probably found Edward Rehberg innocent. There is a lot of evidence saying that he was innocent. Social status still played a role in twentieth century trials. People also came in with pre-conceived ideas even though they were supposed to be neutral. One of the main differences was that twentieth century juries took more evidence into consideration. Clara’s statement would have been examined more closely. She had no reason to lie about who abused her. Throughout the case one can also find many statements saying that Edward and Clara didn’t have much contact with each other during the day of the abuse. One of these statements includes one made by Bertha Rehberg. "I would have known it if my father had beaten the child Sunday forenoon. Father and the hired man left the house to go to work right after dinner about one o’clock that afternoon. Clara was in the kitchen." [5] This statement would have been accepted in the twentieth century whereas in the nineteenth century it wouldn’t have been as important because a woman said it. Another statement which is of importance was that of Joe Tiebow. "He did not leave me at all…" [6] Tiebow’s statement is important because he was not in the family so he had no reason to lie. He states that Edward was with him all day so there is no way he could have abused Clara.
Nineteenth and twentieth century juries would have declared different verdicts. The nineteenth century jury would have probably said guilty while the twentieth century jury would have probably said not guilty. This case was very controversial and different because children don’t often come up in history. Much of the evidence in the State vs. Rehberg can be interpreted differently, which makes the case even more difficult to solve.
http://www.archiva.net/hist150ay01/hist150rehberg1.html - homepage
http://www.courts.state.va.us/courts/courts.html - about different types of court cases in VA, including juvenile cases
[1] State vs. Rehberg, Reader, 32.
[2] State vs. Rehberg, Reader, 31.
[3] State vs. Rehberg, Reader, 31.
[4] State vs. Rehberg, Reader, 22.
[5] State vs. Rehberg, Reader, 21.
[6] State vs. Rehberg, Reader, 27.
Comments