#8 State of Montana vs. Rehberg and societies impact on the outcome

In the 1885 case of the State of Montana vs. Edward Rehberg, the eleven-year-old daughter, Clara, sustained sever physical injuries that led to her death on August 5, 1885. Her father, Edward Rehberg, is on trial as the aggressor who inflicted these injuries upon his daughter, resulting in her death (State vs. Rehberg). We as a group feel that if the state of Montana vs. Rehberg was held in the 20th century instead of the 19th; society’s current views on gender and social status would be different enough to change the verdict in the case.
    Unfortunately, during the 19th century, there were no tests that could be performed to determine exactly what means of brutality caused the wounds on a body. This being the unfortunate situation, the items could not have been found and tested for the child’s and fathers DNA. So, the only evidence that could be used to defend Mr. Rehberg were the testimonies by his family. The only family member who was, and gave an eyewitness testimony, was Clara right before she died. Since she was a young girl who seemed to be angry at the fact that she was dying, her death bed testimonies did not hold any weight in court, deeming her testimony inadmissible. Joe Tieblow, the hired farm hand, and all the other children who testified, confirm the fact that Rehberg was not near Clara Rehberg, nor did he leave Tieblow's side all day. Emma Rehberg, in her testimony, stated that Clara was inside with their stepmother almost the entire day. Despite these testimonies, this knowledge led the jury to convict the father because of societies opinion on men and poor families (State v. Rehberg).
    During the 19th century, society’s views of men and women were skewed to the roles they undertook within a family. Women are thought to always be nurturing and loving to their children. While men are thought to already be aggressive in nature, as well as the parent to discipline the children more so then the mother. So, the accusations that it was Rehberg’s wife was the one who harmed the child were considered preposterous.  Beside the stereotypes set inside the juries head, the accusations that Rehberg’s wife was the guilty party were stricken from the record due to an objection on the grounds of improper cross-examination. Plus, society’s view of the poor and their families are not ones filled with love. Poor families are stereotyped as trashy and uncivilized; as seen in the second picture which displays a farm family eating dinner. This would give reason to Rehberg abusing his daughter if this type of behavior “always” occurs within this social class. This is why our group believes that due to the social norms of this time period, the original verdict in this case was guilty.
    In contrast, having the same case occur in the 20th century, we as a group believe that Edward Rehberg’s innocence could easily have been proven. The United States courts have seen many cases since the State vs. Rehberg that show abuse on children, more importantly cases in which the abuse was performed by the child’s mother. Andrea Yates who killed her five children as well as the case where Lashaun Harris killed her three children, are some of the most publicized. Since society is now aware that mothers are capable of horrible acts of violence upon their children, the investigators and jury would not as easily dismiss the possibility of Rehberg’s wife being guilty. Although some stereotypes remain in current day society, the prevalence of finding the truth in all cases remains the main goal of the U.S. courts. Today, lawyers, prosecutors and defense lawyers have been better equipped with knowledge needed to debate a case in its truest form. We also believe that all the testimonies proving the father’s lack of contact with the girl and his crippling arthritis would have been solid evidence for his innocence. It is our belief that if the case were to be tried again in the 20th century, the jury would find Mr. Rehberg innocent.
    It’s amazing that the verdict in a case with as serious of a charge like murder or manslaughter could be swayed depending on the time period in which it occurred.  We as a group feel that this is exactly what could have happened. The view of a poor family was one lacking sophistication and basic human actions. During this time period it was thought impossible for women to harm an innocent child due to their maternal instincts and lack of physical strength. Women today are viewed equally to men in most aspects, and could easily be a suspect for murder as any man.

[1] Science & Society Picture Library. [Time-lapse photographs of a woman and child, 1872-1885]. In Photography of Motion, Muybridge in Cinematography & Film in ENTERTAINMENT & MEDIA from Science Museum Library. [Online]: http://www.scienceandsociety.co.uk/results.asp?image=10437727&wwwflag=2&imagepos=120. [November 11, 2005].

[2] Science & Society Picture Library. [Farmer Giles’ Establishment, Christmas Day, 1830]. In Families in People & Personal Life in SOCIETY & WARS from Science Museum Pictorial. [Online]. http://www.scienceandsociety.co.uk/results.asp?image=10422272&wwwflag=2&imagepos=22. [November 11, 2005].

Group Report:

This group blog was good, besides a few small kinks.  Candice and Taylor wrote out the outline for the paper and Candice ended up writing up the main paper.  Lauren and Estefanie added very useful research for the group; and Jamison revised the paper.  After a rocky start, the group worked well together to admiss this product.

State vs. Rehberg, Reader, History 120, Fall 2005 

Location of the first picture: [1]
Location of the second picture: [2]   

Comments

[Vernon Eppard]

You did a good job of giving reasons of why the jury would have acted differently from one time period to the next.

You however used words that made your entire post lose conviction. Feel and believe make it sound like you are unsure of whether or not what you are saying is right. It's helpful to avoid the first person. When you do that you eliminate the possibilty of the phrase "We believe."

Also, your post lacks credibility in another way. You do not site any source in the actual writing. There aren't any books or websites sited that can give a proffessional's expert opinion to strengthen your assertion. Try to find something in the text book that would fit in to your paper. There is not much material online to use but the text book has atleast a few references for you to use.

Lastly, you may want to work on your topic sentences. These are the sentences at the begginning of each paragraph and tells exactly what the paragraph is about. Make sure that your topic sentences do just that.

[James Kim]

Hey Group. I thought your thesis statement was well confined and arguable. I also felt that you guys backed it up in your body paragraphs. One suggestion I have for your group is to fix the sentences up grammar-wise. For example, the first couple of sentences in your third paragraph could have been fixed up to sound more clearer. Another suggestion I have for you guys that would make your paper stronger is adding and citing more sources. My last suggestion for you guys is to decrease the amount of the word "believe" in your paper. When reading your paper, I felt as if the essay lacked confidence.