Sunday, September 30, 2018

Cora Stanfield: Too Many Men

Cora Dell Morse was born 1873 in Walla Walla, WA to Franklin B Morse & Mary A Holbrook.

She married Edward Wallace Stanfield 1 Nov 1894 in Walla Walla, WA
They divorced and re-married again 31 Jan 1908 in Colfax, WA. In Oct of 1908 she rented rooms with A. G. Roberts and got herself in a tangled mess in Oregon.

Here is her story:






Inmate #1482 Idaho State Prison
Crime: Adultery 
Discharged: 4 Jul 1909











A. G. Roberts
Inmate # 1481 Idaho State Prison
Crime: Adultery 
Discharged: 4 Jul 1909






Cora and Edward had a daughter
Bertha Hazel Stanfield born 1897



So Cora gets out of prison and her and Edward are together in the 1910 census living in Winona, WA.

1920 they are still living in Winona, WA

By 1930 they move to San Jose, CA she's 57 by now and working in Vendome Hotel.

Cora dies at age 64 in Los Angeles, CA

Edward re-marries by the 1940 census to a Ella

Edward dies 23 Apr 1951 Santa Clara, CA




Saturday, September 29, 2018

Thomas Henry Mox Mox: Famous Indian

Thomas Henry Mox Mox was born Abt 1877 Idaho, he was part of the Tribe Nez Perce, parents were Peter Mox Mox and Anna Tonahun. His grandfather was the famous Chief Poe Poe Mox Mox.

He was a rough neck and in and out of trouble almost constantly.




Inmate #696 Idaho State Prison
Rec: 19 May 1899
Crime: Vio Sec 139 USRS 
Term: 20 months & $200 fine & $9.60 Costs



He was also incarcerated at McNeil Island 24 Aug 1903



Then again he was in Idaho State Prison

Inmate #2305 
Rec: 12 May 1915
Crime: Assault With A Deadly Weapon
Term: 1-2 yrs






I found a few newspaper articles, one is referring to the assault charge but there is another assault against his own mother and wife.






I found a photo on Pintrest of his grandfather Chief Peo Peo Mox Mox



What a story, I am sure I could of written a bunch more on his line if I would do a few more weeks of research into it. I found land records ad tribal records and a few videos on his grandfather.

He was known as Yellow Bird he was murdered him, cut off his ears, hands and feet and scalped him.

Very sad story 




Friday, September 28, 2018

Edward M Luke: Grand Larceny

Edward M Luke was born 1876 in Gastport, Maine and by 1920 he was living out west in Portland, OR with wife Phoebe who divorced him by the 1920 census, she is listed in the 1918 city directory as his wife. He married again 22 Mar  1934 to Ada Hale Morrow (1887-1947).

Phoebe had a sister named Mrs. Idell Flower.


Edward got into some trouble in 1915 






Inmate #2300 Idaho State Prison
Crime: Grand Larceny
Term: 5-14 yrs
Discharged: 15 Aug 1917
Age: 39

















I as far as I can tell he never went back to Idaho, he had several jobs, Carpenter, Laborer, and worked for city street department.

He had a brother named John Luke but all I found was a city directory he was also a laborer.

Edward died 18 Mar 1948 in Multnomah, OR

Never found any children.



Thursday, September 27, 2018

Josie Laurens-Kensler: Murder 2nd Degree

Josie Laurens (Lawrence) married John Kensler 22 Jul 1886 in Shoshone, ID.
She was born Joan Josephine Lawrence 8 Oct 1871 in Utah
He was a Civil War vet 1862 at age 18 Born 18 Jun 1845 in Ohio.

They had two children:

Myrtle Estella Kensler 1887-1967
Albert John Kensler 1891-Unknown


Here's the story: 17 Oct 1896



Inmate #565 Idaho State Prison
Rec: 29 May 1897
Crime: Murder 2nd Degree
Age: 25
Term: Life
Discharged: 1 Dec 1909






Accomplice: Albert Rosencrans Freel

Inmate #  564 Idaho State Prison
Rec: 29 May 1897
Crime: 2nd Degree Murder 
Term: Life 
Discharged:26 Dec 1910







According to the story this is what happened:


Text for the above:

 Held for the District Court
The examination of Josie Kensler and Alfred Freel, charged with the  murder of John Kensler, consumed  three days in Justice Mullany's court at Glenn's Ferry, all the legal talent in the county—represented : cro Wolfe, Howie and Sinnott—being engaged on either side. No clue to the whereabouts of the missing man,dead or alive, was obtained,  but most of the evidence was such as to weave strong webs of circumstantial evidence against the prisoners.  The testimony of J. H. Morrow, H. C. Tinglev, Joseph Rosevear and D. E. Bayles showed that all tracks from the Kensler place have been br carefully obliterated and that the, condition of affairs are entirely unharmonious with the stories told by the defendants of Kensler's absence.  Freel states that Kensler woke him up on Saturday night, October l6th, at 10 or 11 o'clock, asking him to go to Ferry and help him spend $1400; that he heard Kensler drive the team and wagon out of the gate and over a culvert crossing an irrigating ditch, and that was the last seen or heard of him. Mr. Bayles found the team in the morning about a quarter of a mile from the ranch, with the forewheels of the wagon hitched to them and one of the reins wound about the hub of the wheel so tight that the horses could not move, and apparently there but a short time; a little further buck he found the balance of the wagon, all apart, but although the ground about was very soft and sandy, there were no indications or tracks of any one getting out or falling out of a wagon; no tracks were found about where the wagon was that the team was tied to, and tracks from the gate leading out seem to have been swept over. All witnesses testified to the apparent utter indifference of Mrs. Kensler, she taking no part in the search for her husband and acting totally unconcerned. Mrs. Canfield testified that Mrs. Kensler told her a few months ago that she would yet be sole owner of the ranch and when witness expressed surprise Mrs. Kensler said, "wait and see." The Bulletin is informed that the prisoners exhibited a remarkable spirit of bravado during the examination. The court placed  them under bond of $500 each pending further investigation. Mrs. Kensler furnished the bond on Saturday and was released, but Freel lingers still in the county jail. 
 Elmore Bulletin, 25 Nov 1896, Wed, Page 3









Then if this wasn't enough drama look what happens next:



She was named Gladys Kensler (1897-1984) even though many feel she was Albert Freel's daughter 

While in prison or shortly after getting out she gets married to an ex-convict named Andrew Renwick Ketchum 28 Mar 1912 in Canyon, ID.  


She was also married to Andrew Thomas date unknown they had a son named Edward Thomas 1914-1982.


Josie's name is complicated, all her prison documents say Josie Kensler with maiden name as Laurens, other trees on Ancestry have her as Joan Josephine Lawrence.

Josie died 17 Aug 1938 in Gallatin, MT.



Wednesday, September 26, 2018

Mrs. Margaret E Hardy: Murder 2nd Degree

Margaret E Hardy was born in 1847 Utah. She was married to Mr. Hardy and they had an adopted daughter named Henrietta Hardy who was under 2 years of age at the time of her death.

Mr. Hardy was busy with other women in 1895 and was cohabiting with such that was not his wife.

On 10 Feb 1895 Margaret murdered Henrietta, telling authorities on the 14th that the child committed suicide. She was not believed and was placed under arrest.


March 21  1895 while in jail she had an episode and the jailers thought she might of gone insane or was faking it.



Oct 1896 State vs Margaret E Hardy (See text below).

CHALLENGE TO GRAND JURY—REVIEW ON APPEAL- 
    Supreme Court of Idaho, November 20, 1895. 


When defendant was arrested after finding of indictment, to avail herself of the benefits of subdivision 4 of § 7730, Rev. St., it is incumbent that the facts set forth in her motion should be supported by proof, at least to the extent of defendant’s oath, or verification.

When all the evidence in a criminal case, although circumstantial, “ taken as a whole, and giving them their reasonable and just weight, and no more, to a moral certainty exclude every other hypothesis except that of the guilt of the accused,” the verdict of the jury will not be disturbed on the ground of conflict of testimony.

(Syllabus by the court.)


Appeal from district court, Latah County; W. G. PIPER, Judge. Margaret E. Hardy was convicted of murder, and appeals. (Aflirmed.) For appellant, Goode 1% Orland.

For the State, Attorney-General Parsons, Clay McNamee, District Attorney, and McNamee (E Morgan.

Husrou, J . The defendant was convicted of murder in the second degree at the February term, 1895, of the district court of Latah county, by causing the death of one Henrietta Hardy,an adopted child of the defendant, of about the age of two years, by poison. The crime is alleged to have been committed on the 10th day of February, 1895. The indictment was found on the 14th of February, 1895. Defendant was not in custody until after the finding of the indictment. On the 16th February, 1895, defendant’s counsel, upon defendant’s arraignment, moved the court to order the grand jury which had found the indictment to be brought into court, to be examined “ as to their qualifications, hoth as a body and as individual members thereof.’,’ On the l8th February, 1895, said motion was overruled by the court, and thereupon defendant’s counsel interposed a challenge to certain members of said grand jury,naming them, upon the ground that “each and every one of them had formed an unqualified opinion as to the guilt of this defendant before the examination by them of the case as grand jurors; and for the reason that some of the members of the grand jury had been spoken to by outside parties, not under oath, and other than the district attorney of this district, in reference to the case, and prior to the time when the case was taken up by the grand jury for investigation; and that as to some of the members of the grand jury a state of mind existed prior to the examination of this case which would prevent them from acting impartially and without prejudice to the rights of this defendant; and to substantiate the foregoing ground of challenge, defendant, by her attorneys, asks that the said grand jury be summoned, and ordered to appear in court, to be examined as

* 42 Pacific Reporter, 507. ‘

- to the causes of challenge,"-—all of which was denied and overruled by

the court. To this action of the court exception was taken by defendant. Appellant bases her exception to the ruling of the court upon the provisions of § 7730, Rev. St. Idaho, which is as follows: “ The indictment must be set aside by the court in which the defendant is arraigned, upon his motion in either of the following cases: * * * Subd. 4. When the defendant had not been held to answer before the finding of the indictment, on any ground which would have been good ground for challenge, either to the panel or to any individual grand juror.” Usually this question was brought before the court by plea in abatement, though under our statutes it may be presented by motion. Still, although the particular manner of raising the question has been changed under our practice, we apprehend it was never the intention of our lawmakers to do away with the essential requisites. The plea in abatement was required to be supported by proof, at least to the extent of the oath of the defendant, that the grounds set forth in his motion were true. It would not, nor will it under our practice, answer for the defendant to simply file his motion alleging generally, although specifically named in his motion, that certain members of the grand jury were disqualified by reason of having formed an unqualified opinion as to defendant’s guilt. The grand jury may have been, and not unfrequently is, discharged before the defendant is arraigned,or even arrested ; and to require the court to resummon them merely to allow the defendant to inquire whether any of them had formed an unqualified opinion touching his guilt could hardly have been contemplated by the legislature. Subdivision 6 of § 7609 of the Penal Code provides as one of the grounds of challenge to an individual grand juror as follows: “That he has formed or expressed an unqualified opinion or belief that the defendant is guilty or not guilty of the offence charged; but a hypothetical opinion, founded on hearsay or information supposed to be true, unaccompanied with malice or ill-will, shall not disqualify a grand juror or be cause of challenge.” We do not think the grounds set forth in defendant’s motion bring her within the provisions of this statute. Our view would seem to be strengthened by the provisions of the next following subdivision of said § 7609, to wit, subdivision 7: “ That a state of mind exists on his part in reference to the case, or to either party, which satisfies the court that he cannot act impartially and without prejudice to the substantial rights of the party challenging." If each and every one of the grand jurors named in defendant's motion had expressed an opinion that the defendant was not guilty of the offence charged, surely she had no ground for challenge ; and, from aught that appears in her motion, such might have been the case. If it was otherwise, or if the state of mind set forth in subdivision 7 existed with any of the grand jurors, it was at least incumbent upon the defendant to make a prima facie showing in that behalf before imposing uponthe state the necessity of resummoning the entire grand jury. These views, we think, are supported by both reason and authority. See 1 Bish. New Cr. Proc. §§ 793-884; Whart. Cr. Pl. §§ 350-427; United States v. Hammond, 2 Woods, 201, Fed. Cas. No. 15,294.

The bill of exceptions does not show any motion in arrest of judgment, nor any action of the court upon such motion. Numerous exceptions were taken to the admission of testimony upon the trial of this case. We have examined the record with much care, and we are unable to find wherein the rules of evidence have been transgressed or misstated to the prejudice of the defendant. Witnesses were permitted to testify to threats made by defendant, not only against the deceased child, but against its mother, and the husband of defendant. When we take into consideration the relations of these parties, and their characters as shown by the record, we cannot consider the admission of such testimony improper. The evidence shows the defendant to have been a woman of not only vile character, but possessed of an utterly uncontrollable temper. The mother of the child was a colored woman, with whom the husband of defendant had for some time had illicit relations, and with whom, at the time of the alleged homicide, he was living and cohabiting. That this condition of affairs had the effect of exciting beyond control the naturally evil propensities of defendant is clearly established by the record. It is true, the evidence in the case is wholly circumstantial, but a careful examination of the record satisfies us that the circumstances proveu, “ taken as a whole, and giving them their reasonable and just weight, and no more, to a moral certainty exclude every other hypothesis except that of the guilt of the accused.” The theory of accident put forth by the defence is entirely unsupported by the record. It is a mere suggestion of counsel. “lt might hswe been.” We think the evidence in this case left the jury but one of two conclusions: either the deceased, an infant under two years of age, committed suicide, or the defendant, possessed of a wicked and intractable temper, accentuated by vicious habits and an uncleanly life, in revenge of real or fancied injuries, took its life. ;The jury-correctly, as we think from the record—accepted the latter conclusion. If there is any error in the record, it is in the verdict. Under the proofs, a conviction of murder in the first degree would have been warranted; and the fact that a lesser degree was found by the jury (doubtless on account of the sex of defendant) is urged as a reason for setting aside the verdict. This question has already been settled in this court in the case of State v. Schieler, 37 Pac. 272. The record contains several aflidavits pertaining to set forth newly-discovcred evidence. An examination of these afiidavits fails to show any new fact. They simply tend to the impeachment or contradiction ol'


7 certain witnesses upon matters not at all material. Judgment of dis.




She was Inmate #1122 Idaho State Prison
Rec: 21 Mar 1895
Crime: Murder 2nd Degree
Term: Life

24 Oct 1895 became an inmate at the Idaho Insane Asylum in Blackfoot, Bingham, Idaho










This is all the information I found, She was still in the Asylum in 1910 at about age 58 she most certainly died there. I found no records for little Henrietta, not even a grave.