URI:
   DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       Carrie Brown : Murder In The East River Hotel
  HTML https://carriebrown.createaforum.com
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       *****************************************************
   DIR Return to: 1901-1902
       *****************************************************
       #Post#: 3565--------------------------------------------------
        Was George Damon Guilty Of Criminal Conduct?
   DIR By: HowBrown1953
       Date: November 2, 2024, 4:54 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       Would charges be made against George Damon for waiting ten years
       before coming forward with his alleged evidence in 2024?
       Professor George Dekle recently said this on The Carrie Brown
       File over on Facebook.
       Prof. Dekle has 40 years of experience as a trial lawyer and
       prosecutor in the State of Florida:
       If Damon had come forward during the trial, Francis Wellman
       would have eaten his lunch on cross-examination.
       Well, my question isn't about what Wellman or Nicoll would have
       done if he had shown up during the trial
       but rather the fact that he had every opportunity to come
       forward or mail the evidence in before the trial and didn't.
       Would he be in legal trouble today?
       Could Damon have been charged with obstruction? The following
       legalese found online:
       Yes, depending on the jurisdiction and the nature of the
       evidence you found, not turning in something that could free a
       prisoner from jail could be considered a criminal offense, as it
       could be seen as obstruction of justice or aiding and abetting a
       criminal.
       Key points to consider:
       Intent matters:
       If you genuinely didn't realize the item was evidence that could
       lead to a prisoner's release, it might not be considered a
       crime, but it's still important to report it to the authorities.
       Strike one against Damon as he had compared a key from the hotel
       to the one left behind and had come to the conclusion the keys
       matched. At that point, possibly earlier from learning the room
       number was '31', he realized the key in his possession was
       evidence. This is suppression of evidence
       Type of evidence:
       If the evidence is something critical like a missing piece of a
       crime scene puzzle or a key witness statement, not turning it in
       would likely be more serious than not reporting a minor piece of
       information.
       Legal duty to report:
       In some jurisdictions, there might be a legal obligation to
       report certain types of evidence to the police, even if you find
       it on private property.
       Potential consequences:
       Charges:
       Depending on the situation, you could be charged with
       obstruction of justice, accessory to a crime, or even conspiracy
       to commit a crime.
       Strike Two: The 'situation' was that someone was sent to prison
       for life. And Damon knew that.
       Let's never forget the cost of the Ali trial...$ 6,000 then is $
       207, 890.77 today.
       Civil liability:
       Even if not criminally charged, you could face civil lawsuits
       from the victim or the prisoner if your actions contributed to
       their wrongful imprisonment.
       What to do if you find something potentially relevant to a case:
       Contact the authorities immediately:
       Yeah, not ten years later.
       Always report any evidence you find that could be related to a
       criminal case to the police.
       Don't tamper with evidence:
       Do not alter or destroy any evidence you find, as this could
       further complicate the legal situation.
       Damon had two months to drop the key in the mail. His claim of
       worrying about his reputation in 1891 was ridiculous. He brought
       it out in 1901 when criticism would have been, but mysteriously
       wasn't, far greater. He would have had to think the degree of
       criticism would be far greater a decade later. He wasn't stupid.
       Damon would have been hailed as a hero if he came forward in
       late April 1891 or early May. The idea that he may have held out
       until the time he eventually popped up out of the woodwork in
       1901 for some financially beneficial reason would have been true
       in 1891. Hell, I thought he was a good guy until I got into this
       case deeper and like Pete, I believe he was a dirtbag and
       disagreeable person.
       Damon had weapons available at his home and was not averse to
       using them ( He shot at burglars at his home, according to one
       newspaper account).
       Damon had a hired hand on the premises. Henry's arm wasn't going
       to stay broken forever.
       Damon had two teenage sons ( three in all ) at home in 1891.
       Broken record here, but simply mailing the key to the press, the
       DA, or the defense team and requesting their consideration for
       his and his family's anonymity would have worked as easily as
       boiling water or slicing bread.
       By getting his neighbor involved, Damon unintentionally set the
       table for a potential blackmail scheme. If John A. Lee rolled
       over on Damon and told the DA in 1892 or 1893 that his neighbor
       had had evidence that would have saved the City a hell of a lot
       of money because Wellman, Simms, and Nicoll were all still at
       the DA's Office, Damon's goose would have been cooked.
       Why didn't Damon consider some of these scenarios which would
       have serious repercussions for him and his family?
       #Post#: 3702--------------------------------------------------
       Re:  Was George Damon Guilty Of Criminal Conduct?
   DIR By: Michael Banks
       Date: November 22, 2024, 8:09 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       Hi How, whilst I certainly agree with yours and Pete’s opinion
       on Damon I’ve thinking about your question of possible
       repercussions after only coming forward 10 years later. It might
       have been difficult to prove that Damon had knowingly withheld
       evidence. Maybe his response might have been something like -
       “yes I read about the murder in the papers at the time but I
       didn’t pay that much attention to it and I didn’t connect the
       key and the bloody shirt in the farmhands room. He was a bad
       tempered guy so I just assumed that he’d gotten into a fight. It
       wasn’t until x mentioned the case and the missing key that I
       mentioned it to my wife and she told me that she thought that
       she still had the key somewhere. And it turned out that she
       had.”
       I’m just thinking that it might have been difficult to prove
       that he’d deliberately withheld evidence and that it wasn’t just
       a case of him not connecting the shirt and the key at the time.
       #Post#: 3703--------------------------------------------------
       Re:  Was George Damon Guilty Of Criminal Conduct?
   DIR By: HowBrown1953
       Date: November 22, 2024, 9:26 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       Mike:
       Thanks for your input, boss!
       It might have been difficult to prove that Damon had knowingly
       withheld evidence. Maybe his response might have been something
       like - “yes I read about the murder in the papers at the time
       but I didn’t pay that much attention to it and I didn’t connect
       the key and the bloody shirt in the farmhands room. He was a bad
       tempered guy so I just assumed that he’d gotten into a fight. It
       wasn’t until x mentioned the case and the missing key that I
       mentioned it to my wife and she told me that she thought that
       she still had the key somewhere. And it turned out that she
       had.”
       One problem I see with that and Pete might agree also, is that
       Damon took the time to go to the Hotel dragging Brennan along
       with him, whereupon he saw that the key left
       by the farmhand was identical to the one left by someone at the
       hotel bar.
       At this point, he realizes the key is evidence and if he keeps
       it and doesn't send it to the authorities, legally, that's
       considered suppression of evidence.
       Had he found the key and simply kept it, that's another matter.
       What damns him, in my view, is his affidavit in which he
       discusses going through all that
       trouble to compare the key.
       By his own admission and in his sworn affidavit(s), he admits
       recognizing the significance of the key back in late April or
       early May 1891.
       Brennan and Lee support this with their true or fabricated
       accounts of events at the time.
       That he suppressed evidence and got away with it is, IMHO, a
       result of his social status,
       Had Ali found a key in a flophouse and gone through the motions
       Damon allegedly did and then popped up in 1901 and told the
       authorities the same story
       Damon would go on to do, we can bet both of our asses that heads
       would have rolled if it were George Damon in jail for ten years
       and there was no reason for the suppression of evidence as
       displayed in this case.
       Problem for a prole, however, is that a lower-class individual
       couldn't just surface 3,650 days later with a 'get out of
       trouble' note from the Governor.
       Pete and I have brought up our views on the 'At An Impasse'
       thread.
       Pete feels that Damon honestly misremembered what the farmhand
       looked like and that what it all boils down to is a matter of
       flawed memory.
       I respect that view and cannot dismiss it.
       I just feel differently.
       Pete and I compiled a list of reasons ( not Damon's excuses)
       that may have additionally contributed to Ali's release, along
       with the tangible item ( the key ) on one
       of the threads.
       #Post#: 3717--------------------------------------------------
       Re:  Was George Damon Guilty Of Criminal Conduct?
   DIR By: Michael Banks
       Date: November 24, 2024, 5:39 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       It does appear that Damon wasn’t concerned about repercussions
       over the fact that he’d knowingly sat on evidence because he
       made no attempt to cover his a** by taking the kind of approach
       that I suggested…”I just assumed he’d gotten into a fight which
       explained the bloody shirt and I just never thought to connect
       the key to the ERH murder. We just stuck it in a box in case he
       came back for it and we forgot about it.” Which I’d have thought
       impossible to disprove.
       He didn’t feel the need for excuses though and admitted that he
       suspected the truth straight away but decided to keep schtum.
       Had he been told by those that wanted Ali free that was safe
       from prosecution? He couldn’t have been too worried about his
       reputation either when his actions (or lack of them) were made
       public? Maybe he was being paid and it outweighed the possible
       blow to his reputation?
       #Post#: 3718--------------------------------------------------
       Re:  Was George Damon Guilty Of Criminal Conduct?
   DIR By: Kattrup
       Date: November 24, 2024, 5:56 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       It’s very difficult for me to ascertain whether Damon was guilty
       of anything. One needs a legal historian to accurately determine
       what the law was concerning withholding evidence.
       I’ve tried several times to read up on it, but the searches for
       legal texts from the 1890s are swamped by texts on lawyers
       withholding evidence and the ramifications of the American
       disclosure rules during trial. I cannot seem to find texts about
       citizens withholding evidence.
       It’s possible that there were no laws about it; as far as I
       know, American law has always had as a base dictum that there is
       no obligation to help others, especially if this would expose
       one to danger or risk.
       The modern texts you quote, Howard, are also quite reticent,
       just saying in “some” jurisdictions etc. So a lot of caveats.
       In Damon’s case, which jurisdiction would we consider this in -
       the crime occurred in New York, but Damon found the evidence
       where he lived, in NJ.
       How could he be charged under NJ law for not supplying evidence
       to a NY trial? I don’t see it happening.
       As I understand it, it was and is the police who investigate
       crimes and are responsible for delivering evidence (witnesses
       and physical evidence) to the prosecutors.
       If the police fail to round up witnesses or evidence, I think
       it’s difficult to blame the witnesses.
       Also, if the authorities start prosecuting people who come
       forward late, that would mean fewer people would come forward.
       After all, it’s better that people do present their evidence,
       even if ten years late, than not. So prosecuting people for
       waiting is actually counterproductive. IMO.
       However, Ali’s lawyers should have considered Ali suing Damon,
       it’s much more likely he was open to a civil lawsuit than being
       guilty of a crime.
       #Post#: 3719--------------------------------------------------
       Re:  Was George Damon Guilty Of Criminal Conduct?
   DIR By: HowBrown1953
       Date: November 24, 2024, 6:19 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       Good points Pete and Mike....
       I asked Prof. Dekle these two questions just now:
       Dear Bob.....if you can, could you settle an issue for us?  The
       question is: Could George Damon have been charged with
       suppression of evidence in 1901 after swearing in one of his
       four affidavits that he knew the key came from the East River
       Hotel?
       Last question: Could Amer Ben Ali sue Damon after Damon turned
       in the tangible evidence that led to his release?
       Pete, Mike...
       As soon as he responds, I'll share the answer.
       #Post#: 3720--------------------------------------------------
       Re:  Was George Damon Guilty Of Criminal Conduct?
   DIR By: HowBrown1953
       Date: November 24, 2024, 6:31 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       Pete:
       Like you, I have trouble locating a definitive article on New
       York State statutes on the issue at hand.
       I still maintain that there has never been a case of a person
       retaining evidence for that length of time...at least that I can
       find.
       Also, if the authorities start prosecuting people who come
       forward late, that would mean fewer people would come forward.
       After all, it’s better that people do present their evidence,
       even if ten years late, than not. So prosecuting people for
       waiting is actually counterproductive. IMO.
       You might be right on this, Pete. I admit I didn't think of that
       scenario.
       One thing that led me to conclude there could have been
       repercussions ( to Damon ) is that he went so far as to get the
       Governor of New Jersey to write a letter
       to the Governor of New York.  To me, that's a 'wink wink, nudge
       nudge'....a favor being requested between one high-ranking
       politician to another for a third party
       to prevent any legal actions from being taken against the friend
       (Damon).
       #Post#: 3722--------------------------------------------------
       Re:  Was George Damon Guilty Of Criminal Conduct?
   DIR By: HowBrown1953
       Date: November 24, 2024, 7:16 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       Mike:
       This is a list of excuses attributed to Damon explaining his
       reluctance in coming forward earlier.
       1- Fear of the effects upon his reputation     -Affidavit-
       2. He felt Ali would be better off in an institution-
       -Affidavit-
       3. He felt Ali deserved to be off the streets, regardless of
       any complicity in the murder, and was worried about his
       well-being. -In a newspaper
       account-
       4. Upon conferring with John R. Lee, Damon took Lee's advice
       and steered clear of any involvement...in other words, don't get
       involved.  - Affidavit-
       5. A fear of some sort of violence at the hands of the
       Farmhand should he turn in the key.  -Affidavit-
       6. Felt the prosecution case wouldn't succeed anyway   - Lee
       and Damon in an affidavit-
       One or two would have been sufficient.
       #Post#: 3723--------------------------------------------------
       Re:  Was George Damon Guilty Of Criminal Conduct?
   DIR By: Michael Banks
       Date: November 24, 2024, 11:09 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       Six excuses smacks of desperation or someone making it up as he
       goes along. If he’d have turned in the shirt and the key and the
       police had put out a description of this guy how could Damon
       think for a minute that he’d have been dumb enough to show his
       face again? None of his excuses are valid.
       #Post#: 3724--------------------------------------------------
       Re:  Was George Damon Guilty Of Criminal Conduct?
   DIR By: HowBrown1953
       Date: November 24, 2024, 1:06 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       Six excuses smacks of desperation or someone making it up as he
       goes along. If he’d have turned in the shirt and the key and the
       police had put out a description of this guy how could Damon
       think for a minute that he’d have been dumb enough to show his
       face again? None of his excuses are valid.
       Talk about overegging the pudding, Damon set some sort of record
       in that category.
       Additionally, and I hate to sound like a broken record, how
       frigging hard would it have been for Damon to simply send the
       shirt and knife to the DA's Office?
       All he had to do after connecting the key and shirt to the
       farmhand was put the items in a package and take it to the post
       office. it isn't brain surgery.
       Factor in the nearly ( in 2024 US dollars ) quarter of a million
       dollars the trial cost the State of New York and that the DAs
       office was often cash strapped (
       the man whose book Pete Damgaard found with the photo of Ali,
       Dr. Allan Hamilton, had to sue the City for a fee due to him in
       1892), the prosecution
       would not schedule a trial.
       1. It would have created a reasonable doubt as to Ali's guilt.
       Here, they'd have the key to the room.
       2. The DA Office could simply tell the press that upon
       reflection that they were not confident in trying Ali.
       The press sure as hell wouldn't object. They questioned the
       arrest from the beginning despite not knowing what the police
       knew.
       This is all under the assumption that Damon's unauthenticated
       key & different descriptions of the farmhand can be overlooked.
       I believe there was zero chance of Damon forgetting that he had
       the key & that it was in his house for ten years.
       If the story is true, he also set the standard of callousness
       when he simply put or had Old Lady Damon put the key in with her
       jewel box
       among the strands of beads and rings she wore to the Euchre Club
       or some other social affair.
       *****************************************************
       Page 1 of 1