The Case Builds : Welcome to My Rabbit Hole Part XI

****************************************************************************

If you need to catch up check out ‘Juvenile Svengalis’ and ‘Welcome to My Rabbit Hole Parts I, II, III, IV ,V ,VI , VII , VIII, IX and X here. (OMG this is so much easier than maintaining and designing my old Wordpress blogs!) I have a story to tell and thanks for helping me sort out my thoughts with this website and blog!

****************************************************************************

A Peculiar Case.

Eau Claire Doctor and Son Accussed (sic) of Hypnotizing a Girl.

Eau Claire, Wisconsin, November 26th 1894

Dr. George W. Pickin and his son, Asigal Pickin, have been arrested here on the charge of criminal assult. Dr. Pickin is out on $1500 bonds, but his son is in jail. The prosecution is the result of an investigation which began September 4th last when a girl of 17, named Edna Mabel Briggs, daughter of Joseph M. Briggs, was found at the house of Dr. Pickin by her family and an officer after she had been missing two days. The case of the prosecution is that the girl had been hypnotized and was criminally assaulted. The defendants have pleaded not guilty and waived examination. While the state expects to prove the crime on the evidence of the ordinary nature, a large mass of evidence will be produced on the hypnotic features of the case. -The Superior times, Superior, Wis., 01 Dec. 1894

A Large Mass of Evidence

So why does the prosecution focus on the evidence of hypnotic control? Why does the state choose to go that route? Why is the physical evidence and witnesses ignored?

So I have questions.

• If Mabel was assaulted were there witnesses?
• Who are the witnesses?
• If there are no witnesses what other physical evidence of the assault was available?
• Why are they prosecuting the case? ‘Criminal Assault’ which I assume means rape is difficult to prosecute now, I can’t imagine what an undertaking that must have been in 1894. How heinous of a crime could this have been, that this even came to prosecution?
• What did you have to prove in 1894 in Eau Claire, Wisconsin to have a successful ‘Criminal Assault’ prosecution?
• Why is hypnotic control and at the bare minimum kidnapping not the charge?
• Does the charge of ‘hypnotic control’ gain attention to the case that it otherwise would not have had?

I am not a lawyer or a legal expert by any means, but if anyone has any insight I would love to hear what you have to say!

****************************************************************************

If you need to catch up check out ‘Juvenile Svengalis’ and ‘Welcome to My Rabbit Hole Parts I, II, III, IV ,V ,VI , VII , VIII , IX and X here. (OMG this is so much easier than maintaining and designing my old Wordpress blogs!) I have a story to tell and thanks for helping me sort out my thoughts with this website and blog!