.
Feedback

Party Hearty and Pay the Price

Marvin and Beverly partied hearty all through New Years and Marvin blacked out and Beverly was dead. Oh and it took so long for justice.

Forty five year old plumber Marvin Tuthill took a twenty five months to get to his assigned seat at 11:03 AM on Friday January 28, 1949 at San Quentin's Gas Chamber Seat B.  Marvin did not last long after the drop of the eight potassium cyanide eggs dropped in to the distilled water and sulphur acid pot under his seat.  He had no last words and was dead at 11:33 becoming the 609th legally executed Californian.


Marvin James Tuthill is confined in the state prison at San Quentin under sentence of death entered pursuant to the verdict of a jury which found him guilty of the first degree murder of Mrs. Charlotte Beverly. The judgment of conviction was affirmed on December 9, 1947.

Marvin contends that the delay in discovering the facts comprising his assertedly new defense is "excusable on account of defendant's imprisonment, his lack of funds, friends and an attorney from the date of the alleged crime [January 1, 1947] and his imprisonment until 27 days after said date, and because of [his court-appointed] ... attorneys' lack of means and time to procure a thorough investigation as to material facts and evidence," and because ever since the night of the killing defendant has "suffered a complete lapse of memory ... of the events that occurred during two hours either side of the moment of the homicide."

On December 21, 1946, Marvin and Mrs. Beverly, who had been living together as man and wife, separated.  Marvin moved from the auto court cabin where they had lived to another cabin at a near-by court.  Charlotte continued to reside in the cabin where she had lived with Marvin. She told Marvin that she planned to go to Boston shortly after Christmas.

Charlotte and a Mrs. Beavers spent the evening of December 31 in the Knotty Pine Inn, across a highway from the auto court where Charlotte lived. On the afternoon of the 31st Marvin had stopped work at 4:30, drawn his pay, and had several drinks of intoxicating beverages. At 7:30 PM he entered the bar of the Knotty Pine Inn, where Mrs. Beverly and Mrs. Beavers were sitting, and asked Mrs. Beverly if he might see her alone.  She refused and Marvin left the bar.  Thereafter he consumed a considerable quantity of intoxicating liquor. Marvin testified that twice during the course of the evening he asked Charlotte if he might speak with her alone and she refused.  He told her that he wished to see her alone in order to give her $100.  He further testified that he remembered nothing after about midnight until he was awakened in his own cabin by the police at about 4 AM on January 1, 1947.

At about 2 AM on January 1, Mrs. Beverly and Mrs. Beavers, accompanied by one George Pickell, left the Knotty Pine and walked to the cabin of deceased.  Pickell left the two women at the cabin.  The women entered the cabin and found the light inside it burning.  Marvin lay asleep on the bed. Charolotte shook him and asked him why he was there.  Marvin sat up, revealing a rifle on which he had been lying.  (This rifle belonged to Charlotte's son, had often been used by Marvin when he was living with Charlotte and was usually kept hanging on the wall of the cabin, where defendant himself had placed it.) Marvin lifted the gun.

Charlotte, who had a pretty high temper and said, "You are not going to shoot me with that gun." She and Mrs. Beavers then left the cabin. Mrs. Beavers pleaded with Marvin to leave the vicinity.  Charlotte stepped back into the doorway of the cabin. According to the testimony of Mrs. Beavers, "I heard a gun fire" and Charlotte fell with a thud.   Mrs. Beavers ran toward the Knotty Pine and "I got about to the highway I think, and I looked back and the lights in Charlotte's cabin were off."

Another witness, one Payne, testified that shortly after 2 AM, as he walked away from the Knotty Pine Inn, he heard a shot, turned, and saw Mrs. Beavers running at about the center of the highway. Mrs. Beverly was killed by a single shot which entered her head "approximately 2 inches above and forward of the upper edge of the right ear, and proceeded downward."  The bullet, therefore, could not have been shot while Charlotte stood in the doorway squarely facing Marvin and while he was on or near the bed to the left of the doorway, as described by Mrs. Beavers. 

Marvin argues that the sound which Mrs. Beavers heard when she saw Charlotte in the cabin doorway was not a shot.  He testified that the shot was fired later, as Mrs. Beavers reached the highway; and that it was the sound of such shot which caused her to turn and see that the light in the cabin was out. As will hereinafter appear, this theory is an important part of defendant's "new defense."

Persons summoned by Mrs. Beavers came at once from the Knotty Pine Inn to the cabin of Charlotte. The cabin was dark. One Mrs. McLearn testified that she called to Charlotte and no one answered.  She called Marvin and asked that he turn the light on.  Marvin replied that he could not. He did turn on a light outside the cabin, which was controlled by a wall switch immediately adjacent to the switch which controlled the light inside the cabin.

Various persons entered the cabin and found that the light inside could not be controlled by the wall switch because the bulb had been loosened in the socket. Whether the bulb was so loosened by Marvin or Charlotte is unknown. After the light was put on Marvin partially lifted the harlotte's body from the floor, said, "See, there is nothing wrong," and let her body fall. He also said, "Oh, she is all right."

Marvin then left the cabin, carrying the rifle. Two men from the Knotty Pine took the rifle from him.  Marvin offered no resistance. He went to his own cabin, undressed and was asleep when the police found him at about 4 AM. About half an hour after the police awakened him, Marvin complained to an officer that he had "a pretty bad pain over one ear." He asked the officer if he (the officer) had struck him; the officer replied that he had not; and Marvin said, "Somebody along the way has sure given me a nasty clip."

Marvin presented one new evidentiary fact, to wit, that at about 12:30 AM on January 1, 1947, during the period of his "blackout," he had an altercation with one Joseph Hildreth.  According to Hildreth, at that time he and Mrs. Beverly were sitting in a booth at the Knotty Pine Inn.   Hildreth "put my arm around her. Thereupon Marvin Tuthill came up to the booth ... and he made a threatening gesture at me, though he did not hit me. Thereupon I jumped up and took a swing at him, though I certainly did not hit him very hard or hurt him. In the scuffle that followed someone grabbed my arm, and someone else grabbed Marvin and shoved him out of the front door. I could see Marvin outside looking in through the front window a moment later; then I saw no more of him.

Fifteen or thirty minutes later I left the Knotty Pine, walked around ...looking for my dog, and ... stood for some minutes just outside of cabin 1 which was rented by Mrs. Beverly. ... It never then entered my head, nor until I later heard of Mrs. Beverly's death, that Marvin was at that moment inside of cabin 1, possibly watching me and angry over the scuffle we had, and possibly thinking I was out looking for him to carry on the fight. It was then between 1 and 2 AM."


According to Donald McLearn, who was present at the time of the altercation, "Marvin took a swing at Joe. Joe jumped up and started to swing at Marvin," but neither "swing" took effect and the two were separated. That the further new fact as to the head injury, if in truth it occurred as related by Hildreth in this proceeding, would have been material at the trial cannot be persuasively disputed. The evidence supporting the jury's determination of the degree of the crime and, presumptively, their selection of the death penalty in preference to life imprisonment, was legally sufficient, as we held on the appeal but cannot be said to be overwhelming. The possible importance to this court of substantial evidence of a head injury to defendant as affecting the balancing of the scales when the appeal was before us is indicated by the fact that in our opinion we twice commented upon the lack of such evidence.

"The record contains no evidence of any head injury at the time of the killing.  When Marvin was arrested in his own room some hours after the shooting, he complained of a throbbing pain or splitting headache over his right ear.  He asked the officer if he had hit him and the officer replied in the negative. That he may have suffered from a headache is not unlikely in view of the events of the night." Again the record contains no evidence of any head injury at the time of the killing."

That was the end of the appeals process for Marvin.  Nobody bought in to his story and his lawyers were not so hot.

Newsletter & Alerts

Get the best stories each day and important breaking news

Subscribe

Not from San Leandro Patch? Find your Local Patch »

Loading comments ...
Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors. Write a new post... What's up? Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell something
california girl May 18, 2013 at 08:05 pm
I loved the green tea!
anthony May 17, 2013 at 01:01 pm
go nuts, or one of each... for later of course. would go scone myself, old habits die hard.
Leah Hall May 19, 2013 at 01:59 pm
Young man! The stormtroopers get into the act.... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MuJXaVrvpXE
Justin Agrella May 19, 2013 at 09:43 am
http://youtu.be/78LAgl90UyM
Leah Hall May 16, 2013 at 05:04 pm
Youth development, healthy living & social responsibility... ...in San Leandro! For the firstRead More time ever! Thanks to everyone who brought the YMCA "Move-A-Thon" to San Leandro and all the families that participated! -Leah Hall SL Human Services Commissioner & Volunteer YMCA Youth & Government advisor (for our San Leandro delegation comprised of San Leandro high school students)
anthony May 18, 2013 at 04:31 pm
remembered reading this here, maybe ther's a forward in thereRead More somewhere...http://sanleandro.patch.com/groups/politics-and-elections/p/local-hungry-families-helped-by-urban-farmer. Don't hold me to this one, but I thought Tim at Zocalo Coffee was a keeper.
Richard Mellor May 15, 2013 at 06:38 pm
I have a friend who has just had a hive put in her garden If you would like me to put u in touchRead More with her contact me at aactivist@igc.org
Analisa Harangozo (Editor) May 15, 2013 at 12:02 am
Thanks for posting in our Announcements Board, Christa! I shared this on our Facebook page. I hopeRead More this helps you in your hunt for honey bees :)
RHG May 17, 2013 at 03:46 pm
First let me say sorry for the loss of one of your family. Ive been keeping my eyes pealed incase IRead More see him. But I'd recomend since he is going blind, it might be easyer for someone to catch him if we knew his name. Just a thought. Hope for his safe return.
Carol Parker May 14, 2013 at 08:45 pm
I'm happy to report Buster found a forever home on Mother's Day. There are other bassets availableRead More for adoption on Golden Gate Basset Rescue's website, however. Adoptable dogs will be on hand June 9 from 11 a.m. to 3 p.m. at Pet Food Express on Blanding Avenue (in the shopping center of Nob Hill Foods) in Alameda. Come down and see some hounds up close and personal.
Stefanie Pruegel January 29, 2013 at 05:11 pm
I would speculate that more durable, reusable bags still score a lot better than disposables, evenRead More if a small fraction of those are "dual use" as in the cases you point out (dog poop, trash can liner). BTW, for those concerned about a dwindling supply of free poop bags as a result of the ban, here are still plenty of plastic bags available for that purpose e.g. those that people's newspaper comes in. The bottom line is that most people would agree that reusable bags are the better solution than to continue choking our waterways with disposable plastic bags.
David January 21, 2013 at 10:12 pm
There are plenty of competing studies that disagree. I perused that, and one huge faulty assumptionRead More that they have is that "single use" means single use when as we see above, people use them for dogs, garbage etc.
Stefanie Pruegel January 21, 2013 at 09:47 pm
Funny you should bring up cost/benefit analysis of disposable plastic bags vs reusable bags, David.Read More This is exactly what was done in 2010 by a coalition of several California cities and organizations, to help communities in the state gauge the impact of any ordinance they consider passing in regards to disposable bags. The upshot is that reusable bags (particularly non-woven plastic reusable bags) have significantly lower environmental impacts on a per-use basis than single-use plastic bags. Find the full study here: http://bit.ly/VWdEn9
Sarah Nash May 10, 2013 at 02:18 pm
Just had a chance to read this story. Loved it! While I believe that conscientious students wouldRead More try their best at the test, as I did when I took state aptitude tests in school, I can hardly imagine staying up nights worrying about it! There is nothing at stake except perhaps personal satisfaction so the test itself shouldn't impose stress. A high-strung parent, on the other hand, might.
David April 27, 2013 at 03:09 pm
Oh come on, Rob. You talk about me cherry picking stuff? 10/10? Sure. And as I've shown you canRead More pull out Maxwell Park, North Oakland, parts of SF (Glen Park, for example), parts of El Cerrito and other locations to show that API scores aren't well-correlated with property values. Again, why do homes sell for the same $/sq foot in Maxwell Park as Estudillo Estates? San Lorenzo's API is about the same or better than most of SLUSD. Property values there are lower. The clearest example of what effect API scores have on property values was mentioned below, about a 10% difference depending on which side of the tracks, er, 580 you live on in Castro Valley. 10%? whoopdedo, that kind of variation is washed out when you factor in commute times, crime, amenities, etc. In fact, API scores are likely to continue to shrink as a factor in RE values as more and more parents flee the public schools, no matter what the API (witness SLUSD, the 30% drop in OUSD enrollment in just the past decade, etc). In another generation, we'll be accused by our children of child abuse by having sent them to public schools.
Rob Rich April 27, 2013 at 12:38 pm
If you accept the premise that API scores are poorly correlated with real estate vualues, then is itRead More coincidental that the top school districts are in areas with high real estate values? http://www.greatschools.org/find-a-school/7046-ten-california-school-districts-highest-test-scores-2012.gs. In the old days, 10 for 10 was considered pretty good correlation.