Member-only story
The Murderer Set Free From 99-Year Sentence Simply Because Women Served On His Jury
A criminal who confessed to his crime was set free due to a very unusual reason
Once an accused criminal is convicted in a court of law, they are entitled to appeals, but getting a verdict overturned is very much an uphill battle. If an appeal is granted, it’s usually due to new evidence or gross misconduct on the part of the officials involved in the case. And then there was the case of a convicted murderer named Robert J. Riddle, who was found guilty of killing someone during a home invasion robbery a century ago and sentenced to 99 years in jail, but was soon after set free simply because women had served on his jury.
The January 12, 1922 Chicago Tribune carried the peculiar case of Riddle. It was officially determined that on December 13, 1920, he had murdered Mrs. Ida Sorley of Waco. He was subsequently indicted, tried and convicted, and sentenced to prison for a term of 99 years.
Like many criminals facing a lengthy time behind bars, Riddle appealed his conviction, but used a rather unusual strategy. His lawyer argued that because two women served on the Grand Jury which indicted him, all subsequent proceedings should be null and void. This was because women on juries were considered illegal at…
