Contempt of Court: The Turn-of-the-Century Lynching That Launched a Hundred Years of Federalism

by Mark Curriden, Leroy Phillips

In this profound and fascinating book, the authors revisit an overlooked Supreme Court decision that changed forever how justice is carried out in the United States.
In 1906, Ed Johnson was the innocnet black man found guilty of the brutal rape of Nevada Taylor, a white woman, and sentenced to die in Chattanooga, Tennessee. Two black lawyers, not even part of the original defense, appealed to the Supreme Court for a stay of execution, and the stay, incredibly, was granted. Frenzied with rage at the deision, locals responded by lynching Johnson, and what ensued was a breathtaking whirlwind of groundbreaking legal action whose import, Thurgood Marshall would claim, "has never been fully explained." Provocative, thorough, and gripping, Contempt of Court is a long-overdue look at events that clearly depict the peculiar and tenuous relationship between justice and the law.

Genres: History, Nonfiction, Law, American History, Politics, True Crime, Historical

432 pages, Paperback

First published January 1, 1999

Reviews

[Eric_W · Rating 5 out of 5]

Note. If you don't like spoilers, don't read the book since the first chapter reveals what happens right up front. Everyone else *should* read it. Often we labor under the assumption that because things are the way they are today, it must have been ever thus. This book will quickly disabuse you of that notion.

The extraordinary story of two heroic black lawyers who championed the case of an innocent man, a sheriff more interested in political advancement than justice, mob rule, and one of the very few times when the Supreme Court has issued a contempt citation for failure to follow its rulings, and the importance of the 14th Amendment to the Constitution. To quote Thurgood Marshall: " The Shipp case was perhaps the first instance in which the court demonstrated the the Fourteenth Amendment and the equal protection clause have any substantive meaning to persons of the African-American race. . . .The import of the Sheriff Shipp case on the federal court's authority over state criminal cases should not be underestimated." It also meant that Justice Harlan was to become one of my most recent heroes.

The case began with the assault on a young white woman who had been walking home from work when she was attacked by a black man and although she was never able to identify him precisely, a black man roughly meeting her description by the name of Ed Johnson was arrested. There was another witness who swore he had seen Johnson with a leather strap in the vicinity. Johnson unwaveringly swore his innocence and had several witnesses who maintained he had been several miles away at a bar.

While Chattanooga had been a place of reasonable racial harmony for several years and had had no recent lynchings, (in fact, two well-respected local ministers, one having served with the union, the other with the Confederacy, were a strong force arguing against mob violence but they were out of town that evening) a mob formed when they heard someone had been arrested and was soon whipped into such a frenzy they began to batter down the doors of the jail. They were only persuaded from further violence when Sam, McReynolds, the judge assigned to the case showed up and offered to prove that Johnson was not even there. He and the Sheriff had arranged earlier in the day to have Johnson and another marginal suspect taken to another city. Finally satisfied, the mob dispersed.

Before Gideon v Wainright, suspects had few rights and were not entitled to a lawyer. Unlike most states, however, Tennessee law required that a lawyer be appointed in capital cases. Also unlike today, which practice is now forbidden, it was common for judges to meet with prosecutors to plan the prosecution. The question was whom to appoint as the defense attorneys for John after the grand jury had returned a "true bill" of indictment. Despite numerous efforts, the Sheriff had been unable to get a confession from Johnson who continued to swear to his innocence.

The authors do a masterful job of portraying the case. The three court appointed lawyers really did their best against a stacked deck, especially Judge Shepherd who, in an impassioned summation to the jury, ripped the judge and prosecutors for not giving Johnson a fair trial. Initially the jury was split 8-4 for conviction, but after the judge sent them home for the night, he met with the prosecutors. No one knows what happened during that meeting but everyone feared the eruption that would occur should Johnson be found innocent or there be a hung jury. In any case, immediately upon returning to their deliberations the next morning, the jury announced they had a verdict and all four of the holdouts had changed their minds.

The trial itself had some startling scenes with a couple of jurors, in tears, requesting that the victim be brought back to testify and *they* asked her if she could swear that Johnson was her attacker. She never could with certainty. After the verdict Shepherd wanted to appeal to the Tennessee Supreme Court but three more lawyers, appointed by the court, picked in a closed door meeting with the prosecution (highly unethical behavior) and, it was later admitted by the judge, two of whom were picked by the prosecution, persuaded Johnson, and the other lawyers that *even if he was innocent* it was better to be hung in the course of *justice* rather than by a lynch mob. When they announced their decision not to appeal the verdict, an extraordinary decision, the judge sentenced Johnson to hang, the penalty for rape in Tennessee.

They had failed to reckon with Noah Parden, whose resume alone is worth a book. His trip to Washington where he convinced Justice Harlan to issue a stay of execution and the later decision that resulted in the federal application of basic rights to the states under the 14th amendment is riveting. What Parden had managed to do was to persuade the Court of the need to apply the Sixth Amendment requirement of a fair trial to the states Due Process was not to mean simply did the rules get followed, but did the defendant get a fair trial. Equal Protection had to mean that black defendants would get the same presumptions of innocence and privileges accorded to white defendants.

Unfortunately, the significance was perhaps not lost on the mob, which, horrified that the federal court might deign to dispute its cherished denial of black men's rights, decided to enforce its own brand of morality. The Supreme Court has no enforcement powers but what they did was, I believe, never before, nor since done. No spoilers here, read the book.

To give you a small flavor of the endemic racism that pervaded American society at the time, it was the practice of lawyers admitted to the bar of the Supreme Court to kiss the Bible as they were sworn in. After black lawyers were admitted to the bar, that practice was dispensed with because white lawyers refused to have their lips touch anything that might have been sullied by black lips.

Ed Johnson lies today forgotten in a closed African-American cemetery under a tombstone on which is inscribed, I AM A INNOCENT MAN. GOD BLESS YOU ALL.

Interestingly, much of the research for the book was done at Tuskeegee University in Alabama which has a detailed record of virtually every lynching. Many of the original documents are in terrible shape and part of the proceeds of the book will be allocated to help the preservation of those materials.

[Laura (Book Scrounger) · Rating 4 out of 5]

This was an eye-opening look at justice system history (which is probably good for someone like me who couldn't even have defined what "contempt of court" is off the top of my head before reading this), as well as racial relations in the United States.

It's hard to picture how different the relationship between the federal and state courts were in these times, but this story of two black lawyers who successfully petitioned the Supreme Court to intervene in a case of their client is at once depressing and hopeful. Depressing because it involves a lynching, and there is plenty of focus on the racial attitudes of the times -- I certainly found it both shameful and anger-inducing, but also important to read. It was also a good introduction to Styles and Hutchins, the two courageous black lawyers who made history, but not without enduring threats, rage, and shunning in their own community.

Overall, this was an informative and interesting (and sad) look at the sham that justice usually was for black people in this time, and certain parallels to today can also be seen. It's also a must-read for anyone who's interested in legal history in the United States.

[Amy · Rating 5 out of 5]

Rarely do you find biographies so readable and applicable to everyday life. Contempt of Court covers the trial and lynching of Ed Johnson, an African American accused of raping a white woman in 1906. Despite strong evidence to the contrary, a jury found him guilty and sentenced him to death. The U.S. Supreme Court intervened...and eventually went so far as to hold those connected to his lynching in contempt. It was the only time the Supreme Court ever heard a criminal case.
United States v. Shipp did more than decide one man's guilt or innocence. It allowed the federal government to get involved in a state criminal court case. It both reflected and launched a new age of federal involvement.
Very much worth reading.

[Lawrence A · Rating 3 out of 5]

The book revisits the genesis of 20th-century federal-court oversight of state-court criminal trials, particularly in the context of the epidemic of racially-motivated lynchings in the southern US between 1870 and 1906. The text clearly lays out the details of the injustice visited upon one Ed Johnson, an innocent African-American man from Chattanooga, TN, who was falsely accused of raping a white woman. The authors describe his railroading through the Tennessee state court system, the all-white jury system in that state during the early 1900s, the racial bias of newspapers, prosecutors, the trial judge, and law enforcement officials, and Johnson's ultimate murder by a white mob aided and abetted by local law enforcement officials shortly after the US Supreme Court agreed to consider an appeal from a lower federal court's denial of his habeas corpus petition. Amazingly, after more than 30 years of diluting or ignoring rights guaranteed against states pursuant to the post-civil war Fourteenth Amendment, the US Supreme Court, in a novel contempt proceeding against a county sheriff, exercised its authority to enforce its own mandates against state and local officials.

I hesitate to give the book more than 3 stars, however, in light of several factual errors I came across in the book [e.g., Theodore Roosevelt did not graduate from, or even attend, Harvard Law School, and it would thus have been impossible for him to have appointed attorney Edward Terry Sanford to the federal bench because they were classmates there--Roosevelt graduated from Harvard College, and later attended Columbia Law School for a short time, but dropped out of law school to run for the New York State Assembly; Miranda v Arizona, which articulated the Constitutional rights afforded to those accused of crimes while in police custody, was decided in 1966, not 1963], and the frequent melodramatic and over-exaggerated conclusions reached by the authors.

Nonetheless, the book revisits an important and all-too-frequently forgotten era in US racial and judicial history.

[Jake Yarmey · Rating 5 out of 5]

Greatly researched and well sourced the authors did a great job of using the historical record to illustrate the gravity and emotions of the case.

[Paula Weisberger · Rating 3 out of 5]

Interesting, fascinating topic about racism and the justice system. A little drawn out but seemed to be well researched.

[Jon B · Rating 5 out of 5]

Well-written and engaging read about the terrible miscarriage of justice and the unprecedented Supreme Court case that followed. Worth the read.

[Ruth · Rating 3 out of 5]

Very interesting. A few glaring incorrect facts made me a little uneasy about the research quality.

[Richard]

(Added because of Eric's enthusiastic five-star review).

[Rocky · Rating 5 out of 5]

Every lawyer should read this book, if not every person on the planet. Contempt of Court takes us back in time to 1906, when juries were composed solely of white men, lynchings were carried out with the complicit approval of law enforcement, and when the accused had few due process protections. And, it tells the story of black heroes which history has forgotten.

Ed Johnson, a black man, was accused of raping a white woman. Although dozens of alibi witnesses testify to his actual innocence, Johnson's guilt was already established by the color of his skin. The same day Johnson was arrested, the newspapers rallied the angry white men into a frenzy and a lynching was attempted that very night. Since that moment, the Sheriff, Judge, and Prosecutor conspired to hang Johnson before the lynch mob could do it. They were nearly successful, until two black members of the bar initiated Johnson's appeal.

Two black lawyers, Noah Parden and Styles Hutchins, appealed a rape conviction to the U.S. Supreme Court to stay Ed Johnson's execution, challenging the constitutionality of the procedures used to convict Johnson. To the surprise of all the local officials, the petition was successful and Johnson's execution was stayed until a oral argument could be held. But, the Supreme Court's order was fragrantly disregarded by the local officials who abandoned the jail and Johnson to the mob.

Even though Parden never got to argue the appeal on the merits, every single constitutional issue raised in the appeal became legal precedent in the decades to follow. In decisions that spread out over 50 years, the justices endorsed and implemented Parden's original arguments into the law of the land:

1923 - A trial which a lynch mob puts undue pressure on the judge, lawyers, or jury, or improperly influence the outcome of the case, violates a defendants constitutional right of due process. The leaders of lynch mobs were almost never arrested. Of the 65 people murdered by lynch mobs in 1906, only three arrest were made (pp. 216).

1948 - All criminal trials in state or federal courts must open tot he public. Johnson's parents, his supporters, or any black people, were excluded from the court room during the trial. The only black man in the court room was the defendant.

1963 - Violation of defendant's fifth amendment right against self-incrimination for a suspect to be questioned without allowing the suspect's lawyer to be present. Also illegal for police to use force to obtain a confession. Johnson was questioned by the Sheriff many times, the Sheriff using every possible tactic to force a confession. But, Johnson always said he was innocent. His last words to the lynch mob were: "God bless you all; I am innocent," which was engraved on his tumbstone.

1967 - Defendant has a right to an effective attorney. Defendant has a right to have an attorney present during a witness ID line-up. Johnson did not have an attorney present during the line-up, and he was abandoned by his attorneys once the trial was over.

1970 - Local courts may not systematically exclude black people from jury service. Although, in 1906 federal courts were not allowed to exclude black people from the jury, it was not the case for state courts. And, it was the practice in many southern states to exclude black people and women. It is a shame it took until 1970 for this to become the law.

1972 - Death penalty could no longer be used as a punishment in rape cases. The death penalty was dis-proportionally applied to black defendants, men and women. While white people were often not even arrested for the crime of rape, a black person would be zealously prosecuted and would pay with their life. Which goes to show, how the law is applied is equally as important as enacting the law itself.

This book should be in the hands of every high school, college, and law student in the United States. This book tells an important story that was nearly lost to history and is essential to understanding who we are as Americans, U.S. criminal procedure, constitutional law, the very reason we have the law in the first place.

[David Allen Hines · Rating 5 out of 5]

Henry Martyn Hoyt, Jr., Solicitor General of the United States under President Theodore Roosevelt, lays buried next to his namesake father, a Governor of Pennsylvania, in the history 200 year old cemetery in Forty Fort, Pennsylvania, just a mile or so down the road from my home and he plays a central role towards the end of this fascinating book about a long ago lynching that resulted in the only criminal trial before the United States Supreme Court in American history.

In 1906 in Chattanooga, a beautiful young woman, Nevada Taylor, was mugged and raped in the dark outside a train station on her way home from work. Initially she couldn't even say if her attacker was white or black, but in the racism of the time, of course he had to black. Enter Sheriff Joseph Shipp, who was in the middle of a tough re-election campaign accused of being soft on crime after a rise in local crime. Little progress was made in the investigation until a reward was offered, then a questionable fellow led police to a young black man, Ed Johnson, who had no prior history of violence.

Add to this mixture a racist district attorney and judge and a white majority public clamoring for justice. Even by the racist standards of the time, there was virtually no evidence against Ed Johnson, even on the witness stand, Nevada Taylor was unwilling to say he was her attacker beyond any doubt. The racist judge miscarried justice to the extreme; at one point a juror lunged at Ed Johnson saying he wanted to kill him and even then the judge didn't call a mistrial or even dismiss the juror. Needless to say, Johnson was convicted and sentenced to hang, at which point his court appointed lawyers abandoned him.

Two young black attorneys risked everything to file an appeal and to their amazement, Supreme Court Justice John Marshal Harlan granted a stay and they were going to be granted a hearing. Upon hearing the news, a lynch mob formed and attacked the jail while the Sheriff did nothing and in fact was quoted in newspapers denouncing the Supreme Court.

At the time the Supreme Court majority was composed of states rights racists but when they heard how the Sheriff had acted they railed against the insult to the court and had Shipp and others held in Contempt of the Supreme Court, after an argument by Solicitor General Hoyt, the first time in American history anyone had been charged with contempt of the Supreme Court. A Special Master held a trial and while cases against some of the defendants were dismissed ultimately Shipp and a few others were convicted and jailed for several months. Following this precedent, even in the worst of the racism decades, no one else from the South or anywhere else in the nation ever challenged the authority of the Supreme Court.

This book is well written, a great read, and brings to light an important precedent in Supreme Court history. But justice was never done to either victim. Ed Johnson remains convicted on the record, buried in a forgotten overgrown cemetery on a little visited hillside; Nevada Taylor died less than a year later, having never recovered, her true attacker never caught or even identified.

[Mike · Rating 3 out of 5]

I'm not entirely sure how I could elaborate upon Contempt of Court except to say it's a competently-written and well-paced journey through the details of a lynching that occurred in defiance of a stay of execution. The catch? The stay was issued, in unprecedented fashion, by the Supreme Court. It is a pleasurable, gripping read that implicates white people in all of the most predictable of ways; one of my favorite motifs in the book is just how much the state resents the authority of the Supreme Court. It seems that federal intervention is an insult to the hubris of the "smart" and "lawful" people of Chattanooga, and the city rebels in ways characteristic of an impudent child rebelling against its parents. The contempt for the Supreme Court - and any authority larger than Tennessee's - relies on a bit of circular reasoning, i.e. we hate the feds because we hate them, but that hasn't stopped this mystifying rivalry from dying down all that much since then. The "states' rights" rallying cry is still a lousy surrogate for unbridled bigotry.

Another tidbit I've enjoyed is the story of a reverend for a church that speaks against the lynch mob in the town, condemning them as wrathful, depraved sinners who defied God by defying the rule of law. The man accuses all of the lynching attendees - who did, for the most part, walk away with their reputations intact and their rap sheet clean - for having blood on their hands. Many sermons were given in the Chattanooga churches beseeching the churchgoers not to lynch the innocent man Ed Johnson. And yet, these Bible-thumping, church-going patrons of the Lord very conveniently brushed aside their commitment to benevolence. I can pretend to be surprised if you'd like. Throw in how often wives of white terrorists will lie under oath that their husband wasn't chopping off the genitals of a condemned yet innocent man, and you get a decent picture of how religion really does play in some of these places. Again, I can pretend to be surprised if you'd like. It makes me realize that perhaps we are too quick to condemn some of the more redeeming components of organized religion, because even when its proponents and gatekeepers are consciously rallying for justice and peace, it falls on the deaf ears of hot-tempered racists hiding behind the guise of "defending womanhood." So it goes.

The book comes at a time when the country needs to remember why the Supreme Court had to assert its authority and create the boundaries by which the Supreme Court itself can act and function, a time when once again the latest crop of racist, religious conservatives wish to chip away at the federalism in which the two rulings discussed in this book are enshrined. Contempt of Court is another puzzle piece in the elaborate panorama of "America-as-black-history," and I am happy to continue putting in those puzzle pieces. Black history is a crucial literature for understanding this nation, one of the only ways to not get an over-mythologized or downright bullshit rendition of our bloodied, miserable country.

[D Franklin Pack · Rating 5 out of 5]

Contempt of Court: The Turn-Of-The-Century Lynching That Launched 100 Years of Federalism, by Mark Curriden and Leroy Phillips, Jr., is a nonfiction book that details the events surrounding the March 19, 1906, lynching of Ed Johnson in Chattanooga, Tennessee. This is a true story of how this young black man was falsely accused and arrested for the rape of a young white woman, denied a fair trial, convicted by a sham court, and lynched on the Walnut Street bridge by a ferocious mob, despite an appeal being granted and a stay of execution ordered by the United States Supreme Court.

Although I was raised within hollering distance of where he is buried in the Pleasant Garden Cemetery at the foot of Missionary Ridge and was walking the Walnut Street bridge long before it became a pedestrian-only bridge, I do not remember ever being taught anything about Ed Johnson. Having moved away from Chattanooga in the late 1970s, I just recently learned about the February 2000 overturning of his conviction, the dedication of the Ed Johnson Memorial on September 19, 2021, and the efforts of a small group of concerned and loving citizens to restore the Pleasant Garden Cemetery which had been neglected for so many years. Had it not been for this book, which is referenced in another book I am reading on Chattanooga history, I still would know very little about Ed Johnson. Though multitudes of Chattanoogans and visitors have walked the bridge and have seen the memorial, I venture to say that most do not know the full story of Ed Johnson and, sad to say, have no interest in learning it.

It is difficult to describe how I feel about this book. Common adjectives, such as enjoyable, exciting, thrilling, and amazing seem insensitive, while words such as sad, shameful, embarrassing, and discomforting seem too weak. For lack of a better word, I will just say “informative.” This says much for a book covering an event that is all but forgotten, if not for those who keep pulling the rug back. So, for those who want to be informed about the full story, this book is a good place to start. The information in this book is the result of years of research by the authors who perused the history books and old newspaper articles, conducted numerous interviews, utilized the resources of various libraries, and went through the lynching archives of the Tuskegee University in Alabama with a fine-tooth comb.

I recommend this book to anyone interested in the history of the United States Supreme Court at the turn of the twentieth century and how this case still affects our legal system; to those who want to learn more about the racial issues that affected this case; but mostly to anyone who claims to be a Chattanooga history buff because, like it or not, this is a part of Chattanooga history that should never be allowed to fade.

[Neal Leslie · Rating 5 out of 5]

Hard to believe I had such a gem on my bookshelf for 10 plus years without cracking the cover. Written with the flair of a novel, "Contempt of Court" tells the story of Ed Johnson, a poor African American accused of raping a white woman in Chattanooga, TN in 1906. He was convicted with scant evidence by an all-white jury and sentenced to hang. Abandoned by his defense team, his case was taken up by a reluctant black lawyer, Noah Parden, who appealed the case all the way to the Supreme Court on the grounds that Johnson's constitutional rights were violated.

At that time it's important to acknowledge that the Bill of Rights had never been ruled to apply to a case in States' courts, and Parden argued that omitting blacks from the jury pool denied Johnson of his right to an impartial jury. Parden met with Justice Harden, considered one of the more liberal justices and a dissenter in the landmark case "Plessy vs Ferguson" that validated Jim Crow segregation. Harden agreed that Johnson's trial was likely a sham and that several of his constitutional rights were violated. He convinced the other justices to issue a stay of execution until the Supreme Court could hear the case. This outraged the citizens of Chattanooga and a mob stormed the jail and lynched Johnson. The Supreme Court court held several of the mob in contempt including the sheriff of Chattanooga who did nothing to prevent the lynching.

This is a heart-wrenching story about a dark part of our history. But it was also the beginning of the Federal government exerting it's authority over States' courts. The South had long used the argument of States' rights in perpetuating Jim Crow and suppressing African Americans.

This was one of those books that was hard to put down. I don't think I'm giving anything away since the authors divulge Ed Johnson's fate in the first few pages. How the story unfolds and all the twists and turns definitely keeps you on the edge of your seat.

[Anson Cassel Mills · Rating 4 out of 5]

Contempt of Court is the compelling story of a Chattanooga lynching and its national repercussions. In February 1906, an uneducated black man—likely innocent—was convicted of raping a white woman in a brief, emotionally charged trial. When the U. S. Supreme Court stayed his execution pending appeal, a local mob, abetted by the conduct of the sheriff, murdered him on the night of March 16.

Because an order of the Supreme Court had been so deliberately flouted, the Court conducted a criminal trial, the only one in its history, with the Department of Justice bringing charges against the sheriff and some members of the lynch mob. The plaintiffs argued that the Court was not competent to hear the case; but in a unanimous decision, it ruled otherwise. After the Court pronounced the sheriff guilty of contempt, the number of attempted lynchings thwarted by law enforcement officers grew significantly. The decision also reinforced the Supreme Court’s right to intervene in state capital cases when constitutional due process was at issue.

The authors, one a lawyer and the other a legal affairs writer, have exhaustively researched this compelling (and sometimes moving) story, well explicating the pertinent legal issues. The writing itself is also very good, though fifty pages could have been trimmed from the book by excising unnecessary detail and block quotations, especially in the final third of the volume. There is a bibliography but no endnotes. Rarely have I read a book that might have used them to better advantage.

[Frances · Rating 4 out of 5]

A very accessible telling of the lynching that occurred in Chattanooga in 1906 of a seemingly innocent man of color accused of assaulting and raping a young white woman. The man was not given a fair trial. Through the bravery and perseverance of two local black lawyers, the case made its way to the US Supreme Court. Angered by a perceived delay in justice, a local mob broke into the jail and took the defendant to be lynched while local authorities turned a blind eye. The Supreme Court acted with a contempt of court order for the local sheriff and a number of men who participated in the mob. This historic case helped that court seal its place as a court with power over the whole country and above state courts. It began a time of increasing basic rights for all men (and eventually woman) regardless of race or place in society.

Supreme Court Justice John Harlan: Let it be said that I am right rather than consistent.
Attorney Noah Parden, November 1909: We are at a time when many of our people have abandoned the respect for the rule of law due to the racial hatred deep in their hearts and souls, nothing less than our civilized society is at stake.

[Linda · Rating 5 out of 5]

This book should be required reading for students. It is the dramatic story of a black man, falsely accused of raping a white woman. The defendent, Ed Johnson, is tried and convicted in a trial that is a mockery. Then when the Supreme Court stays his execution, a lynch mob with the full cooperation of the sheriff and his deputies, takes him from the jail and hangs him. All this happened in 1906 in Chattanooga, TN, just a few miles from where I live. Ed Johnson was hung on the Walnut Street Bridge, a landmark in Chattanooga, now a pedestrian bridge.
Before this case, the Bill of Rights did not necessarily apply in state courts, which seems unimaginable now. Lawyers for the sheriff and members of the lynch mob argued that the Supreme Court did not have jursdiction in a state case. This was the first criminal case ever tried before the Supreme Court. Much of this is unbelievable now, and most people have never even heard of this story. In convicting this sheriff, and other members of the mob, the Supreme Court sent a strong message against lynchings, which were very common, especially in the South.

[Max Mora · Rating 5 out of 5]

4.5

This was very well written and the level of detail was incredibly impressive. The history and biographies give the reader so much insight into the many characters. Only at one point, about 3/4s the way through, did it feel like it was getting repetitive. I would highly recommend to anybody who is interested in the criminal procedure or federal jurisdiction in criminal cases. It taught me a lot and was able to illuminate the whole process more than I thought. The book also offers insight into how we have been given the rights we have today and quickly removes the thought that, since we have the right to a fair trial now, then we must have always had a right to this.


Only reason it was a 4.5 is some of the narrative aspects of the book being available to the author . Such as detailed dialogue in a closed meeting or characters reactions to events within their homes. I guess just certain details not commonly being recorded in public record. Not a huge flaw as this was often times some of the most engaging aspects of the chapter.

Highly recommend

[Rachel Tilly · Rating 5 out of 5]

Excellent book about an obscure Supreme Court case (United States v Shipp) from the early 20th century that has far reaching effects. It was so interesting (and infuriating) to read about the injustices suffered by Ed Johnson, a black man wrongfully accused and convicted of rape of a white woman , sentenced to the death penalty and then lynched by a mob after the US Supreme Court declared a stay on his execution. The Supreme Court made history by holding Sheriff Shipp in contempt of court for failing to protect Ed Johnson from them mob following he stay of execution. Noah Parden and Styles Hutchins were amazing African American lawyers who championed for Ed Johnson even though the odds were long and they were ostracized by the community. These two men accomplished so much—they should be lauded as early civil rights leaders because of their bravery and the far reaching effects of the US Supreme Court’s decision.

[Drew · Rating 4 out of 5]

It wasn't until 1970 that the Supreme Court proclaimed that you couldn't systematically bar black people from jury service. Clearly, that should've happened a lot earlier, especially given the case of United States v. Shipp, back in 1906, which exposed a Chattanooga judicial system and police department as racist to the core. That particular case was the aftermath of an orchestrated mob lynching of a black man named Ed Johnson wrongfully accused of rape. And guess who got a monument afterwards? Not the black lawyers Noah W. Parden and Styles L. Hutchins who took the initial injustice to the Supreme Court. Nope. The former Confederate captain and complicit sheriff, Joseph Shipp, after serving time for contempt of court. (His defense was all about "states' rights.")

[Marina Oquendo · Rating 3 out of 5]

Finally finished this monster of a read.

Truly a really great and informative book. Highlights the sheer injustice black people faced when it came to being accused of a crime at the turn of the century. It is so blatant the miscarriage of justice in the case of Ed Johnson - and the description of his death was genuinely heartbreaking.

It was really hard for me to get through this book because it was really heavy on the exposition and legalese. Looking forward to reading something more in the fiction realm next.

Would definitely recommend if one is looking for a bit of a non-fiction read and has the energy to really take in everything the author is writing.

[Dsolove · Rating 4 out of 5]

I read this book many years ago and, speaking as a lawyer, it was fascinating. I am adding it now only because I just attended a live presentation by one of its two authors. Ed Johnson, a black man, was convicted of a rape in Chattanooga at the turn of the century based on no evidence. While in jail and after his attorneys convinced him to waive his appeal, Johnson was lynched. A new defense attorney went to the Supreme Court to have the sheriff held in contempt of court for not preventing the lynching. It is a unique case that set several important precedents.

[Kimberly Tilley · Rating 5 out of 5]

I read this book as part of some research on another case and was really impressed with the research the authors put into it. Ed Johnson didn't deserve the terrible fate he met, but it's wonderful that the authors really delved into his case and told his story. The book also told the stories of Noah Parden and Styles Hutchins who took on Ed's appeal at their peril and against tremendous odds. It's a sad case with inspirational highlights. You can see how far the United States has come in 100 years.

[Taylor · Rating 4 out of 5]

If I haven’t said it before, I’ll say it here — I don’t consider myself a fan of history, broadly speaking. This book has helped me unlock what I need to enjoy history. I need stories and people-centered writing and depth. I suspect history text books are what kept me from liking history but now that I know what to look for, I plan to read more books like this and learn things class never touched on.

[Susan · Rating 5 out of 5]

This book is about a black man who is found guilty of rape in 1906 and whose case was referred to the Supreme Court due to many unjust errors. Before the Supreme Court could review the case, however, the community took over and lynched the man - all in the first half of the book!

This is well written, easy to read as a novel is, yet based on history, legal proceedings, etc. Fascinating!

[Gary · Rating 5 out of 5]

Yet another very informative and yet tragic true story of the Jim Crow south. Not blaming anybody, but I did not learn nearly enough about the Reconstruction, Jim Crow, and Civil Rights periods in our history when I was in school. Found several more heroes along the way while reading this. Excellent book.

[Rick Westmoreland · Rating 5 out of 5]

This is an excellent book. The writing is exceptional. The story is both heartbreaking and hopeful. We are a country premised on the rule of law. History is a great teacher of what happens when the rule of law is ignored in favor of the rule of the mob. This book shows what it means to stand for the rule of law.

I highly recommend it.

[RoseAnn Foster · Rating 4 out of 5]

This book was fascinating. It's crazy to me that this case isn't better known given the long term implications and shift in thinking within the Supreme Court. The authors did a great job researching the case and including source material. It's an excellent read.

[Bill Dawson · Rating 5 out of 5]

A wonderfully detailed narrative of a most troubled time, pointing out the evils of many Southerners in 1906 but also the valient few who tried to stand against them. It should be required reading for all law students.

[Julia Torres · Rating 4 out of 5]

I was required to read this book for law school, and it was amazing. The deep dive into southern lynching and the enforcement of power by the United States Supreme Court was incredibly powerful. Highly recommend if you are interesting in Civil Right History and past rulings.