## Facts

- R.C. Ross had been sexually involved with a sister of several Skelton brothers and of Judge John B. Tally’s wife, leading the Skeltons to threaten Ross’s life.
- Ross secretly left Scottsboro for Stevenson, Alabama, fearing an imminent attack; the Skeltons pursued him on horseback, armed.
- After seeing the Skeltons ride out armed, Tally went to the Scottsboro telegraph office and declined to send a message to have the parties arrested.
- A relative of Ross sent a telegram to Stevenson warning that “four men on horseback with guns” were following Ross and advising caution.
- Tally then sent a telegram to the Stevenson telegraph operator (Huddleston), instructing him not to let the warned party escape and to say nothing.
- Huddleston did not promptly deliver the warning to Ross despite having an opportunity to do so when Ross arrived in Stevenson.
- The Skeltons attacked Ross near the depot; after an exchange of gunfire and pursuit, Ross was ambushed and killed.

## Issues

1. Whether intentionally preventing a victim from receiving a warning that could aid escape or self-protection constitutes “aiding and abetting” murder.
2. Whether accomplice liability requires the assistance to be a but-for cause of the homicide.
3. Whether liability requires the principal offenders to know of, or act in prearrangement with, the alleged aider’s conduct.
4. Whether the evidence proved willful neglect of duty by a circuit judge for failing to intervene to prevent an anticipated homicide.

## Decision

- The Alabama Supreme Court found the evidence insufficient to prove willful neglect of duty by Tally in his official capacity.
- The court found Tally guilty of complicity in the murder as an aider and abettor based on his intentional interference with the warning telegram.
- The court entered judgment removing Tally from judicial office.

## Legal Principles

- Aid or assistance need not be a but-for cause of the criminal result; it is enough if it intentionally facilitates the offense, even if the crime likely would have occurred without it.
- A person aids and abets a homicide by conduct that puts the victim at a disadvantage, including depriving the victim of a single chance to avoid death, without proof the victim would have taken that chance.
- Accomplice liability may be shown by prearrangement or knowledge by the principals that would encourage the crime, or by intentional assistance that contributes “in point of physical fact” by improving the killers’ position or impairing the victim’s.
- Separate from moral blameworthiness or criminal participation, an official-duty charge requires proof of a clear, legally enforceable duty and its willful breach under the governing law and facts.

## Conclusion

The court held that intentionally blocking delivery of a warning that could have given the victim an opportunity to escape or defend himself constituted aiding and abetting murder even absent strict but-for causation, and it removed the judge from office while rejecting a separate charge of willful neglect of judicial duty.


State ex rel. Martin v. Tally, 102 Ala. 25, 15 So. 722 (Ala. 1894)