Joe Casey’s Long Road to the Gallows

Tucson, Arizona Territory — 1883–1884

Joe Casey was supposed to die on July 27, 1883.

A jury had convicted him of first-degree murder in the death of Pima County jailer Andrew W. Holbrook, who had been shot during an attempted escape from the Tucson jail on April 29. Judge A. W. Sheldon denied motions for a new trial and arrest of judgment and imposed the death sentence.

But July 27 would not be the end of Joe Casey. His case continued through the territorial courts, postponing the execution and leaving him in custody for months after the first date set for his death.

The First Death Sentence

When Casey appeared before Judge Sheldon for sentence, he did not deny that Holbrook had been killed during the escape. According to the contemporary newspaper account, Casey told the court that he had not committed the murder “in cold blood,” but under intense excitement brought about by long confinement and shattered nerves.

Sheldon rejected the argument. In the formal sentence, the judge told Casey that he had received a fair and impartial trial before a jury of his own selection and had been represented by counsel. The jury, Sheldon said, had found the killing to be deliberate rather than the result of mitigating circumstances.

The court ordered Casey held by the sheriff of Pima County until Friday, July 27, 1883. On that morning, between eight and ten o’clock, he was to be taken into the jail yard and hanged by the neck until dead.

When the sentence was completed and the court asked for Casey’s response, the newspaper recorded a single word:

“Correct.”

Casey was returned to jail to await the approaching date.

The Execution Is Delayed

The July execution did not take place. Casey’s conviction went before the Supreme Court of the Arizona Territory, and the judgment of the District Court was ultimately affirmed.

That appellate history explains why Casey later appeared before a different judge for another death sentence. The original judgment had not disappeared; its execution had been superseded while the appeal was considered.

Back Before the Court

In April 1884 Casey was again brought into a crowded Tucson courtroom. Judge Fitzgerald presided. Casey’s attorney, Judge Anderson, told the court that he had nothing further to offer in view of the Supreme Court’s decision.

Fitzgerald then asked Casey whether he knew of any legal reason why the death sentence should not be imposed.

Casey answered that he had not had a fair trial.

Asked whether he had anything more to say, Casey replied that he did not and did not think it would be of any use.

Judge Fitzgerald reminded him that the Supreme Court of the Territory had affirmed the judgment. The court then fixed a new execution date: Tuesday, April 15, 1884. Casey was to remain in the Pima County Jail until that day and then be taken into the jail yard or enclosure and hanged sometime between ten o’clock in the morning and four in the afternoon.

After Fitzgerald finished his remarks, Casey replied:

“Thank you sir, for what you have said.”

Casey Back in Cell No. 6

The Citizen sent a reporter to the jail later that afternoon. The resulting account provides a rare contemporary glimpse of Casey only days before his execution.

The reporter found him seated on the edge of the upper bunk in cell No. 6, smoking a cigar. Casey joked with the newspaperman and remarked that the time left to him was short. When the reporter observed that Casey had not done very well in the “escaping business,” Casey agreed that he had experienced hard luck and would now have to give it up.

The exchange is useful precisely because it does not require speculation about Casey’s state of mind. The newspaper described what he said and how he behaved; anything beyond that would be conjecture.

April 15, 1884

This time the execution date held.

The Arizona Daily Star’s contemporary index records Joseph Casey as hanged on April 15, 1884. The Arizona Weekly Citizen, looking back on the event a few days later, likewise reported that Casey had been hanged Tuesday for murder.

The Citizen also recorded the public reaction outside the jail. Hundreds of people crowded the surrounding streets and jail area even though, according to the newspaper, they knew they would be unable to see the execution. The paper criticized what it considered a morbid fascination with the condemned man and the gallows.

The execution was carried out in the Pima County jail yard—the same jail complex in which the escape attempt and shooting of Holbrook had begun nearly a year earlier.

An Extraordinary Irony

The Citizen added one particularly striking detail after Casey’s execution. It reported that Casey had originally been in jail on a robbery charge and stated that, according to the District Attorney, the evidence available in that case would not have been sufficient to convict him. The paper suggested that Casey might otherwise have soon been a free man.

That statement should not be read as proof that Casey was innocent of the robbery. It is significant because it was attributed by a contemporary newspaper to the District Attorney. If accurately reported, Casey’s attempt to escape a charge that might not have resulted in conviction led instead to the confrontation in which Holbrook was killed—and ultimately to Casey’s own execution.

The Mob and the Law

There was another contrast the Citizen wanted its readers to notice.

Immediately after Holbrook was shot in April 1883, public anger in Tucson had threatened to turn into mob justice. Sheriff Bob Paul and the authorities kept Casey in custody and the case proceeded through the courts.

A year later, the Citizen used Casey’s legal execution to argue that Arizona was becoming a place where accused criminals could be arrested, tried by juries and punished through the courts rather than by lynching. That was the newspaper’s editorial judgment, not an objective measure of crime or justice throughout the Territory, but it reveals how Casey’s execution was understood by at least one contemporary Tucson newspaper.

For Joe Casey, the distinction was final.

The mob did not take him in April 1883. A jury heard the murder case. The territorial courts reviewed the judgment. Two death dates were set.

The second one held.

On April 15, 1884, Joseph Casey was hanged for the murder of Jailer Andrew W. Holbrook.

Tarnished West Research Note

This version distinguishes statements made by Casey, findings of the courts, and editorial observations made by contemporary newspapers. Where the Citizen attributed information to the District Attorney, that attribution has been retained rather than converting it into an established fact.

Primary Sources and Documentation

• Contemporary article, “Casey Doomed,” reporting Judge Sheldon’s first death sentence and the original July 27, 1883 execution date.
• Contemporary article, “Found Guilty,” reporting Casey’s first-degree murder conviction and the competing prosecution and defense theories.
• Tucson Citizen, April 12, 1884, “Doomed to Die,” reporting Judge Fitzgerald’s resentencing and Casey’s subsequent jailhouse interview.
• Arizona Weekly Citizen, April 19, 1884, reporting Casey’s execution and public reaction.
• Arizona Historical Society, Ayres Newspaper Index — Crime, entry for Arizona Daily Star, April 15, 1884, page 4, column 3: “Joseph Casey hanged.”

---