The second unusual incident came during the Camp Grant massacre 's legal proceedings . Outrage at the April 1871 killing of over 80 Apaches peacefully encamped at the military camp near Tucson was felt as far away as Washington D.C. , with Federal officials threatening to place the territory under martial law if the attackers were not indicted . A grand jury was impaneled , which returned indictments against 100 men . The trial began on December 6 , with both the defense and prosecution having agreed to try one of the leaders , Sidney R. DeLong , and have his fate determine the guilt of the other defendants . Titus was supportive of DeLong and used his discretion to help ensure a not guilty verdict . The defense did not contest the claim that DeLong had participated in the attack , but instead dwelt on the history of Apache attacks that had occurred in southern Arizona Territory over the previous months . When Titus gave his instructions to the jury , they included directions that " murderous intent " could not be proven if the defendants felt an " irresistible apprehension of danger to them or theirs from Apache attacks " or by " such a sense of intolerable suffering as impelled them in spite of themselves to make the attack . . . ? " Following the judge 's instructions , the jury needed only nineteen minutes to acquit the defendants
Camp Grant massacre
Camp Grant massacre
John Titus (jurist)