The Sun.
London, England, 1851-03-10 00:00:00

ASSIZE INT ELLIGENC

:,LL, CA it
ti 1 L.— C4eint,p,rd, Mal ch
b.
THE DODDINGHIT HST MURD -SR.
The proceetitrigs in this extrasiedieary case were re- I
etemed this morning at eight o'clock, at which hour
Lord Chief Justice Campbell took his seat on the bench.
The prisoner was then placed in the dock. He ap-
peared very downcast throughout the day, and sat with
his head btu ied in his chest, apparently absorbed in deep
bought.
Mr. E. James, Q.C., and Mr. Rodwell again attended
as counsel for the Crown; and Mr. Clarkson, Mr. Bod-
kin, and Mr. Hawkins for the prisoner.
Mr. CLARKSON then proceeded to address the jury for
the defence. Having expre.sed the deep anxiety he felt
upon the occasion, and entreated the jury to dismiss
from their minds all the prejudice which must almost, he
sold, nttturaily be crewed by a case of this description,
he proceeded to comment upon the evidence which had
beets adduced for the prosecution. With regard to the
medical testimony, he entreated the jury to look at it
very carefully; and he said that, although no one could
&Wet the great experience and the extent of scientific
knowledge possessed by Dr. Taylor. still a good deal
of his evidence was purely theoretical, and it was
possible that he might be mistaken, and therefore he
said, evidence of that description ought not to have such
weight with a jury as testimony of a positive character.
lie called their attention to a case of poisoning disposed
of at the Central Criminal Court, in which upon the
medical evidence as to how long before the death arsenic
had been administered, that question was left to the
jury, and they returned a verdict of guilty ; but it was
afterwards discovered that the medical gentleman, al-
though a man of gnat experience and knowledge of his
profession, was certainly mistaken, and the woman was
not convicted; and he urged upon the jury the possibi-
lity that the medical witnesses were mistaken in the pre-
sent instance. There had been a most excessive degree
of zeal imported into the case, and the police-officers had
evidently done all they could to hunt up evidence against
the prisoner. A most aggravated and dreadful crime
was suggested to have been committed, and of course he
could not complain that all proper eedravours should be
Made to detect the guilty party, if guilt really existed,
but at the same time a prisoner ought to be dealt with
fairly, and no evidence ought to lie made use of but that
which was legitimate and legal. The Learned Counsel
then commented at considerable length upon the evidence
of Inspector Coulson, and particularly upon the fact of
his having serorn originally that he had carefully com-
pared the piece of rope found in the prisoner's box with
that which was round the neck of the deceaet d, and that
they entirely corresponded. He said that this statement
turned out to be entirely false, and that it was periectly
clear that if the two pieces of rope had been examined,
it must have been seen immediately that they did not cor-
respond, because they were twisted different ways, and
yet, it it had heppened that Ceulson had died between
the tint and second examination, his deposition would
have gone to the jury as a tact. that the two pieces of
rope corresponded, and the life of the prison: r might
have be ea sacrificed upon evidence which was not true.
With -I,gard ,c the evidence of the censtable Lennan,
and the conversation he was represented to have had
with the prisoner, he said it appeared to him rather fa-
vourable to the prisoner than otherwise; for if he bad
really been the man who committed the dreadful crime
there could have been no necessity for his inquiring how
many tiered; the rope was. round her neck; and the ob-
servation that he afterwards made, " Well, I don't care,
I did not do it," would seen, to imply merely, that if a
crime had been committed, he was not the guilty party, •
and nothing more. As to the letter regarding the
child, it seemed to him that if it was to have any effect •
at all it was in favour of the prisoner. It was suggested
that his ehject in destroying this poor girl was to re-
lieve his self from the inconvenience of her being in
the iamily way, but if he really believed that this letter
weuld exeuer ate him Irons all liability, and the evidence
went to show that this was the case, then there was an
entire abet nce of motive tar the commission of the crime.
The Learned Counsel then proceeded to observe upon the
possiniliry of the deceased having destroyed herself, and
while he admitted the extraordinary character of some
of the circumstances, he contended that it was impossible
for the jars to come to a positive conclusion upon their
oaths that she did not commit suicide; and he said he
should call medical witnesses, whose evidence he hoped
would it fluence the jury, and induce them to be of opinion
that, at. all events, there was a doubt upon the subject,
and that the prisoner out ht to have the benefit of that
doubt. Ile should also, he believed, be able to show
there, by positive testimony, bow the prisoner employed
his time on the night in question alter he had had his
tee at his own house, and he should satisfy
them that until past nine o'clock on that night the
prisoner could not have committed the murder,
if murder there was, and if he did this he
was certain the jury would not come to the con-
clusion that the murder was committed after that hour,
in the absence of all evidence on the part of the prose-
cution to show how the deceased passed her time in the
interval between leaving her mother's cottage and the
period in question. The Learned Counsel concluded a
very eloquent and able addreers by stating that he should
call before the jury the witnesses for the prisoner, and
his life would then be in their hands. He thanked God
the responsibility was with them, and he trusted Provi-
dence would guide them to a righteous decision.
The following witnesses were then examined for the
prisoner:— •
John Thorpe, surgeon, of Malden, examined by Mr.
Paacoca—fie stated that he had been 27 years in prac-
tice. Had had considerable experience, and had occa-
sion to inquire into cases of suicide cud homicidal :aurae-
, gelation. He had recently seen a case of suicidal stran-
gulation. The inference he shrub draw from the evi-
dence he had heard given in the present case was, that
he thought there was a doubt as to whether it was a carte
• of suicide or not.
In his cross-examination by Mr. JAISES, the witness
said he had never seen a case of strangulation till the
one in February. In that case the skin was not lac c-
rated, nor did the tongue protrude from the mouth.
There was no analogy iu the violence in this latter case,
nor in the manner in which the rope was held. Lie
agreed with Dr. Taylor that the first coil round the
neck would produce insensibility.
By the C.IIRT—It I Saw any marks of violence on the
body which I examined in February, it would make a
great oifirrence in the opinion I should form.
Fr ederick Pollock, a surgeon, residing in Hatton-
garden, London, and practising for the last thirty years,
had had his attention lately directed to the subject of
suicidal and homicidal strangulation. He was present :it
one case of death by suicidal strangulation in January
last. Having heard the evidence given in the present
case, he felt, considerable doubt as to whether deceased
died by her own hand.
On cross-examination he admitted that the marks of
violence in different parts of the body would be very met-
tenet evidence in inducing him to arrive at a conclusio n
as to the way in which death had been caused. He be-
lieved that the first coil round the neck must have pro-
duced instant insensibility. The blood from the moue h
and nose, and the lacerations of the neck, indicated grey it
violence—the tongue protruding through the teeth wi is
also indicative of violence. The bruises on the body, an d
the flattening of the nose, could not have been caused b y
the failing forward of a heavy woman.
By Mr. PEACOCK—I do not think the violence was
greater than might have been used by a determihe et
suicide.
Sueennah Hubbard deposed that the prisoner returned
from his work between half-past five and six o'clock on
the evening in question. She believed that he suckle d
the calves as usual, and alter that he took his tea witch
witness, and having changed his shoes he asked for a.
basket and straw to put some eggs in, and having goe
the eggs he went out about half-past six or seven, an d.
she saw no more of him that night, having gone to be d
at eight. Witness rose at six the next morning, and th e
prisoner got up immediately afterwards, and went about
his work as usual.
Isaac Gay, a labourer, employed by Mr. Hammond.,
one of the witnesses examined on the previous day, wen it
with a team to Chadwell on the day in question, and me
his return stopped it the Rising Sun public-house, about
half a mile from his master's field.
Jesse Barnard, a hay-binder, was at the Rising Sun on.
the evening in question, and saw the prisoner walking
along the path towards Brentwood; that was about half-
past seven o'clock.
Samuel Parker, landlord of the King's Head, Brent!,
wood, deposed that the prisoner came to his house on
Saturday evening, the 12th of October, about twenty or
twenty-five minutes past eight, and had a glass of half- •
and-half. He had a basket with him. He went into the
parlour, where there were ten or a dozen persons.
Proud, the butcher, spoke to him. The prisoner after-
' wards hat some refreshment in the small parlour, and
witness observed nothing peculiar in his manner or ap-
pearance. He always considered prisoner a person of
very amiable and inoffensive character.
John Proud gave evidence in corroboration of that of
the last witness. During the time he was in conversa-
tion with him at the King's Head be noticed nothing
peculiar either in his manner or appearance. He always
considered him a mild inoffensive young man.
John Hudson, a fishmonger of Brentwood, was also
at the King's Head, and saw the prisoner there. His
evidence was to the same effect as that of the two pre-
ous witnesses.
Henry Lemon, a grocer of Brentwood, saw the pri-
soner at his shop between half-past nine and ten on the
night of the 12th of October. He purchased some
swear, and took it away in his basket.
George Wheel, a labourer, of Doddinghurst, knew
the deceased. She applied to lodge in his house just
before harvest. She lodged some time with him.
Sometimes she ap•.eared in good spirits, and sometimes
not. He had many times heard her say that she car-
ried a line in her pocket, with the intention of hanging
herself. He had beard her say so three times in the
course of a week, within ten days or a fortnight of the
time of her death. That occurred when they were
talking about the primmer. He did not notice what the
conversations were about, as he thought the threats
were all gem:eon.
Mary Wheel, wife of the last witness, also deposed to
the deceased, while the lived with them, being not very
cheerful occasionally. She heard her say she had a
razor in one hand and her hand round his neck, and had
attempted to cut his throat. She also said she bad at-
, teineted many times to make away with herself, but
there was alwae a something to prevent her. She said
she had ate misted it with a razor and a line. Her
husband was present and beard all that was seid. Wit.,
Lees thought she was gammoning.
W. D Wright, a farmer, of Brentwood; Joseph Porter,
of Snenfiptd- hall, and cherchrvarden of the parish;
Samuel B' wrifield, farmer, of Brentwood; William
e
Vs rein. farmer, of Shenfield; and John Marthen, of
PilgOm' Hatch. all gave the prisoner an excellent cha-
racter as an amiable and ineffensivc men.
This closed the case for the prisoner.
Mr. JAMES then made a most elteinent end cow; ineing
reply, which W 441 listened to with breathless attention by
a crowded court. He said that tiie poeition in which he
painful in
I stood at that moment was one of the most