Stockton Herald, South Durham and Cleveland Advertiser. — 1876-03-18 (Stockton-on-Tees, Cleveland, England)

BRAMWELL. CHILD MURDER AT ORMESBY.  Annie Elizibeth Parker (17), was indicted for the wilful murder ot her newly-born female child, at the parish of Ormeeby, on the Sth January. Mr Skidmore prosecuted, and went over th 9 circumstances of the ease, which were fully reported by us at the time of the occurrence. Eliza Parker, the mother of the prisoner deposed that when a child was brought into her house she asked her daughter if it were hers, and she admitted it. The child was alive, and she went for a doctor. The child lived twenty minutes after it was brought into the house. Mrs Osborne, a neighbour, deposed that she lived next door to where the prisoner resided. She heard a mouing in the ashpit, aiel she draw toe attention vi a M Y fit'.4 :14 !act. gri Wat,ou took a  child out al the inhpit. She showed it to the prisone and she wireiit-ed that the child was hers. theth Watson deposed that she took a by out of the ash-pit. Tht body wag found ia a place where the ashes are generally thrown. The child was alive when she toek it out. There was blood on the fire side where the prisoner was kneeling. She had the child in her arms, and the prisoner said she bad been to the petty, and that the child was hers. She found prisoner was in a very exhausted condition, and she told the prisoner she had better go to bed. Mr John Bland, surgeon, of South Bank, stated thet he WAS called in to examine the child. It was dead. It was full grown. He found a cut on the menth, and then made a post mortem examination. He and his brother found several scratches on , Vie head and other i.arts of the body, a distinct diecolouration on the arm, a fracture on the left arm, a swelling on the neck—the cut on the mouth extending three quarters of an inch, and there was a fracture of the jaw. There was a large wound oe the back part of the throat internally.—The Judge j How could that be got at,—Witness : By the mouth. It was under the palate, and extended from the one aide to the other. The skull was fractured. The witness deposed to other injuries, but his evidence was delivered in a low tone, despite Mr Skidmore's requests for the witness to raise his voice. The learned judge also remarked that really a man of education should see the necessity of raising his voice so as the jury might bear him. Witness thought that tin cause of death resulted from hemorrage arising from the wounds he had spoken oc. The h.jury to the throat in his °pillion had been none by some point:d instrument., and he did not think a finger nail would have done it.; Cross-examined by Mr Lockwood, who oppeared for the prisoner : Witness believed that when he gave his evidence before the magistrates he said the wounds had been caused ey a blunt instrument. Mr Lockwood then asked the vi nese to reconcile the two statements. On asking to defiue what he meant, he said he considered that a pair of ircissors was a blunt instrument, and not a cutting instrument. A finger nail was not a sharp cutting instrument. A finger nail was not pointed, anl was not a cutting instrument. The jury, after an absence of forty minutes, returned a verdict of not guilty, and the prisoner was discharged.