The counsel for the defence urged that there was no proof that the woman
had died from the effects of prussic acid and that some sudden emotion
might have been the cause of death.
As to the prussic acid found in the body, he suggested that it might have
been derived from apple-pips eaten by the deceased.
Chemical evidence, however, was brought forward to prove that prussic acid
could not have been formed as suggested in the process of digestion, and
the only result of this novel defence was that for long afterwards the
barrister was known as "Apple-pip Kelly."
In his summing up of the evidence the judge, Baron Parker, said with
reference to one of the contentions of the prisoner's counsel: "If the
evidence satisfies you that the death was occasioned by poison, and that
poison was administered by the prisoner it is not necessary to give direct
and positive proof of what is the quantity which would destroy life, nor
is it necessary to prove that such quantity was found in the body of the
deceased, if the other facts lead you to the conclusion that the death was
occasioned by poison and that it was knowingly administered by the
prisoner."
Referring to the argument that there was no proof that the deceased might
not have died from the effect of a sudden emotion he pointed out that they
were not to have recourse to mere conjecture; that where the result of the
evidence gave them the existence of a cause to which the death might be
rationally attributed they were not to suppose without a reason for doing
so, that it was to be attributed to any other cause.
As has already been mentioned, the evidence convinced the jury of the
guilt of the prisoner, and he was sentenced to death.
CHAPTER XIV
NOTABLE POISONING TRIALS
Use of Poisons--Arsenic and Antimony--Chapman Case--Strychnine in
Palmer Trial--Physiological Tests--Case of Freeman--Error from
Quantitative Deductions--Poisonous Food Given to Animals--Mary
Higgins--Negative Result of Physiological Tests--Hyoscyamus
Poisons--Crippen Case--Experiment on Cats--Time Limit for Action of
Arsenic--French Case.
The use of poisons but little known at the time has generally been due to
a special knowledge of their properties on the part of the poisoner, who
has hoped in this way to escape detection, and, in fact, has often done
so.
Arsenic, which has always been a favourite with ignorant poisoners, is
cumulative in its action, and remains in the system for a long time after
it has been taken. It has a remarkable preservative effect upon the
tissues, which it will keep for an indefinite length of time from
decomposition. There is, therefore, little difficulty in detecting and
identifying it in a body years after a crime has been committed.
The effect of antimony is very similar, and it was owing to this fact that
it was possible in the Chapman poisoning case to prove that some of the
victims had been poisoned with antimony.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account