Jean Watt is the next witness adduced by the prisoner, who, by her own
evidence, appears to be a woman of an abandoned character. She has a
family to Mr. Brodie, and was denominated by him, in one of his letters,
by the appellation of “a devil.” This witness and her maid no doubt
concur most minutely in a very extraordinary fact, which, if it can be
believed, amounts to a falsification of the whole other evidence, viz.,
that Mr. Brodie came to Watt’s house just at eight o’clock, as the bell
was ringing, and did not leave her house again till nine o’clock next
morning. No doubt she swears pointedly to the night, and so does her
servant; but although these two witnesses agree in the day, the hour,
and even the minute of Mr. Brodie’s coming to Watt’s house on the 5th of
March, yet, when they came to be cross-examined, they did not even agree
in days; for Jean Watt said that she did not see Brodie from the
Thursday morning, at nine o’clock, till the Saturday afternoon
following, yet her maid said that he was twice in the house on the
Thursday, both in the forenoon and afternoon; though Sheriff said that
Brodie was in his house on the Thursday from three o’clock in the
afternoon till eleven o’clock at night. They can give no reason for
fixing the night of his visit at Watt’s house to be Wednesday night,
except the subsequent flight of the prisoner; and therefore it may have
been any other night in that week as well as the one condescended upon.
But, gentlemen, I have no occasion to dispute, and indeed, from the
evidence of Helen Alison, I am inclined to believe that the prisoner
went on the Wednesday night to Mrs. Watt’s house, and slept there that
night; but I have heard nothing, allowing all the witnesses to have
spoken what they believed to be true, that goes to prove that he went
there until after the crime was committed. Gentlemen, the circumstance
which fixes the hour in the memory of both Mrs. Watt and her servant is
the ringing of a bell, and we all know that there is a bell that rings
at ten o’clock as well as at eight. And it is very far from being
improbable that they might both mistake the one bell for the other,
either at the time, or afterwards, upon endeavouring to recollect the
hour at which Brodie came to them.
Allowing, therefore, gentlemen, that all the witnesses adduced by the
prisoner are to be believed, there appears to be nothing in their
testimony contradictory to the evidence of the prisoner’s accession to
the crime charged; and therefore I can have no doubt that, although the
matter rested upon the evidence I have already stated, you could have no
hesitation in pronouncing both the prisoners guilty.
But, gentlemen, when, in addition to that evidence, you take into your
consideration the testimony of Ainslie and Brown, the two associates of
the pannels, if any doubt did remain, it would necessarily be removed.
The counsel for the prisoners, aware of this, have objected to the
admissibility of both of them.
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