The whole evidence before you consists of three parts. In the first
place, the evidence of Brown and Ainslie, who have acknowledged
themselves guilty of the crime in question, and are the sole witnesses
brought forward directly to fix the guilt on the prisoner; in the second
place, in opposition to this there stands the direct proof of _alibi_,
established by a number of unexceptionable witnesses; and lastly, the
evidence arising from the various circumstances which are said to
support and confirm the direct testimony of Brown and Ainslie, which,
independent of such confirmation, is admitted to be deserving of little
credit. Upon each of these parts I shall submit to you some remarks,
trusting that you, gentlemen, and the honourable counsel on the other
side of the bar, will correct me should I happen in any instance to
mistake the import or nature of that proof which has been led in your
hearing.
Upon the first part I have already, in the course of the trial,
anticipated almost everything which relates to the evidence of Brown and
Ainslie; I should therefore be ashamed to trouble you with more on that
subject. I do not say that their being themselves accused of the crime
in question should be a ground for totally rejecting their testimony,
which the Court, proceeding on the present law and practice of Scotland,
has allowed to be received. But this I will with confidence maintain,
that the evidence of persons who, in the very outset of their testimony,
confess the most enormous crimes, and thereby cover themselves with
infamy as completely in the eye of reason as if they were convicted by
sentence of a jury, can in no case be entitled to much credit, and when
standing by itself is deserving of none at all.
But it is not on this alone that I impeach the testimony of these bad
men; they stand in a situation different, very different, indeed, from
other witnesses of that description--a situation to which I again
entreat your best attention.
When Ainslie was first examined before the Sheriff, and for a long time
afterwards, he persisted in maintaining the innocence of Mr. Brodie;
nor was it till he learned that Brodie was apprehended, and till he was
informed that to criminate him was the only means of saving his own
life, that he uttered a syllable tending to infer the guilt of my
client. This we offered to prove in the course of the trial, but a proof
was refused by the Court.
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