Cook, John Parsons, -1855; Palmer, William, 1824-1856 -- Trials, litigation, etc.; Trials (Murder) -- England -- London
I propose now to discuss the question whether the circumstantial
evidence against Palmer be such as to be inexplicable on the supposition
of his innocence, and if I show you on the broad and salient features of
the evidence that it is not (you will not expect me to go into the more
minute details), and I have succeeded in satisfying you on any
considerable portion of the points to which I have directed your
attention, and if the evidence comes up to what I have been instructed
to say it will, you will be too happy, recollecting that you are the
country in the language of the law--that the country out of doors, in a
case of crime, of life and death, is uninformed, without the opportunity
of hearing the witnesses examined or cross-examined on their oaths to
decide between the Crown and the Queen’s subject on the evidence alone.
Every word of this evidence will be carried to all the ends and corners
of the earth, and it will remain to be seen whether this great country
of England, in a paroxysm or convulsion of prejudice, created by the
rashness of one scientific man who had no knowledge of his own about the
matter, has made up its mind to sacrifice the life of a fellow-creature
under circumstances which would expose any person who has ever been
present at deathbed convulsions liable to the same charge.
I say the circumstantial evidence in this case is not such as to justify
you in coming to a conclusion of the guilt of the prisoner. I will
endeavour in this part of the discussion to address myself to those
portions of the case which seem at the first blush of them, and on
judicial consideration of them, to require notice. I will not avoid
anything that is difficult or that may seem to you difficult, so that
when I sit down you will see that I have discussed this great argument
fully and fairly in every branch of it, and ask yourselves, what ground
is there for any verdict but a verdict of “not guilty”? I will avoid
nothing, and proceed at once to one of the most salient points. I will
pass over, after an intimation that was made from the bench, the point
about pushing the man at the inquest, or the accident of a slit in the
covering of the jar, which, sharp instruments being used by the
operators, may easily have occurred, or the putting it in a further
corner of the room, from which there was no possibility of its being
removed. I do not believe that any such circumstances as these would
induce you to come to a conclusion against the prisoner.
LORD CAMPBELL--No member of the Court, I think, has intimated any
opinion as to the other portions of the case; merely as to the pushing.
[Sidenote: Serjeant Shee]
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