Cook, John Parsons, -1855; Palmer, William, 1824-1856 -- Trials, litigation, etc.; Trials (Murder) -- England -- London
Then, gentlemen, it is said that there are two other circumstances in
the case which make strongly in favour of the prisoner, and negative the
presumption of a guilty intention, and those are, the fact that he
called in two medical men. Here, again, I admit that this is a matter to
which all due consideration ought to be given. He called in Dr. Bamford
on the Saturday, and he wrote to Mr. Jones on the Sunday, and desired
his presence to attend his sick friend. It is perfectly true that he
did. It is perfectly true, as medical men, they would be likely to know
the symptoms of poisoning by strychnia, and they would be likely to
suspect that death had ensued from it; and yet even here it strikes me
that there is a singular inconsistency in the defence. See the strange
contradiction in which the witnesses called for the defence involve my
learned friend who puts them forward, if all those symptoms were not the
symptoms of strychnia. If they are referable to all the multiform
variety of disease to which those witnesses have spoken, why, then,
should Mr. Palmer have the credit of having selected medical men who
would be likely to know from those symptoms that they were symptoms of
strychnia? I pass that by; it is not a matter of very much importance.
It is true that he did have those two medical men. He called in old Dr.
Bamford. I speak of that gentleman in terms of perfect respect; but I
think I do him no injustice if I say that the vigour of his intellect
and his power of observation have been impaired, as all human powers are
liable to be impaired, by the advancing hand of time. I do not think he
was a person likely to make very shrewd observations upon any symptoms
exhibited to him, either immediately after death or upon the subsequent
examination of the body; and the best proof of that is to be found in
that which he has actually done and written with reference to this case.
As regards Mr. Jones the same observation does not apply. He was a young
man in the full possession of his intellect and the professional
knowledge which he had acquired. Nevertheless, about him the
observations I am about to address to you I think are not unworthy of
notice. The prisoner at the bar selected his men well, for what has come
to pass shows how wisely he judged of what was likely to take place.
This death occurred in the presence of Mr. Jones, with all those fearful
symptoms which you have heard described; yet Mr. Jones suspected
nothing; and if Mr. Stevens had not exhibited that sagacity and firmness
which he did manifest in the after parts of this transaction, and if Mr.
Palmer had succeeded in getting that body hastily introduced into the
strong oak coffin that he had had made for it, the body would have been
consigned to the grave, and nobody would have been aught the wiser. The
presence of Mr. Jones, and the presence of Dr. Bamford, would not have
led to detection, would not have frustrated the designs with which I
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