Science and the Criminal

nkley-Trial

ks upon a document was given in a court of law in this country was at the trial of Rich

ade, but in the course of his life had turned his hand to many occupations, and for many m

e to an old lady named Blume, and when, early in 1906, she died,

isgust of her daughter and granddaughter, who had always resented his influence over the old lady. They had no knowledge that

witnesses were present upon the will. He knew that he could rely upon one of his witnesses, a man named Hird, who had drawn up the will; but the other witness, Parker, r

at the will would be declared a forgery, Brinkl

low-creatures," alleging that he needed it to kill a dog, and this poison he introduced into a bottle

nd and daughter, and they all drank the poisoned beer that had never been intended for them. Mr. and Mrs. Beck died

rinkley who, after the coroner's inquest, was committed for trial on the charge of murdering the Becks, the law being th

gnificant statement: "If anyone says I put poison in stout, he's got to

ic acid, that Brinkley had bought that poison, that he had bought a bottle of stout in West Cro

evidence, but Brinkley held stoutly to his story that the wi

e evening the latter asked him to sign his name upon a paper petitioning for an outing, and that they had thereupon turned

at public-house, and he was told to write his name upon a sheet of paper in that ink, a

of the same kind-an ink readily recognisable from its particularly brilliant blue pigment. In addition to this, three distinct kinds of ink were present upon the will, the

ner was very ably defended by Mr. Frampton. Every day the judge, counsel on both sides, the prisoner, and many

ite unconcerned, and chatted with the warders. As is so often t

disappear more or less rapidly from the body after death. The chemical evidence as to the presence of prussi

disputed. In fact, Brinkley, who went into the witness-box, when asked how he explained the fact of

e bottle of ink was discovered when the house was searched, and

facts were never supported by any evidence, while for ev

e the Assizes were held that it was barely possible to distinguish the faces of those who were trying a man for his life, excepting when they were lit up by the vivid flashes of lightning. Throughout the storm Mr. Muir

f one leading London paper whispered to another sitting just behind the writer,

planations of evidence, which, as he urged, was entirely circumstantial in characte

(Sir John Bigham) summed up, and the jury, aft

he protested

s country for many years was that of Robert Wood, a yo

aviour of the prisoner in court, and the excited state of public feelin

her lodgings in a small house in Camden Town

fragments of a letter, while in the chest of drawers a

stations and published in the papers, and was soon recognised

uaded a girl of his acquaintance, named Ruby Young, to promise to support his s

of a journalist as to what would be the best thing to do, putting the case as a hypothetical one. The man, however,

of the dead woman, were in the handwriting of Wood, and evidence was also given by the present writer that the pi

the beginning of the trial at the Old Bailey, he admitted that he had written them, though to the

ppointment made with the dead woman f

ought him very close to the scene of the crime, and his attempt to create a false alibi a

n the morning. He had not seen the face of the man, but had noticed that he had a characteristic swinging walk, and when taken to the police station had id

occasions in the past, although he asserted that he had only known her a few days and had seen her only

nts in the case for the prosecution-the evidence that had been gathered from a tainted source, the complete absence of a

not take upon himself the responsibility of admitting what would cause him to occupy a lower

ale against Wood was that of the man McGowan, who stated that he had seen the prisoner l

said that he had a peculiar gait similar to that described by McGowan, and s

her, who stated that he was at home on the night of the murder, and of a nei

, when Wood was stated to have been seen, he left his house at five minutes to five. He was then wearing a loose overcoat. Westcott was a

He gave emphatic denials to the questions put to him in cross-examination by Sir Charles Matthews, but he admitted having lied in the matter of the

tter, and suggested that it might have been some scrap of writing taken from his pocket by the dead woman. The theory

it not been for the conduct of Wood himself in telling lies and keeping back

e witness had not mentioned at once about having noticed a peculiarity in the walk of the man he s

soner at all. That was a remarkable feature in the case. A number of witn

ugh. But the jury could not convict him because he was a liar. It was mainly in consequence of Wood's own false

secution have brought the case near enough home to the prisoner-with the exception of the evidence of McGowan. That evidence, if implicitly relied upon, would justify you in finding him guilty; but that evidence is considerably controverted. I don't think the identification, even if true, is sufficient to justify you in finding this man

consider their verdict, and before eight had struck they were back

the judge and the court officers to obtain silence. Men and women thronged round

o the very doors of the court, took up the cry, and yell

sm that followed upon the announcement of the verdict were some indication of the tense excitem

Sunday paper by one of the best known actresses. After describing the emotional stress through which she had passed while waiting for the jury to give their verdict she mentioned that she had gone into the hall. There she had noticed a forlorn little figure of a girl wandering listlessly u

crowd that was waiting to give a boisterous welcome to the acquitted artist and his solicitor and counsel, and t

her to venture outside; and it was quite late at night before, disguised as a charwoman, she

the course of which several of the witnesses had complained to the judge of

e in the trial was the b

he was making upon the spectators in court than about the necessity of accou

as he himself wrote afterwards, he could notice whether one of

rol or appear otherwise than an unconcerned wit

t the whole time, to write of him: "That he felt nothing I will not dare to say, that his mental processes were not frequently stirred to such pain as comes of baffling difficulties,

tting with his friends, and making sketches of the judge, the counsel, and the witnesses? Even at the most crucial moment of the trial, when the jury

ts of the letter, whether "with all his mental alertness, his intellectual activity, his temperamental composure, this w