SUICIDE IN CONNEXION WITH MEDICAL JURISPRUDENCE.
The importance of medical evidence—The questions which medical
men have to consider in these cases—Signs of death from
strangulation—Singular positions in which the bodies of those
who have committed suicide have been found—The particulars of
the Prince de Condé’s case—On the possibility of voluntary
strangulation—General Pichegru’s singular case—The melancholy
history of Marc Antonie Calas—How to discover whether a person
was dead before thrown into water—Singular cases—Admiral
Caracciolo—Drowning in a bath—The points to keep in view in
cases of suspicious death—Was Sellis murdered?—Death from
wounds—The case of the Earl of Essex.
Medical men are frequently called upon in our courts of law to give
evidence in cases where it is doubtful whether persons found dead
were murdered or committed suicide. The questions involved in these
judicial inquiries are of great public importance, and it is the sacred
duty of medical men, for the sake of their own characters, and for a
much higher consideration—for the ends of justice, to make themselves
thoroughly conversant with all the evidence which can be brought to
bear in the elucidation of such important questions. Our criminal
annals are replete with illustrations in which individuals accused
of the atrocious crime of murder have been saved from a dreadful and
ignominious death by medical evidence. Cases also are recorded in which
death has been ascribed to suicide, but which after investigation have
been proved to have been effected by other hands. In doubtful cases
of this description, the evidence of the medical man is of the highest
importance; without it, in the great majority of cases, justice would
be defeated.
In the cases of persons found hanging, two questions naturally suggest
themselves to the mind:—1. Whether the individual was suspended before
or after death. 2. Whether it was an act of suicide or murder. It is
possible, and such cases have occurred, that a person may have been
hanged up after having been murdered, or may have endeavoured to
destroy himself by firearms, or by cutting his throat, and suspend
himself afterwards, not being able to effect his purpose in any other
way. In the first case we might mistake murder for suicide; and in
the second, suicide for assassination. The following are the signs
of death from strangulation:—The countenance is livid and distorted;
the eyes protrude, and are often suffused with blood; the tongue
projects and is wounded by the teeth. If the rope be placed below the
cricoid cartilage, the tongue will protrude; but if it presses above
the thyroid cartilage, the tongue will not be seen in the position
described. It was formerly the generally received opinion that persons
who were hanged died of apoplexy; but the experiments of Sir B.
Brodie and other physiologists clearly prove that death is owing to
suffocation. The livid or depressed circle which the rope is said to
make round the neck is pronounced by M. Klein to be an uncertain sign;
he saw fifteen cases of suicide in which it was not discovered. Remer,
of Breslaw, who has recently directed his mind to the consideration
of this important point, found, out of one hundred cases of persons
who died from strangulation, eighty-nine with sugillation on the neck
in an evident manner. In addition to the signs mentioned, others have
been enumerated. The fingers are said to be found bent, the nails blue,
hands nearly closed, with swelling of the chest, shoulders, arms, and
hands.
If the body be not suspended, but touches, more or less, the ground
or floor, while the cord is not tight enough for the purpose of
strangulation, and there be no manifestations of any other means of
death, there can hardly be room to doubt as to self-murder. It is
true that the mere resting of the toes takes away but little of the
character of suspension, but we may meet with stronger cases. A few
years ago, a man, aged seventy-five, destroyed himself at Castle Cary,
in the morning, by fixing a cord round his neck while sitting on the
bed-side, and leaning forward till his purpose was accomplished. His
wife, who had for years been bedridden, and was therefore not likely to
have been very fast asleep, was in the room during the transaction, and
knew nothing of what was going on. A prisoner hung himself in a gaol by
fastening the cord to one of the window-bars, and pushing himself away
from it with his arm.
Persons have both wounded and hung themselves. This may be effected by
placing the cord in a wrong position, which would protract the person’s
sufferings, and compel him to struggle and make violent efforts to kill
himself. Ballard relates, that a young priest, having first cut his
throat to a certain extent, hung himself with his robe.[69] In cases
like these there can be little difficulty in ascertaining the real
cause of death.
In a memoir published in a French journal,[70] there are related
several instances of self-destruction by hanging, where the bodies
were found in the most extraordinary positions and attitudes. A man
was discovered in a granary hanging by a cotton handkerchief, made
fast to a rope which stretched across; the knees were bent, so that
the legs formed a right angle backwards; the feet were suspended on a
heap of grain, over which the knees hung at a distance of a few inches.
A prisoner was found suspended in a vertical position, with his heels
resting on a window-stool. An Englishman, a prisoner in Paris, hung
himself in his cell, which was an apartment with an arched roof, and at
the lower part of it was a grated window, the highest part of which
was not near the height of a man. Nevertheless, he hung himself to this
grating, and was found almost sitting down, with his legs stretched out
before, and his hips within a foot and a half of the ground. Another
case is related of a man whose attitude was similar to the case first
described. He had suspended himself to a large iron pin driven into the
wall to support the bed-curtains, and his feet, bent at a right angle,
rested on the bed, while his knees approached it within a few inches.
A female suspended herself so low that, in order to accomplish her
purpose, she was obliged to stretch out her legs, one before resting
on the heel, the other behind resting on the toes. A female was found
stretched at the foot of her bed, the legs, thighs, and left hip lying
on the floor; the upper part of the body was raised, and suspended by a
cord fixed to the neck, and fastened to the hospital bed.
A patient in La Charité was found one morning hanging by the rope which
was attached to the head of his bed. He had fastened this by a loop
round his neck, but his body was so retained, that when discovered he
was on his knees by the side of his bed.
In 1832, at the west end of the town, a man was found hanging in his
room, with his knees bent forwards and his feet resting upon the floor.
He had evidently been dead for some time, since cadaverous rigidity had
already commenced. The manner in which this man had committed suicide
was as follows:—He had made a slip knot with one end of his apron, (he
was a working mechanic,) and having placed his neck in this, he threw
the other end of the apron over the top of the door, and shutting the
door behind him, he had succeeded in wedging it in firmly. At the same
moment he had probably raised himself on tip-toe, and then allowed
himself to fall; in this way he died. The weight of his body had
apparently sufficed to drag down a part of the apron, for it seemed as
if it had been very much stretched.
In October, 1833, a gentleman who was employed as an assistant in a
respectable school in the neighbourhood of London, was discovered by
some of his pupils, one morning, in a sitting posture, on a dark part
of a staircase of the house. Upon examining further, it was ascertained
that he was completely dead, and that he was suspended to the banisters
by a cravat firmly tied round his neck. The deceased had evidently
made two similar attempts at self-destruction before he succeeded, as
part of a silk pocket-handkerchief and his braces were found suspended
to other parts of the banisters. It seemed scarcely possible to those
who discovered him that the deceased could really have accomplished
suicide by hanging in such a situation, for his body was resting
entirely on the stairs, and, making every allowance for the slipping of
the ligature by which he was suspended, still his feet must have been
throughout in contact with the stair.
There have been few medico-legal investigations of late years which
have excited greater interest than the case of the Duke de Bourbon, in
France.
On the 27th August, 1830, the duke was found suspended in his bed-room,
in the chateau* of St. Leu. An inquest was held the same morning on
the body, and from the evidence of the witnesses, as well as from the
reports of the physicians and surgeons who examined it, a verdict was
returned to the effect that the duke had committed suicide in a fit of
temporary insanity. This event did not excite much notice until the
contents of his will were made public.
The deceased, it appears, had made his will in favour of the Baroness
de Feuchéres, a female who had lived with him for some years,
bequeathing to her the whole of his immense estates, and leaving the
Duke d’Aumale, the youngest son of the king of the French, residuary
legatee. The Princes de Rohan, heirs by collateral descent to the
deceased, thus finding themselves deprived of an expected inheritance,
attempted to set aside the will, alleging that undue influence had
been exercised over him. The cause came on for hearing before the
First Chamber of the Civil Tribunal of Paris, in December, 1831, and
excited considerable attention, not so much in consequence of the
dispute concerning the validity of the will, as of the question which
was raised during the trial,—whether the duke had committed suicide,
or whether he had been murdered, and afterwards suspended, in order to
defeat the ends of justice.
The facts of the case, collected from the _procés verbaux_, are as
follows:—The deceased had naturally partaken of the alarm which had
diffused itself throughout France in consequence of the events of the
revolution of 1830. Some of his most intimate friends declared that,
for some time previously to his death, his mind had been filled with
the most gloomy forebodings as to what this new order of things would
bring about. On the morning of the 27th, his servant went, as usual,
to his bed-room door about eight o’clock; but receiving no answer on
knocking, he became alarmed. Madame de Feuchéres then accompanied the
valet to the door of the room, which was fastened on the inside; and
receiving no reply after calling to the duke in a loud voice, she
ordered it to be broken open. On entering the apartment, the body of
the deceased was found suspended from the fastening at the top of the
window-sash by means of a linen handkerchief, attached to another which
completely encircled the neck. The head was inclined a little to the
chest; the tongue protruded from the mouth; the face was discoloured;
a mucous discharge issued from the mouth and nostrils; the arms hung
down; the fists were clenched. The extremities of both feet touched
the carpet of the room, the point of suspension being about six feet
and a half from the floor; the heels were elevated, and the knees half
bent. The deceased was partly undressed; the legs were uncovered, and
had some marks of injury on them. Among other points of circumstantial
evidence, it was remarked that a chair stood near the window to which
the deceased was suspended, and the bed looked as if it had been lain
on.
The medical witnesses, who examined the body soon after its discovery,
stated that they found it cold, and the extremities rigid, from which
they inferred that the deceased had been dead eight or ten hours. This
would have fixed the time of his death at midnight of August 26th. The
body underwent a second examination, a report of which was furnished
to the legal authorities, on the following day. Five medical men were
present at the inspection; and they gave it as their opinion, from the
_post mortem_ appearances—1st, that the deceased had died by hanging;
and, 2ndly, from the absence of all marks of violence or resistance
about the person or clothes of the deceased, and other facts, that he
had destroyed himself. They considered that the contusion on one arm,
and the excoriations observed on both legs, must have arisen from the
rubbing of these parts against the projecting rail of the chair near
the window. The mark on the neck of the deceased they described to be
large, oblique, and extending upwards to the mastoid process.
General evidence was given to shew that the duke had meditated
self-destruction, and had conversed about it with some of the
witnesses. On the morning of the 28th, some fragments of paper, which
had been written on, were taken from the grate of his chamber; these
were carefully put together by one of the legal inspectors; and among a
few disjointed sentences, indicating despair and a dread of impending
danger, were the following:—“It is only left for me to die in wishing
prosperity to the French people and my country. Adieu for ever!” Here
followed his signature, and a request to be interred at Vincennes, near
the body of his son, the Duke d’Enghien. It is necessary to observe,
that no noise or disturbance was heard in the bed-room on the night of
the deceased’s death.
On the other side it was contended that the duke was not unusually
melancholy before his death; that the supposition of suicide was
inadmissible in a moral point of view, and indeed was physically
impossible, from the circumstances. One person argued that he could not
have made the knots seen in the handkerchiefs; another, that he could
not have reached so high above his head to have suspended himself,
and that the chair could not have been used in any manner to assist
him; while a third affirmed, that a person might be suspended in the
position in which the body was discovered, without death ensuing. The
circumstance of the door being fastened on the inside, was accounted
for by supposing that the bolt had been pushed to from the outside.
The duke had been heard to condemn suicide; he had made an appointment
for the following day; and had attended to many little circumstances,
such as winding up his watch the night previously, and noting his
losses at play;—facts which were forcibly urged as being opposed to the
supposition of his having destroyed himself.
To combat the medical evidence, it was assumed that the deceased was
strangled or suffocated, and was afterwards hanged, by assassins.
Several schemes were devised by the medical witnesses on this side of
the question, to account for the manner in which the supposed murder
was committed. According to some, a handkerchief might have been
tightened round the deceased’s neck by one assassin, while another
forcibly held his legs under the bed-clothes, by which the lesions
already described would have been produced; or instead of being
strangled by a handkerchief, he might have been suffocated by a pillow
placed over his mouth.
The body might then have been dragged across the room to be suspended;
and if during this time the hand of one of the assassins had been
rudely thrust between the cravat and the neck, the excoriation and mark
seen on the skin might be easily accounted for.
The counsel for the appellants remarked, that the want of a line in
writing, to withdraw from all suspicion his attendants, and even Madame
de Feuchéres, was remarkable, as this _latter precaution_ had suggested
itself _to almost every suicide_. He condemned those engaged in the
anatomical examination of the body, as having been guilty of culpable
mismanagement. He ridiculed the idea that the duke, as reported by
the two physicians consulted, had probably come to his death through
asphyxia by strangulation. He contended that all the appearances on the
skin of the neck, where no ecchymosis, _as is usual in persons hung
alive_, was visible, _shewed that death had preceded the hanging of the
body_.[71]
Conflicting as the evidence was in this case, we think no impartial
mind, after maturely considering all the physical facts and moral
circumstances connected with the Prince de Condé’s death, can entertain
any other opinion than that he sacrificed his own life. The case is one
of great interest; and the minute particulars detailed in the French
journal are worthy of the perusal of every medical man.
It has been doubted whether voluntary strangulation was possible,
but we have too many cases on record to allow us to question the
probability of such an occurrence. An individual was found strangled
in a hay-loft by a handkerchief which had been tightened by a stick.
A Malay, who, on board of a man-of-war in the East Indies, had made
repeated attempts to commit suicide, at last effected his purpose in
the following manner:—He tied a handkerchief round his neck, and with
a small stick twisted it several times, and then secured it behind his
ear, to prevent its untwisting. Jealousy was the cause assigned for the
suicide.
General Pichegru was found strangled in prison during the consulate
of Buonaparte. The case gave rise to various suspicions. The body was
found lying in bed on the left side, in an easy attitude, with the
knees bent, and the arms lying down by the side, with a black silk
handkerchief twisted tightly round the neck, by means of a stick passed
under it. The cheek was torn by the ends of the stick in its rotations.
It was established that he had been guilty of suicide.
A very important lesson is to be learned from the history of the
following case, which Dr. Beck has published in his “Medical
Jurisprudence.” This is but one of many cases in which the innocent
have been accused, and have suffered for crimes of which it has been
subsequently proved they were innocent.
Marc Antoine Calas was the son of John Calas, a merchant of Toulouse,
aged seventy years, of great probity, and a Protestant. He was
twenty-eight years of age, of a robust habit, but melancholy turn
of mind. He was a student of law, and becoming irritated at the
difficulties he experienced (in consequence of not being a Catholic)
concerning his licence, he resolved to hang himself. This he executed
by fastening the cord to a billet of wood placed on the folding doors
which led from his father’s shop to his storeroom. Two hours after, he
was found lifeless. The parents unfortunately removed the cord from
the body, and never exhibited it to shew in what manner his death
was accomplished. No examination was made. The people, stimulated by
religious prejudice, carried the body to the town-house, where it was
the next day examined by two medical men, who, without viewing the
cord, or the place where the death had been consummated, declared
that he had been strangled. On the strength of this, the father was
condemned by the parliament of Toulouse, in 1761, to be broken on the
wheel. He expired with protestations to Heaven of his innocence.
Reflection, however, returned when it was too late. It was recollected
that the son had been of a melancholy turn of mind; that no noise had
been heard in the house while the deed was doing; that his clothes
were not in the least ruffled; that a single mark only was found from
the cord, and which indicated suspension by suicide; and in addition
to these, that the dress proper for the dead was found lying on the
counter. Voltaire espoused the cause of the injured family, and
attracted the eyes of all Europe to this judicial murder. The cause
was carried up to the council of state, who, on the 19th May, 1765,
reversed the decree of parliament, and vindicated the memory of John
Calas.[72]
Many cases occur in which it is impossible to decide whether the
person was dead before being thrown into the water. The attention of
the jurist ought to be directed to the condition of the ground in
the neighbourhood of the pond, to ascertain whether any signs exist
of a struggle having taken place. In the case of Mr. Taylor, who was
murdered at Hornsey, in December, 1818, marks of footsteps, deep in the
ground, were discovered near the New River; and on taking out the body,
_the hands were found clenched, and contained grass, which he had torn
from the bank_. The appearance of wounds on the body will often lead
to, or assist in, the formation of a correct opinion, as to the cause
of death. These facts are, however, very often fallacious. Instances
have occurred in which persons determined upon suicide have endeavoured
to kill themselves with sharp instruments, and not effecting their
purpose, have subsequently thrown themselves into the water. Again,
persons may, in the act of drowning themselves, receive severe
injuries, by being propelled against rocks and stakes by the force of
the current.
A few years ago, a man, who had leaped from each of the three bridges
with impunity, undertook to repeat the exploit for a wager. Having
jumped from London Bridge, he sunk and was drowned. When the body
was discovered, it appeared that both his arms were dislocated, in
consequence of having descended with them in an horizontal instead of
a perpendicular position. Persons have been discovered drowned with
ligatures on their hands and feet, and the circumstance has naturally
excited a suspicion as to whether they had committed suicide or had
been murdered. Numerous cases prove that suicides do, occasionally,
adopt such precautions, in order to ensure death. In June, 1816, the
body of a gauging-instrument maker, who had been missing for some days
from his home, was discovered floating down the Thames. On being taken
out of the water, _the wrists were found tied together and made fast
to his knees_, which were in like manner secured to each other. He had
been deranged for two years. The cord was recognised as one which had
been attached to his bed. He could swim well, and it was presumed that
he had so tied himself, in order to prevent his using his legs and arms
should his courage fail him after having plunged into the water.
A man, with his wife and child, was reduced to great distress. On a
certain day, he took an affectionate leave of his family, declaring
he would not return until he had procured some employment by which he
should be able to buy bread for them. On the following day, he was
found drowned in the New River, with his hands and legs tied. A card
with his address was found in his pocket.
A gentleman was found in the Seine, at Paris, having his feet, wrists,
and neck, tied with a cord. His neck, limbs, and hands, were bound by
means of a rope with slip-knots, in order to put it out of his power
to aid himself when in the water, and thereby to render certain the
execution of his suicide.
In the year 1832, the body of Elizabeth Martin was found dead in the
water. A man of the name of Bayley was accused of the murder. They had
been quarrelling, and were seen struggling with each other at the banks
of the pond. He declared that she had fallen in accidentally. Her face
was found turned downwards towards the bottom of the pond, _and one of
her hands was found to be in her pocket_. The judge properly observed,
that if the woman had fallen into the water as the prisoner stated,
that she would have, undoubtedly, taken her hand from her pocket for
the purpose of extricating herself. The man was convicted of the
murder, and executed.
There has been much discussion as to whether bodies sink or swim
when thrown into the water after having been killed. Considerable
discrepancy of opinion exists on this point. It has been maintained
that strangled persons will float more readily than others, as many
facts prove. Caracciolo, Admiral of the Neapolitan navy, was hanged by
sentence of a court-martial. The body was committed to the deep in the
usual manner; and thirteen days afterwards, while the king was walking
on the deck of Lord Nelson’s ship, he suddenly exclaimed, with a yell
of horror—“_Viene! viene!_” The admiral’s corpse, breast-high, was
seen floating towards the ship. The shot which had been attached to
the feet for the purpose of sinking not being sufficiently heavy. This
phenomenon may have arisen from the evolution of gaseous matter, after
the process of putrefaction had commenced, which notoriously renders
the body specifically lighter than water.
The apparitions that appeared at Portnedown Bridge, after the Irish
massacre, and which excited such commotion at the time, were accounted
for in a similar manner. It appears that, about twilight in the
evening, a number of spirits became visible; one assumed the shape of
a naked woman, waist-high, upright in the water, with elevated and
closed hands, and looking as awful a spectre as the most superstitious
person would wish to behold. Various sounds were also heard proceeding
from the river, which caused no little alarm. The sounds were mere
delusions, but that bodies were seen floating upright in the water
there cannot be a doubt.
“One day,” says Clarke, “leaning out of the cabin-window, by the side
of an officer, who was employed in fishing, the corpse of a man, newly
sewed up in a hammock, started half out of the water, and continued
its course with the current towards the shore. Nothing could be more
horrible; its head and shoulders were visible, turning first to
one side, then to the other, with a solemn and awful movement, as
if impressed with some dreadful secret of the deep, which from its
watery grave it came upwards to reveal. Such sights became afterwards
frequent, hardly a day passing without ushering the dead to the
contemplation of the living, until at length they passed without
exciting much observation.[73]
In October, 1829, a female, who was an in-patient of St. Luke’s
Hospital, was found dead in the bath of the institution. It appears
that, for some time previously, she had been permitted the privileges
allowed to patients exhibiting indications of convalescence, and had
obtained access to the nurse’s room, in which the key of the bath
was deposited. One afternoon, she secretly possessed herself of this
key, and then immediately proceeded to make arrangements for the
accomplishment of her purpose. In order to deceive the vigilance of the
nurse, who was accustomed to lock the patients up at bed-time, she took
off her clothes and disposed them about the room, in the usual manner,
as if she had undressed. She then made up a bundle to resemble the
human figure, and placed it inside the bed, filling her nightcap with
handkerchiefs. So accurate was the deception that the other patients,
who slept in the room with the deceased, readily answered that they
were all present. The lunatic, after these preparations, must have
stolen cautiously down to the bath. She was found, the next morning,
dead, lying stretched out with her face downwards. The water of the
bath was not deep, and, indeed, it is presumed, she must have forcibly
maintained the position in which her body was found, in order to have
effected her purpose. The door of the bath-room was locked inside, and
the key was found in the deceased’s pocket.
In a small village of Warwickshire, in the year 1800, a young
gentleman suddenly disappeared on the evening previous to his intended
marriage. After a lapse of some days, his body was found floating in
a mill-stream, and it was generally concluded that he had committed
suicide, though the cause for such a rash act could not be conjectured.
Upon stripping the body, some marks of a suspicious nature were
discovered upon the throat. A surgeon was sent for to decide whether
death had taken place from any other cause than drowning, who, after
a minute examination, gave it as his opinion that he had died by
strangulation. Suspicion now fell upon a man of bad character, who
had been seen the night the gentleman was first missed, running in
great haste from the direction in which the body was afterwards found.
He was apprehended, but, no evidence of guilt being elicited by the
examination, was discharged, and the fate of the unfortunate young man
remained buried in mystery. Ten years afterwards, the person suspected
was convicted of sheep-stealing, and sentenced to transportation.
While on board the hulks, he made a voluntary confession of having
destroyed him, and declared that such was his remorse, and the horror
of his conscience, that he earnestly desired to expiate his crime on
the scaffold. He was tried for the alleged offence entirely on his own
evidence, which was as follows:—
Upon the evening of the fatal event, he was stealing potatoes from a
field-garden belonging to the deceased, whom he unexpectedly saw coming
over the gate to secure him, upon which he jumped over the hedge on
the opposite side, and ran across the field to make his escape. The
gentleman pursued him, and being an active young man, nearly overtook
him; upon which he (the prisoner) attempted to leap the mill-stream,
but the bank on the other side giving way, he fell back into the
water. The young gentleman, instantly plunging into the water after
him, strove to secure him. A desperate struggle now ensued, and the
deceased had at one time got the prisoner down under him in the water,
by which he was half drowned. At length he succeeded in overturning
his antagonist, and, seizing him by the throat, held him fast in this
manner under water, till he seemed to have no more power. He then left
him, sprang out, and made his escape.
The judge gave it as his opinion that the case amounted only to
excusable homicide, and the man was acquitted.
In forming an opinion as to the cause of death in doubtful cases of
suicide, the following important points ought to be carefully kept in
view:—
1st. If the person had for some time laboured under melancholia; had met
with losses, disappointments, or had suffered any acute chagrin.[74]
2nd. If any of his family, associates, or connexions, had any interest
in his death. 3rd. The season of the year should be taken into
consideration; for we have observed, without being able to assign the
reason, that suicide is more frequent during the solstices and the
equinoxes. 4th. If the patient, instead of complaining, remains quiet,
seeks for solitude, and refuses medical aid. And 5th. If there be any
writing (as those who destroy themselves ordinarily express their last
opinions or will) it will be one of the most satisfactory proofs that
they have made away with themselves. Remains of poison found in their
pockets, or in the apartment, are but an equivocal proof, and one which
may attend upon homicide as well as on suicide.[75]
In the course of judicial investigations, medical men are frequently
called upon to decide in cases of suspicious death whether wounds
discovered on the bodies of the deceased were self-inflicted. Before
deciding questions of this character, the medical witness ought to take
into consideration the following points:—1st, The situation of the
wound; 2nd, its nature and extent; 3rd, the direction of the wound; and
4th, the moral circumstances connected with the case.
Generally speaking, those who commit suicide do not wound themselves on
the posterior parts of the body; therefore injuries detected in such
situations naturally excite suspicions as to the mode of death. The
throat and chest are commonly selected when cutting instruments are
used. When death has resulted from the discharge of a weapon introduced
into the mouth, Dr. Smith says it may be taken for granted that the
case is one of suicide. It is, however, possible, even under such
circumstances, for a person to be assassinated in this way. When death
has been caused by firearms, the fingers and hands of the deceased
should be carefully examined, in order to detect the presence of
discoloration. In several instances, a murder has been discovered by a
careful examination of the wadding. In two cases on record, the wadding
being examined, it was discovered to have been torn from paper found in
the possession of the parties on whom suspicion had rested.
Some time back, the body of a man was found lying on the high-road. The
throat was severely cut, and he had evidently died from hemorrhage. A
bloody knife was discovered at some distance from the body; and this,
together with the circumstance of the pockets of the deceased having
been rifled, led to a suspicion of murder. This idea was confirmed
when the wound was examined. It was cut, not as is usual in suicide,
by carrying the instrument from before backwards, but as the throats
of sheep are cut. The knife had passed in deeply under and below the
ear, and had been brought out by a semi-circular sweep in front, all
the great vessels of the neck, with the œsophagus and trachea,
having been divided from behind forwards. The nature of the wound
rendered it at once improbable that it could have been self-inflicted;
and it further served to detect the murderer, who was soon afterwards
discovered, and executed.
With reference to the _extent_ of the wound, the celebrated Earl of
Essex’s case has often been quoted. He was found dead in the Tower,
in 1683, and it was the generally received opinion that he had been
murdered by persons hired by the Duke of York, afterwards King James
II. Upon examining the wound, it was found that the jugular vessels,
trachea, and œsophagus, were cut through to the very neck-bone.
The verdict was suicide. In 1688, the matter was revived, and before a
committee of the House of Lords,[76] it was proved that the razor with
which the wound was inflicted was found on the left side of the body,
while it was known that the Earl was left-handed. The edge of the razor
was found notched; and it was also proved that the cravat worn by the
deceased was cut through, and his right hand was wounded in five places.
As there was much political feeling mixed up with this case, it was
difficult to arrive at the truth. That many persons who have cut their
throats have divided the neck to the vertebræ is a well-known fact.
In the case of Mr. Calcraft, all the large vessels in the neck were
divided, and the throat was cut through to the vertebral column.
In the case of Sellis, much stress was laid by Sir E. Home on the
wound being _regular_; he observes, “_any struggle would have made it
irregular_.” Although there were points connected with this remarkable
case which naturally tended to excite suspicion, we cannot but declare
that the Duke of Cumberland most clearly vindicated himself from the
foul charge which party feeling and private malevolence had endeavoured
to establish against him.
Many doubtful cases may be decided by taking into consideration the
moral circumstances connected with them. A girl was discovered dead.
Suspicion rested upon her mother, who had severely beaten the child. It
was, however, clearly proved that the girl had been repeatedly heard
to declare her intention to commit suicide. Persons should be examined
as to the state of mind of the party found dead; whether he or she
laboured under an hereditary predisposition to suicidal insanity, or
had been exposed to the influence of causes likely to cause melancholy
or a depressed state of feeling. If all these points be carefully
considered, a fair conclusion may be arrived at in the majority
of cases that occur, and which are made the subject of judicial
investigation.