Tweet
I don't remember seeing details of this case before. It interested me on three counts:
1) the location
2) the anonymous letter and
3) the extraordinary outcome - the judge did not approve of the verdict of the jury and refused to accept it and discharged them
If I can find any more details about this case I'll post them here
Chris
The Times
14 January 1913
THE SPITALFIELDS MURDER CHARGE
JURY DISCHARGED
At the Central Criminal Court yesterday, before Mr. Justice Darling, Isaac Parkes, 42, labourer, pleaded "Not guilty" to an indictment and coroner's inquisition charging him with the murder of Lily Pease.
Mr Travers Humphreys and Mr Adrian Clark prosecuted for the Director of Public Prosecutions; Mr St. John Hutchinson defended.
The case of the prosecution was that on the night of December 16 the woman and the prisoner went to some premises in White's Row, Spitalfields, where the prisoner took a room. About half past 1 o'clock the next morning the prisoner was trying to sell a fur necklet, which was identified as the property of the woman. Early the same morning on the steps of the Commercial Street police station a police constable found an envelope addressed to the superintendent of police, which ran as follows:-
"Sunday.
Dear Sir - I want you to send one of your officers to White's Row. There up in a top room you will find the body of a woman. I strangled her in the early part of this morning. This is the second woman I have done in. After this I will tell you more about it when you catch me.
Yours truly, I.P.O.W.
I am starting on the road to W.W."
The prosecution suggested that the first two letters were the prisoner's initials, and that the "O.W." might mean Olbury, Worcestershire, of which place the prisoner said he was a native. The woman's body was afterwards found in the room, her death having been caused by strangulation. On December 18 the prisoner, while at the casual ward of the West Ham Workhouse, told an official that he was the man they wanted for strangling the woman. He then made a number of statements to the effect that the woman and he had several drinks; he went to sleep, and on waking missed his money; he asked the woman where it was, and she replied that she had not got it. He said, "If you don't turn it up I will strangle you," and seized her with both hands and strangled her on the bed. Later the prisoner said, "I gave myself up to get another man out of prison."
The prisoner, giving evidence in his defence, repeated the statements that he had made as to missing his money, and said that when he caught the woman by the throat he did not mean to kill her. He wanted to get his money back. He had had a good deal of drink.
Mr Justice Darling - Did you take that fur thing and try to sell it?
The prisoner - No, my Lord. I know nothing about it.
Mr Hutchinson, for the defence, urged that the prisoner had no intention of murdering the woman or doing her any harm, but that he merely caught hold of her to frighten her into telling him where his money - his week's earnings - was. The medical evidence was that the woman had pneumonia, and therefore was more easily strangled than if she had been in good health.
Mr Justice Darling in summing up explained to the jury in detail the law applicable to the case.
The jury, after half an hour's deliberation in private, returned, and the foreman announced that their verdict was "Guilty of causing the death of the woman, but without wilful intention."
Mr Justice Darling (to the foreman) - That is no verdict at all, sir. I am afraid I shall have to sum this case up again from the beginning. Are you an Englishman?
The foreman - No; but I am here 26 years. That is the unanimous verdict of the jury.
Mr Justice darling - I have summed up the case and explained the law as plainly as I can. It is perfectly plain that the jury have not understood me, and I discharge you from giving a verdict. The case will stand over until next Sessions.
1) the location
2) the anonymous letter and
3) the extraordinary outcome - the judge did not approve of the verdict of the jury and refused to accept it and discharged them
If I can find any more details about this case I'll post them here
Chris
The Times
14 January 1913
THE SPITALFIELDS MURDER CHARGE
JURY DISCHARGED
At the Central Criminal Court yesterday, before Mr. Justice Darling, Isaac Parkes, 42, labourer, pleaded "Not guilty" to an indictment and coroner's inquisition charging him with the murder of Lily Pease.
Mr Travers Humphreys and Mr Adrian Clark prosecuted for the Director of Public Prosecutions; Mr St. John Hutchinson defended.
The case of the prosecution was that on the night of December 16 the woman and the prisoner went to some premises in White's Row, Spitalfields, where the prisoner took a room. About half past 1 o'clock the next morning the prisoner was trying to sell a fur necklet, which was identified as the property of the woman. Early the same morning on the steps of the Commercial Street police station a police constable found an envelope addressed to the superintendent of police, which ran as follows:-
"Sunday.
Dear Sir - I want you to send one of your officers to White's Row. There up in a top room you will find the body of a woman. I strangled her in the early part of this morning. This is the second woman I have done in. After this I will tell you more about it when you catch me.
Yours truly, I.P.O.W.
I am starting on the road to W.W."
The prosecution suggested that the first two letters were the prisoner's initials, and that the "O.W." might mean Olbury, Worcestershire, of which place the prisoner said he was a native. The woman's body was afterwards found in the room, her death having been caused by strangulation. On December 18 the prisoner, while at the casual ward of the West Ham Workhouse, told an official that he was the man they wanted for strangling the woman. He then made a number of statements to the effect that the woman and he had several drinks; he went to sleep, and on waking missed his money; he asked the woman where it was, and she replied that she had not got it. He said, "If you don't turn it up I will strangle you," and seized her with both hands and strangled her on the bed. Later the prisoner said, "I gave myself up to get another man out of prison."
The prisoner, giving evidence in his defence, repeated the statements that he had made as to missing his money, and said that when he caught the woman by the throat he did not mean to kill her. He wanted to get his money back. He had had a good deal of drink.
Mr Justice Darling - Did you take that fur thing and try to sell it?
The prisoner - No, my Lord. I know nothing about it.
Mr Hutchinson, for the defence, urged that the prisoner had no intention of murdering the woman or doing her any harm, but that he merely caught hold of her to frighten her into telling him where his money - his week's earnings - was. The medical evidence was that the woman had pneumonia, and therefore was more easily strangled than if she had been in good health.
Mr Justice Darling in summing up explained to the jury in detail the law applicable to the case.
The jury, after half an hour's deliberation in private, returned, and the foreman announced that their verdict was "Guilty of causing the death of the woman, but without wilful intention."
Mr Justice Darling (to the foreman) - That is no verdict at all, sir. I am afraid I shall have to sum this case up again from the beginning. Are you an Englishman?
The foreman - No; but I am here 26 years. That is the unanimous verdict of the jury.
Mr Justice darling - I have summed up the case and explained the law as plainly as I can. It is perfectly plain that the jury have not understood me, and I discharge you from giving a verdict. The case will stand over until next Sessions.
Comment