Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

1895 Murder Of William Birchall, 6 Millers Court

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • 1895 Murder Of William Birchall, 6 Millers Court

    St. James's Gazette
    February 19, 1895
    ****************
    To Join JTR Forums :
    Contact [email protected]

  • #2
    Originally posted by Howard Brown View Post
    St. James's Gazette
    February 19, 1895
    ****************
    That's very interesting. Thanks for posting it, How. Another story I came across a couple of years ago, I think it was around 1885 too, that a woman living at (13?) Miller's Court was attacked and badly beaten by a man who wanted to put her on the streets and become her pimp. He was caught and punished but I don't recall his name now.

    Comment


    • #3
      How, it doesn't mean that he was murdered IN Miller's Court.

      Comment


      • #4
        I'll change the title, Bob...sorry about that !

        Debs....I'll see if I can locate that 1885 story. Thanks for mentioning it.
        XXX
        To Join JTR Forums :
        Contact [email protected]

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by Robert Linford View Post
          How, it doesn't mean that he was murdered IN Miller's Court.

          Hi Robert


          I think we can assume that he was. There's a newspaper article kicking about (on Casebook I think) that sheds more light on this. It seems to me that his missus whacked him on the head with a poker for whatever reason but he didn't want to accuse her and so invented the 'gang' story.


          As you know, but most people here don't, No. 6 Millers Court was the upper floor of the last cottage on the left.


          The wound was so bad that the brain was exposed and he died 3 days later.
          Itsnotrocketsurgery

          Comment


          • #6
            Stephen:

            Thanks a lot for the additional information. Robert was right in that I jumped the gun, initially.....but if this was committed in that room....we're up to around a half dozen murders in that little corner of Whitechapel in a decade.
            To Join JTR Forums :
            Contact [email protected]

            Comment


            • #7
              School inspection - no 6 Miller’s Court

              Remember that “the Wrack report” - by a school inspector who investigated no 6 in 1878 and stopped it from being a schoolroom because of overcrowding. Confusingly the report refers to the schoolroom being “the ground floor room of no 6”, which we understand to be no 5, (with no 6 being upstairs). 19 people were crammed into this room, measuring about 12 feet by 12 feet by 8 feet. But for the life of me, I can’t work out how 12 rooms of that size could have fitted into the back gardens of 26 and 27 Dorset Street. From the police sketch of the Kitty Roman murder, the upstairs of no 12 was cramped 10x12, including the stairs. Also, could “the school” have been been a nursery, while the mothers were away working?

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by Debra Arif View Post
                That's very interesting. Thanks for posting it, How. Another story I came across a couple of years ago, I think it was around 1885 too, that a woman living at (13?) Miller's Court was attacked and badly beaten by a man who wanted to put her on the streets and become her pimp. He was caught and punished but I don't recall his name now.

                Debs

                There is an interesting analogy here do you not think? with regards to coroners courts verdicts and the torsos

                Here with have clear evidence of an assault taking place on the deceased, which resulted in his death, yet an open verdict was recorded.

                With regards to some of the torsos, there was no evidence of any form of assaults taking place, yet verdicts of wilful murder were recorded,

                How times changed.

                www.trevormarriott.co.uk

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by Trevor Marriott View Post
                  Debs

                  There is an interesting analogy here do you not think? with regards to coroners courts verdicts and the torsos

                  Here with have clear evidence of an assault taking place on the deceased, which resulted in his death, yet an open verdict was recorded.

                  With regards to some of the torsos, there was no evidence of any form of assaults taking place, yet verdicts of wilful murder were recorded,

                  How times changed.

                  www.trevormarriott.co.uk
                  We also have the Emily Horsnail case I found from 1887, Trevor. That poor woman never even got a post mortem after her death, resulting she said, from being kicked by a men she didn't know when out a few night before. She died in agony from peritonitis at 19 George Street, Spitalfields. That was an open verdict too.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by Debra Arif View Post
                    We also have the Emily Horsnail case I found from 1887, Trevor. That poor woman never even got a post mortem after her death, resulting she said, from being kicked by a men she didn't know when out a few night before. She died in agony from peritonitis at 19 George Street, Spitalfields. That was an open verdict too.

                    The point I was making, was as I have stated before that how could a jury bring in a verdict of wilful murder on some of the torsos when not even a cause of death could be established. The correct verdicts should have been either open verdicts, or simply found dead.


                    These wrong verdicts in the torso cases in my opinion have led researchers on a wild goose chase, and some are still chasing 130 years later.


                    www.trevormarriott.co.uk

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Here's more on the case, from the ELA of 16th Feb, 1895:

                      Click image for larger version

Name:	image.jpeg
Views:	1
Size:	114.5 KB
ID:	558993

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by Trevor Marriott View Post
                        The point I was making, was as I have stated before that how could a jury bring in a verdict of wilful murder on some of the torsos when not even a cause of death could be established. The correct verdicts should have been either open verdicts, or simply found dead.


                        These wrong verdicts in the torso cases in my opinion have led researchers on a wild goose chase, and some are still chasing 130 years later.


                        www.trevormarriott.co.uk
                        I know the point you were making, Trevor.
                        An open verdict was usually recorded in the cases of suicide without definite proof of intent because of the moral and legal situations surrounding suicide in that era. It was also used in cases where there was suspicion of a crime but no proof of it.
                        Wilful murder was used when there was no doubt that a person came to be dead because of foul play, and being found dismembered, parcelled up and dumped in the Thames screams foul play.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          I would suggest that a verdict of wilful murder also reflected the fact that these were the bodies of relatively young women, no cause of death from disease could be detected and experts gave evidence that they were not anatomical specimens. Also, that someone went to a lot of trouble to dispose of their bodies.

                          Comment

                          Working...
                          X