No announcement yet.

One Body, Two Inquests

  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • One Body, Two Inquests

    Southern Echo
    March 5, 1889

  • #2
    This is very interesting. Could this have been Baxter taking advantage of a technicality to be spiteful? It would seem a second inquest would have been a benefit to no one. I understand the jurisdictional questions (Kelly and Chapman both dying in Macdonald's district - but the bodies taken to mortuaries in different districts), but a few questions arise: First, in the cases of Chapman and Kelly, why would they have been taken to different mortuaries (and whose call was it)? Also, as I would assume Baxter was fully aware of the previous inquest described in the case in the article, even if it is clear he was "bound" to hold the inquest previously, what purpose would have it served after Macdonald's?


    • #3

      From here, it seems as if it was a bit of spitefulness.....possibly influenced by the November '88 situation concerning the Kelly Inquest.

      Wonder if there were any unreported incidents similar to the Kelly case and this one.


      • #4
        I'm sure if Baxter had held the inquest on MJK, it would have been dramatically different. It would probably have changed our perspective in more than one way. For one thing, it never would have closed in one day, which probably would have meant an appearance by George Hutchinson - unless of course he only came to the police because he knew the inquest had already concluded.


        • #5
          I agree, John. Baxter's position as a major player in the Case study would have been amped up considerably if he had been in charge of the Kelly inquest.