Mr Briggs' Hat: The True Story of a Victorian Railway Murder Read Online Free PDF

members of the jury but he was bullish and instead demandedthat the names of all potential jurors be drawn by ballot in order to ensure that the final group included men taken from the panels of diverse neighbourhoods and counties. A compromise was reached. After several objections twelve men were sworn, all from the lower-middle classes: small-businessmen including a lodging-house keeper, a tobacconist, a grocer, a blacksmith, a tallow chandler, a victualler and a handful of accountancy clerks. They ranged in age from eighteen to forty-five.
    The Solicitor General rose to open the case for the Crown. Cool, rational and restrained, he went straight to the nub. Gentlemen, this is a case which has excited unusual and painful interest , he began, one which … has been canvassed and discussed in almost every newspaper, I might say almost every house in the kingdom; and it is one on which some persons might be inclined already to form an opinion . He entreated the jury to discard everything they might have heard or read and to try the prisoner on the evidence alone.
    This was traditional etiquette in the opening of a capital trial: the promise of reason over emotion, the elimination of the possibility that the prisoner would be made a scapegoat. Drawing attention to the utmost skill and eloquence of Müller’s defence, Collier aimed also to remove residual pity for the apparent powerlessness of the prisoner at the bar. Then, by recognising the painful duty of the jurors, he emphasised the grave responsibility of their task. Over the next hour he dwelt on the seriousness of the crime and on the esteem in which Thomas Briggs had been held. Outlining the basic facts against Müller, he promised to exhibit Briggs’ stick and his hat, watch and chain. He lingered over descriptions of the victim’s injuries and, indicating the model of carriage 69, he pointed out each place where blood was found – human blood, without a doubt, on the evidence of Dr Letheby who would shortly be called to testify. They would see the stick found in the carriage: a stick that may have received its bloody stains merely by being present in the carriage but whichmay also have been powerfully wielded by the murderer … swinging it around with great violence to inflict the injuries Mr Briggs sustained.
    Collier spoke of the plain and simple facts , in rhetoric designed to transfix the assembly. He enumerated the witnesses, outlining how each one of their depositions would substantiate a sequence of accusations. He would show how close Müller lived to the route of the North London Railway and to the place where the body was discovered. The evidence of Mr and Mrs Repsch, Jonathan and Eliza Matthews, the silversmith John Death and others would each forge and prove a link in the chain of facts that told against him.
    Taking care to avoid any reference to the statement made by Thomas Lee, Collier set about deflating doubt about whether the violence was committed by one person only or by more than one person . It was his opinion that just one man was responsible for the deed, for he believed that a number of thieves would have rifled Briggs’ pockets and stolen his other valuables. In the absence of any motive other than theft he posited that the murder was the result of some sudden determination , an impulsive rather than a premeditated act. What it came down to, he stated with some force, was that the stolen items were found on Müller and – more – Müller’s own hat had mistakenly been left behind at the scene of the crime. He would set out to prove this beyond doubt. He would show that Müller had no alibi and he would recount Müller’s movements during the week following the murder including visits on which he showed off a new watch, chain and hat, offering several different accounts about their origin. He would show that a series of pawnbroker deals involving the stolen goods could be traced back to the German tailor, proving that he was in great