Open Access Publisher and Free Library
03-MEMOIRS.jpg

HISTORY-MEMOIRS

IMPERIAL HISTORY, CRIMINAL HISTORIES-MEMOIRS

Posts tagged murder
Strange, Inhuman Deaths Strange, Inhuman Deaths: Murder in Tudor England

By John G. Bellamy

Murder in the sixteenth century, which to English men and women of that time meant planned slaying, usually with an element of stealth or with the victim taken unawares, was not then a common crime; rather the reverse. For example, Sir Thomas Smith, the knowledgeable Tudor legal commentator, tells us that murder by poisoning was virtually unknown in his day. Also writing in the reign of Elizabeth I was William Harrison, who, in a contribution to Holinshed's Chronicles that dealt with the criminal law, its penalties and its impact on society, stated that, although manslaughter and "bloudie robberies" occurred "now and then," "we do not often heare of horrible, merciless, and wilfull murthers."1 Nor do other writers of the period who touch on criminal law or on crime and public order indicate anything different. These brief indications of a relatively low murder rate are borne out by statistics to be garnered from the extant assize records of the late sixteenth century. Because of the existence of victims' corpses, murder may well have been among the most reported of felonies (that is, reported to officers of the law), yet in Sussex and Cheshire in Elizabeth's reign only about 5 percent of all persons put on trial for felony were suspected murderers, while the relatively high rate of 8 percent in Kent has to be set against the trivial 1 percent in Essex. The overall impression is that probably about 1 in every 20 indicted felons was believed to be a murderer.

History Press Limited, Dec 1, 2008, 212 pages

Murders and Madness: Medicine, Law, and Society in the Fin de Siècle

USED BOOK. MAY CONTAIN MARK-UP

By Ruth Harris

FROM THE INTRODUCTION : “In 1902, a hairdresser's assistant, Adrien Virgile Legrand, was sentenced in the Parisian Cour d'assises to hard labour for life for slitting his six-year-old son's throat. On the surface the case appeared simple enough, as Legrand freely admitted the deed and received the harsh punishment prescribed. However, during the trial, he asserted that he had acted under the influence of a 'delirious crisis', a defence which seriously complicated the proceedings. As in many other murder trials in this period, the issue became not whether he was the author of the crime but rather if he could be punished for it. To determine his responsibility, the court sought to evaluate Legrand's defence by probing into his motivations, character, and past history…”

Oxford. Clarendon. 1989. 385p.