Please activate JavaScript!
Please install Adobe Flash Player, click here for download

MAGUS

49 John Hetherton, (police constable) – ‘I saw the prisoner at Bridewell. He told me on the next day he wanted to tell me about the case. I said I wanted to hear nothing about it. He then said he had buried it in a potato ridge. He said he had been sleeping at the fire and was awoke by a noise. When he awoke, he said he saw the sow having the child in its mouth. That he got it from the beast but it caught it again and before he could get it relieved, it was killed. He then took me to where he had buried the child, took it up, and carried it to the barracks and brought it out of the basket. It had three wounds on the face and throat. The wound on the throat was about an inch long. I went and saw the bed, which was about two feet high. I also saw the pig. It was a very large sow. The prisoner said he had been determined to take the child and bury it in his father’s grave. It would be difficult for the pig to get into the bed.’ [Cross-examined] – ‘I think the pig could not have got the child, except it had leapt into the bed.’ Dr Maxwell – ‘I saw the body of the child. I found a large incised wound across the nose. It must have been inflicted by a cutting instrument. There were a number of other wounds. There were punctured wounds. There was a large incised wound across the throat but it was not so clean a wound as the one across the nose. There was one up the right cheek. It was an irregular wound, the bone was fractured. I cannot say by what kind of instrument it might have been inflicted. My first impression was that the wounds had been inflicted by the bite of an animal, but I think the one across the face could not have been so, in the first instance. It was a clean incised wound.’ Dr Black – ‘I examined the body on the subsequent day. The wound across the face must have been inflicted by a sharp instrument. It could not have been inflicted by the bite of an animal. I think also that two other wounds on the face could not have been inflicted by a bite either. The tongue was divided by a sharp instrument. I think the wound across the throat was not caused by a bite, for the skin was not removed to the extent it would have been if caused by a bite. The wound across the face was sufficient to cause death from the loss of blood.’ [Cross-examined] – ‘There was part of the wound in the throat regular, and part of it irregular. It would have required the greatest violence to have cut the child’s head in two by the blow of a turf spade.’ Dr Diamond – ‘I assisted Dr Maxwell. The wound on the throat was a lacerated one, but that on the face was by a sharp instrument. I think some of the other wounds could not have been caused by a bite.’

Pages Overview