Two Murders - No Witnesses

Canary42 | 00:40 Thu 11th Feb 2016 | News

3 Answers

This makes interesting reading. His first murder (no witnesses) was recorded as an accident, but the second one (no witnesses) raised doubts about the first.

Evidence gathered on the second was sufficient to convict him - evidence on the first now being re-visited casts doubts on that one also.

Could the first have been handled better - easy with hindsight of course.

Read it, and see what you think.

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/real-life-stories/husband-pushed-wife-130ft-cliff-7307598?ref=yfp

Another Death For The Us Gun Lobby To Ponder Upon

Is This The Most Pathetic Man In Britain?

Answers

1 to 3 of 3

Best Answer

No best answer has yet been selected by Canary42. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.

For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.

Jackdaw33

This case may be of some interest. It allowed similar facts to be adduced as evidence in court.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Joseph_Smith

Canary42

Question Author

That's fascinating jackdaw, with its similarities too - and an excellent investigation by Spilsbury but a bit alarming that there was almost another victim when D I Neil tested Spilsbury's hypothesis.

Jackdaw33

Here's another one.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mary_Elizabeth_Wilson

1 to 3 of 3

Do you know the answer?