A bit of history for you...
Nov. 8th, 2007 11:31 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
miss_squiddyLook what I spotted today! This:
Police want more blacks, eh? Is that a crime statistic or a policy decision? (I believe the back said 'Teen freaks on rampage' too...)
Which leads me nicely on to this...
On August 18th 1903, local authorities in Great Wyrley arrested George Ernest Thompson Edalji, a 27 year old solicitor, on charges of mutilating horses and writing threatening letters which actually accused Edalji of the mutilations. Edailji was tried and convicted, receiving a seven year sentence of penal servitude with hard labour.
Edalji was the eldest son of an Asian father (Shapurji Edalji) and English mother (Charlotte Stoneham). A promising law student and writer, he and his family had previously been the victim of racial harassment and the recipients of several campaigns of abusive letters. (Edalji’s father had been appointed vicar of Great Wyrley in 1876 but was not accepted by the locals, who could not understand how an Asian could be the minister of a Christian Church.) The police displayed the same prejudice, going straight to his house after a pony at Great Wyrley colliery had to be put down after receiving a long shallow cut along its stomach.
The animal slashings had been occurring since February 1903 and although Edalji was arrested for one specific crime, it was inferred that he was also responsible for the killing and maiming of at least five horses, three cows and a sheep, had threatened Sergeant Charles Robinson and was responsible for a campaign of abusive letters, some of which accused Edalji himself. The police accused him of sacrificing the animals to his gods, despite his Christian beliefs. With scant evidence to support the case, numerous witnesses testifying that Edalji had been in Bridgetown until 9.30 on the night of the attack (before going to bed at 10.45 in the same room as his father and not rising until the following morning) and the anonymous letters continuing after Edalji’s imprisonment, it still took three years, a petition signed by 10,000 people (including barristers and solicitors), widespread publicity and the appearance of R. D. Yelverton, former Chief Justice of the Bahamas to secure Edalji’s release, which eventually occurred in October 1906 ‘because it was considered that the sentence passed upon him was unduly severe’. Even after this, Edalji was not granted a pardon and continued to remain under police survaeillance, preventing him from practising as a solicitor.
However, help was at hand! Several prominent members of society, including Sir Arthur Conan Doyle, read about the case in Truth magazine and established an Edalji committee. Conan Doyle began his investigations in December 1906 and quickly established that an innocent man had been convicted. He found that the ‘bloody’ razors found in the Edalji home were simply rusty, the mud on George's boots was of a different soil type than that of the field where the last mutilation took place and that Thomas Henry Gurrin, the handwriting expert who testified that Edalji's handwriting matched the writing on the taunting letters, had made a serious mistake in another case causing an innocent man to be convicted. As well as this, he hypothesised that Edalji’s jacket was simply damp when it would have been thoroughly soaked by the rain if he had gone outside on the night of the attack, that the hairs found upon it could have been transferred onto it from other evidence collected by the police and transported together and that the small spots of blood found upon it could have resulted from undercooked meat, whereas "the most adept operator who ever lived would not rip up a horse with a razor on a dark night and have only two threepenny spots of blood to show for it." Finally, Conan Doyle used his previous experience as an eye doctor and noted that Edalji held the newspaper at an angle and close to his face when he read "proving not only a high degree of myopia, but marked astigmatism. The idea of such a man scouring fields at night and assaulting cattle while avoiding the watching police was ludicrous… There, in a single physical defect, lay the moral certainty of his innocence."
Concluding eight months of investigation, Conan Doyle proved that Edalji could not have been guilty, casting suspicion instead on a local butcher’s apprentice named Royden Sharp and his brother Wallace. Royden had a history of cruelty to animals, owned the tools required for the job, had been witnessed ripping the seats of a railway carriage in a similar fashion to the animal mutilations and was known for forging letters. Concerned about their reputation, the Great Wyrley authorities warned Conan Doyle that publishing his findings would result in libel action. Conan Doyle went ahead, altering the names of the Sharp brothers but leaving his accusations obvious. In January 1907, he sent his findings to the Daily Telegraph and Home Office, who appointed a committee of three people to re-examine the case in lieu of any formal retrial system. The committee concluded that the evidence against Edalji was weak and accepted that he could not have been guilty of the maimings, granting him a pardon in May of that year. However, they considered compensating him for the three years he spent in prison unnecessary and considered that he may have been guilty of writing the letters against his family.
Although Conan Doyle said that the Government’s failure to compensate Edalji was "a blot on the record of English justice", the decision made a huge difference for Edalji himself. The Law Society readmitted him and he was once again able to practice as a solicitor. In 1907, the Court of Criminal Appeal was established, partially as a result of the Edalji case.
The case has been recounted in Conan Doyle’s own ‘The story of Mr. George Edalji’ (1907) and ‘Arthur and George’ by Julian Barnes, which was nominated for the 2005 Man Booker Prize.
In 1934, Enoch Knowles was identified as the author of the poison pen letters sent to Edalji’s family, the press and police for the duration of the case as well as other letters sent to public figures, the royal family, victims and witnesses of other crimes and many other cases reported in the papers. The animal maimings continued until September 1915. No further suspects were identified.
[Poll #1085388]
Police want more blacks, eh? Is that a crime statistic or a policy decision? (I believe the back said 'Teen freaks on rampage' too...)
Which leads me nicely on to this...
On August 18th 1903, local authorities in Great Wyrley arrested George Ernest Thompson Edalji, a 27 year old solicitor, on charges of mutilating horses and writing threatening letters which actually accused Edalji of the mutilations. Edailji was tried and convicted, receiving a seven year sentence of penal servitude with hard labour.
Edalji was the eldest son of an Asian father (Shapurji Edalji) and English mother (Charlotte Stoneham). A promising law student and writer, he and his family had previously been the victim of racial harassment and the recipients of several campaigns of abusive letters. (Edalji’s father had been appointed vicar of Great Wyrley in 1876 but was not accepted by the locals, who could not understand how an Asian could be the minister of a Christian Church.) The police displayed the same prejudice, going straight to his house after a pony at Great Wyrley colliery had to be put down after receiving a long shallow cut along its stomach.
The animal slashings had been occurring since February 1903 and although Edalji was arrested for one specific crime, it was inferred that he was also responsible for the killing and maiming of at least five horses, three cows and a sheep, had threatened Sergeant Charles Robinson and was responsible for a campaign of abusive letters, some of which accused Edalji himself. The police accused him of sacrificing the animals to his gods, despite his Christian beliefs. With scant evidence to support the case, numerous witnesses testifying that Edalji had been in Bridgetown until 9.30 on the night of the attack (before going to bed at 10.45 in the same room as his father and not rising until the following morning) and the anonymous letters continuing after Edalji’s imprisonment, it still took three years, a petition signed by 10,000 people (including barristers and solicitors), widespread publicity and the appearance of R. D. Yelverton, former Chief Justice of the Bahamas to secure Edalji’s release, which eventually occurred in October 1906 ‘because it was considered that the sentence passed upon him was unduly severe’. Even after this, Edalji was not granted a pardon and continued to remain under police survaeillance, preventing him from practising as a solicitor.
However, help was at hand! Several prominent members of society, including Sir Arthur Conan Doyle, read about the case in Truth magazine and established an Edalji committee. Conan Doyle began his investigations in December 1906 and quickly established that an innocent man had been convicted. He found that the ‘bloody’ razors found in the Edalji home were simply rusty, the mud on George's boots was of a different soil type than that of the field where the last mutilation took place and that Thomas Henry Gurrin, the handwriting expert who testified that Edalji's handwriting matched the writing on the taunting letters, had made a serious mistake in another case causing an innocent man to be convicted. As well as this, he hypothesised that Edalji’s jacket was simply damp when it would have been thoroughly soaked by the rain if he had gone outside on the night of the attack, that the hairs found upon it could have been transferred onto it from other evidence collected by the police and transported together and that the small spots of blood found upon it could have resulted from undercooked meat, whereas "the most adept operator who ever lived would not rip up a horse with a razor on a dark night and have only two threepenny spots of blood to show for it." Finally, Conan Doyle used his previous experience as an eye doctor and noted that Edalji held the newspaper at an angle and close to his face when he read "proving not only a high degree of myopia, but marked astigmatism. The idea of such a man scouring fields at night and assaulting cattle while avoiding the watching police was ludicrous… There, in a single physical defect, lay the moral certainty of his innocence."
Concluding eight months of investigation, Conan Doyle proved that Edalji could not have been guilty, casting suspicion instead on a local butcher’s apprentice named Royden Sharp and his brother Wallace. Royden had a history of cruelty to animals, owned the tools required for the job, had been witnessed ripping the seats of a railway carriage in a similar fashion to the animal mutilations and was known for forging letters. Concerned about their reputation, the Great Wyrley authorities warned Conan Doyle that publishing his findings would result in libel action. Conan Doyle went ahead, altering the names of the Sharp brothers but leaving his accusations obvious. In January 1907, he sent his findings to the Daily Telegraph and Home Office, who appointed a committee of three people to re-examine the case in lieu of any formal retrial system. The committee concluded that the evidence against Edalji was weak and accepted that he could not have been guilty of the maimings, granting him a pardon in May of that year. However, they considered compensating him for the three years he spent in prison unnecessary and considered that he may have been guilty of writing the letters against his family.
Although Conan Doyle said that the Government’s failure to compensate Edalji was "a blot on the record of English justice", the decision made a huge difference for Edalji himself. The Law Society readmitted him and he was once again able to practice as a solicitor. In 1907, the Court of Criminal Appeal was established, partially as a result of the Edalji case.
The case has been recounted in Conan Doyle’s own ‘The story of Mr. George Edalji’ (1907) and ‘Arthur and George’ by Julian Barnes, which was nominated for the 2005 Man Booker Prize.
In 1934, Enoch Knowles was identified as the author of the poison pen letters sent to Edalji’s family, the press and police for the duration of the case as well as other letters sent to public figures, the royal family, victims and witnesses of other crimes and many other cases reported in the papers. The animal maimings continued until September 1915. No further suspects were identified.
[Poll #1085388]
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
(no subject)
Date: 2007-11-09 09:06 am (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2007-11-09 11:06 am (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2007-11-09 12:39 pm (UTC)