![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
UBC: a pair of Georgian murders
May. 27th, 2018 08:41 amCooke, Elizabeth. The Damnation of John Donellan.
The murder of Sir Theodosius Broughton--or maybe the not-murder of SIr Theodosius Broughton, since Cooke's speculation that he was (a) epileptic, (b) killing himself with quack medicines (18th century "cures" for syphilis all involve great quantities of mercury), or (c) both, seems not unreasonable--and the question of who did it. Did John Donellan kill his 20 year old brother in law, or did Sir Theodosius' mother kill him? Since everything we've got is documents from 1780 when neither forensic science nor medical science was even invented yet, all Cooke can do is speculate (and I don't buy all of her speculations), but she certainly raises enough reasonable doubt to make it clear that Donellan should not have been convicted and hanged for his brother-in-law's death.
Borowitz, Albert. The Thurtell-Hunt Murder Case.
This is an excellent no-frills nuts-and-bolts discussion of the murder of William Weare by John Thurtell and a couple of his friends. There's no doubt involved here (Thurtell shot Weare, cut his throat, and actually killed him by shoving the barrel of the gun through his skull), except in the degree of involvement of Joseph Hunt and William Probert, both of whom gave accounts of the murder that threw the blame exceedingly hard at the other guy. Borowitz is comprehensive, a little dry, but not "academic" (by which I mean unnecessarily polysyllabic and difficult to read--if it was academic without the sarcastic quote-marks, I would mean something else). If you're interested in Regency England at all, this is full of details about daily life and the Fancy (boxing) and the odd workings of the justice system.
The murder of Sir Theodosius Broughton--or maybe the not-murder of SIr Theodosius Broughton, since Cooke's speculation that he was (a) epileptic, (b) killing himself with quack medicines (18th century "cures" for syphilis all involve great quantities of mercury), or (c) both, seems not unreasonable--and the question of who did it. Did John Donellan kill his 20 year old brother in law, or did Sir Theodosius' mother kill him? Since everything we've got is documents from 1780 when neither forensic science nor medical science was even invented yet, all Cooke can do is speculate (and I don't buy all of her speculations), but she certainly raises enough reasonable doubt to make it clear that Donellan should not have been convicted and hanged for his brother-in-law's death.
Borowitz, Albert. The Thurtell-Hunt Murder Case.
This is an excellent no-frills nuts-and-bolts discussion of the murder of William Weare by John Thurtell and a couple of his friends. There's no doubt involved here (Thurtell shot Weare, cut his throat, and actually killed him by shoving the barrel of the gun through his skull), except in the degree of involvement of Joseph Hunt and William Probert, both of whom gave accounts of the murder that threw the blame exceedingly hard at the other guy. Borowitz is comprehensive, a little dry, but not "academic" (by which I mean unnecessarily polysyllabic and difficult to read--if it was academic without the sarcastic quote-marks, I would mean something else). If you're interested in Regency England at all, this is full of details about daily life and the Fancy (boxing) and the odd workings of the justice system.
