ILFORD MURDER CASE

Otago Daily Times, Issue 18735, 13 December 1922, Page 5

ILFORD MURDER CASE

A VERDICT OF GUILTY. SENTENCE OF DEATH PASSED. Press Association—By Telegraph— Copyright LONDON, December 11. Sir Henry Curtis Bennett, continuing his address at the Ilford trial, said that there was no evidence to support the charge that Mrs Thompson participated in or wished the murder. Her letters showed that she merely desired to leave her husband. He asked the jury to say that the killing was an unpremeditated act by Bywaters, who feared an attack on his life. Mrs Thompson’s every act was consistent with her story. She did not know that murder was going to be committed, and she was horrified when she found that her husband had been killed. Tho Solicitor-General (Mr Inskip) argued that tho defence that the crime was justifiable homicide or manslaughter could not be substantiated. There was no evidence that Thompson ever had a revolver; therefore the jury could not possibly conclude that Bywaters had acted in self-defence. Mrs Thompson was clearly a principal in the crime. Undoubtedly the compact between the prisoners was that the husband should be removed by poison. Mr Inskip said that the jury must be satisfied as to Mrs Thompson’s’ persuasion of Bywaters to commit the tragedy before they could find her guilty. If the letters did not relate to murder the indictment would not lie against Mrs Thompson ; but the letters were consistent with the theory that the idea occupying all her attention was how her husband could be despatched by poison. They reeked with criminal proposals, and there was no object in making him ill except the awful consequence that ho would lose his life. If it were true that she did this to keep Bywaters’s affection, it was damning evidence against Bywaters. Upon a' fair reading of the letters the fury must conclude that the same idea was ip the minds of both prisoners, resulting in the agreement, the consequence of which was that Thompson met his death. Mr Justice Shearman, in summing up. said that the charge was a common one of an adulterous wife and a man murdering her husband. He was sure that the jury was filled with disgust at the nonsense in the letters inferring that tho husband’s love was improper, and that illicit love was grand and noble; but they must get rid of these feelings and deal with the facts. , He referred to Bywaters’s statement: “I meant to injure, not to kill him.” His Lordship held up a large knife and said: “If anyone intending to injure another uses a weapon which might reasonably be expected to murder, then the user is responsible for the murder.” The correspondence showed that the prisoners had done their utmost to keen Thompson in the dark regarding their relations, though the defence alleged that they were urging him to agree to a divorce. The jurv should remember that Bywaters stabbed Thompson several times in the neck. Regarding Mrs Thompson, the question was whether there was an arrangement between the prisoners that murder should be committed. If they thought that the letters meant what they said they might conclude that Mrs Thompson was" inciting Bywaters to assist in poisoning her husband. If tile nrisoners found that poisoning was no longer possible they*might naturally turn to other means. The letters formed the strongest case that Mrs Thompson was writing to Bywaters asking him to help to remove her husband. If the letters were accurate Mrs Thompson administered poison. It was said that they were mere melodrama; but that was for the jury to say. A later message states that Frederick Bywatera and Mrs Edith Thompson were sentenced to death. The jury were absent two hours, and found both prisoners guilty. Mrs Thompson had to be supported by two wardresses. After sentence she sobbingly said: “I am not guilty. Mv God, I am not guilty.” She then collapsed. Bvwaters, walking steadily to the front of the dock and looking "defiantly first at the foreman and then at the Judge, said: “The verdict is wrong. Edith Thompson is not guilty. I am no murderer. I am no assassin.” Several women spectators, including Mrs Thompson’s mother, fainted when thev heard the sentence.—A. and N.Z. Cable. (Received Dec. 12, at 7.30 p.m.) The newspapers point out that no woman has been hanged in Great Britain since Mrs Wills alias James, a baby farmer, was executed at Cardiff in 1907. A. and N.Z. Cable.