Russell Vs Midgley Essay

This proceeding, reference number: t16781211e-23 on December 11, 1678 has two offenders named Nathaniel Russell and John Watson. These two men are being prosecuted for the killing of William Midgley. Both William and Midgley pleaded not guilty in the accounts of murder. They are accused of giving Midgley a “mortal wound on his breast” from which he died days later. There are three witnesses who include: Dorothy Midgley, sister to William Midgley, Elizabeth Symmonds, and Rebeccah Niccols. All the witnesses were in the room at the time of the murder which took place November 18, 1678. From all their testimonies I gathered that Watson and Russell came to arrest Dorothy Midgley for debt she owed an aunt of hers. Then when the men came to arrest

All the men were armed, but William had a curtain rod as his weapon. No one is quite sure who stabbed William. Dorothy says she thinks it was Russell who stabbed William. Watson claims he was just there to arrest his prisoner even though he heard a boy call out that he was going to kill them. Then as he is leaving he hears a boy cry out “I am killed.” At the end it is said “the Writ and Warrant to justify the Arrest were read, whereby upon the Return it was found, that they had returned a Rescous by the Party that was killed, which the Court told Watson was a great Evidence against him.” Also it is said that because there was no provocation, the law states that it implies the charge to be murder. Nathaniel Russell was found guilty and John Watson was found not

They heard the witnesses statements, which were not helpful because each one said something different or did not have a lot of details. For example Symmonds said “That the Boy did not give them any provocation; That he had a piece of a curtain rod, which she did not see him lift up against them.” This says nothing about the men attacking William and nothing to help the case besides saying that William did not give them any provocation. But on the other hand Russell said that William had some sort of sword, and Watson said that the boy called out that he was going to kill them. I believe this jury made the decision based on the witnesses testimony and not the prisoner’s testimony. Russell and Watson had no motive to murder William which is why I believe there was some sort of provocation. The jury most likely thought of the prisoners as awful people because they were already imprisoned. I got this impression because there was no evidence, besides the witnesses, against the prisoners. They made the decision with whatever the witnesses said without any evidence. If you had a case like this, they would not be able to prosecute you because there was not enough evidence. Witnesses are important, yes, but sometimes they do lie even under oath. The court might have had evidence but it was not stated in this