Chapter 20 Section 20

To take a step back, even if those severed limbs were the remains of Dr. Pikeman, the police and the prosecution did not make a real cause of death identification.Did the victim in this case die from a fractured skull, as some have speculated from the bone fragments found in the smelting furnace, or from a wound to the left chest, as shown by that chest cavity?Prosecutors didn't even mention that in their court arguments, Pliny Merrick said. "If the cause of death is unknown, how can you talk about 'death by violence or crime'?" Taking a step back, even if Dr. Pikeman was indeed killed by Professor West, there is no evidence to prove that it was "premeditated".Pliny Merrick analyzed in detail the contrast in character and economic status between Dr. Pikeman and Professor West, especially the passage about the ore mortgage in Robert Shaw's testimony.From the context of the case, Pliny said, we can "safely" assume that Dr. Peckman's concern is not necessarily money, although money is always the point of contact between creditor and debtor.What really annoyed the doctor was that he thought he had been fooled and deceived by Professor West, so he said "this is a complete fraud and should be punished", "he's going to find West Professor West, teach him a lesson" and so on, that's why he broke into Professor West's house and laboratory many times and humiliated him in public.

If it is true that Dr. Peckman died in Professor West's laboratory sometime after 1:30 p.m. Possibly a bitter dispute.During the dispute, Dr. Pikeman died unexpectedly.The reason, says Pliny Merrick, is simply that Dr. Peckman's aggressiveness is well known, while Professor West's character traits, according to the testimony of many of our esteemed witnesses, are almost entirely devoid of impulsive, violent factors, or criminal tendencies. "And note that during the testimony of these witnesses, the prosecution did not even cross-take evidence, not once! This cannot but be seen as a tacit consent."

Pliny Merrick continued to construct his so-called "case history", he said that either Professor West accidentally injured Dr. Peckman, or Dr. Peckman lost his balance or self-control in a hurry.But no matter what the situation is, the consequences are the same for Professor West - he feels that he "wouldn't be able to clean himself up even if he jumped into the Joels River", so he made this bad move to destroy the corpse. Afterwards, Pliny Merrick spent a long time explaining to the jurors the difference between "premeditated murder" and "manslaughter", which was and was later considered by legal scholars to be a major problem for the defense. mistake.Because, first, the defendant made a "plea of ​​not guilty" in this case, that is, as Professor West insisted from beginning to end, he did not kill Dr. Peckman; second, during the entire trial, the focus of court debate was It also revolves around Professor West's "whether to kill people", but never introduces the discussion of "why kill people".However, now, the defendant talks about "premeditated murder" and "manslaughter" in the final concluding speech without any reason, which not only dilutes the jurors' impression of "whether to kill", but also guides them to "do homicide". Why do you kill?" considerations.To put it more seriously, it can be said that all the previous efforts of the defendant will come to naught, and the consequences are self-evident.

At the end of the seven-hour speech, Pliny Merrick finally began to attack Ivren Littorfeld, as Professor West's friends had always expected.He said that Everren kept saying that he worked so hard to climb through the 60-foot tunnel and drilled through five layers of brick walls in the suffocating basement not for bounty, but to find out the truth of the matter Let me ask, since Yverren suspects Professor West, why didn't he report it to the police?Since he knew that "everywhere in the building has been searched", with the exception of the sewage pipes of the chemical laboratory, why didn't he ask the police to search it?On Wednesday afternoon, when he entered Professor West's laboratory through the window because the walls were hot, why didn't he check the bathroom?He thought it was suspicious that the professor lit a fire in the smelting furnace, why didn't he check the furnace at that time?On Friday, why tell the officer to "come back in 20 minutes or half an hour" when he "has already cut a big hole in the wall" before meeting Officer Trinomon?Didn't he want someone else to be there when the brick wall was dug?Also, the sewer pipe snaked "eight or nine feet" in the basement, so why were those stumps right where the brick wall opening was?

"It sounds like he put it there himself," said Pliny Merrick, "and I think he put it there." But in the final minutes Pliny veered off course again.He said there was also a possibility that another unknown "mysterious third person" other than Professor West and Ifren had killed Dr. Peckman and then hid his body or part of his body in the Inside Harvard Medical School.It is conceivable that during the loan lending process of Dr. Pikeman, it is definitely not only Professor West who had a quarrel with him and formed a personal enmity.Pliny quotes what Professor West told the police on the night of his arrest: "I don't believe those are Dr. Peckman's remains, but I'm sure I have no idea how they got into the medical school. ’” Pliny Merrick told the jurors, describing Professor John West’s innocence. "He couldn't tell you how the severed limbs were hidden in the medical school, he couldn't solve the mysteries that put him in prison. Because he knew perfectly well that he was not the perpetrator, he showed you the The existence of a 'mysterious third party' - an extremely plausible possibility that cannot be ruled out by all the evidence presented to the court by the prosecution."

The prosecution's concluding remarks began at 9:00 am on Saturday, March 30, the eleventh day of the trial. State Attorney General Jon Cliff first took aim at the defense's strongest point of defense -- more than one witness swore they saw Dr. Peckman alive after 1:30 p.m. on November 23, 1849 -- but not pointing straight at.The attorney general said that if the jury had good reason to believe that the police found the remains of Dr. Peckman at Harvard Medical School and there was enough evidence to link the "prisoner" to those remains, then someone, on that day or any day, What did it matter whether Dr. Peckman was seen or not?