Holymead
protested to the judge. Counsel for the defence protested that he had
allowed his learned friend in opening the case a great deal of latitude
as to the relations which had previously existed between the witness Hill
and the prisoner, because the defence did not intend to attempt to hide
the fact that the prisoner had a criminal record, but he had no intention
of allowing a police witness to introduce irrelevant matter in order to
prejudice the jury against the prisoner. His Honour told the witness to
confine himself to answering the questions put to him, and not to
volunteer information.
After this rebuke Inspector Chippenfield resumed giving evidence. He
related what Birchill had said when arrested, and declared that he was
positive that the footprints found outside the kitchen window were made
by the boots produced in court which Birchill had been wearing at the
time he was arrested. He produced a jemmy which he had found at Fanning's
flat, and said that it fitted the marks on the window at Riversbrook
which had been forced on the night of the 18th of August.
Inspector Chippenfield's evidence was followed by that of the two tramway
employees, who declared that to the best of their belief Birchill was the
man who boarded their tram at half-past nine on the night of the 18th of
August, and rode to the terminus at Hampstead, which they reached at 10.
Pages:
246
247
248
249
250
251
252
253
254
255
256
257
258
259
260
261
262
263
264
265
266
267
268
269
270