When there's no body of evidence...
March 16, 2009 3:58 PM Subscribe
In the history of American law, what was the earliest known case of a murder suspect being convicted without the police ever having found the victim's corpse?
I know nothing about law, am not a law student myself. But it's for a project I'm working on, and I'd really appreciate some dates and examples of the earliest (and/or most famous) precedents of a successful murder prosecution when there was no dead body to be found.
Only looking for American cases.
Thanks!
I know nothing about law, am not a law student myself. But it's for a project I'm working on, and I'd really appreciate some dates and examples of the earliest (and/or most famous) precedents of a successful murder prosecution when there was no dead body to be found.
Only looking for American cases.
Thanks!
Best answer: One of the most famous early cases of this sort in the US was the conviction of of Leonard Ewing Scott.
posted by Sidhedevil at 4:12 PM on March 16, 2009
posted by Sidhedevil at 4:12 PM on March 16, 2009
Oh, snap, hangashore. I don't think the Scott case was actually the first in the US, though--just the first high-profile one.
posted by Sidhedevil at 4:13 PM on March 16, 2009
posted by Sidhedevil at 4:13 PM on March 16, 2009
Best answer: Here's a Columbia Law Review article discussing these issues (JSTOR link). It points to a 1959 case and claims that "no American case heretofore has held the corpus delicti proved solely by circumstantial evidence without an additional showing of either an identification of any remains that are found, direct testimony of means of death, admission of knowledge of death, or a confession of guilt." 61 Columbia Law Review 740, 741 (1961). But that's narrower than your question calls for.
The earliest case mentioned in the footnotes is an 1880 case in which admission of knowledge of death and circumstantial evidence of death were held sufficient when no body was found. People v. Alviso, 55 Cal. 230 (1880).
posted by jedicus at 4:16 PM on March 16, 2009
The earliest case mentioned in the footnotes is an 1880 case in which admission of knowledge of death and circumstantial evidence of death were held sufficient when no body was found. People v. Alviso, 55 Cal. 230 (1880).
posted by jedicus at 4:16 PM on March 16, 2009
Best answer: Indeed, Scott was not the first, as this website so carefully documents (Diane Dimond wrote a good piece about the site at HuffPo).
The Sarah Lavinia case of 1843 is almost certainly the first US case in which murder convictions were obtained without a body present.
posted by Sidhedevil at 4:19 PM on March 16, 2009
The Sarah Lavinia case of 1843 is almost certainly the first US case in which murder convictions were obtained without a body present.
posted by Sidhedevil at 4:19 PM on March 16, 2009
Best answer: Possibly not the right body in the George Parkman murder case, 1849. The body parts found were mixed with medical school dissection discards. Simon Schama wrote about this murder in Dead Certainties.
posted by kuujjuarapik at 4:35 PM on March 16, 2009
posted by kuujjuarapik at 4:35 PM on March 16, 2009
What about HH Holmes' victims? Were all of them found?
posted by melodykramer at 4:59 PM on March 16, 2009
posted by melodykramer at 4:59 PM on March 16, 2009
Response by poster: I think the victim's blood is there. So not a complete lack of bodily evidence, I suppose. Sorry for not being specific enough!
posted by np312 at 5:29 PM on March 16, 2009
posted by np312 at 5:29 PM on March 16, 2009
This thread is closed to new comments.
posted by hangashore at 4:10 PM on March 16, 2009