He argued, therefore, that a quarrel had taken place in the lane between the prisoner and the murdered man; that the latter had struck him several blows with his riding whip (the prisoner’s cut lip and the loss of two of his teeth established this fact), and that, after this assault, Chudley caught hold of a hedgestake, with which he defended himself.
This, under all the circumstances, was the best defence that could have been made, and it caused the jury to deliberate one hour and a half before they delivered their verdict.
It is possible it would have had the desired effect had it not been for the murdered man’s throat being cut.
At the expiration of the time already mentioned the jury returned into the box.
Upon being asked by the clerk, “How say you, gentlemen? Do you find the prisoner guilty or not guilty?”
“We find him guilty,” answered the foreman. “Guilty of wilful murder.”
“And that is the verdict of you all?”
“It is.”
The prisoner was asked if he had anything to say before sentence was passed upon him, when to the surprise of those assembled in court he entered into a long rambling statement, which, to say the truth, was little else than a specimen of ignorance, stupidity, and bigotry.
He said that he was not guilty of wilful murder—that a “cunning woman,” whom he declared to be a witch, had cast her spells upon him, and that she, and she alone, was answerable for the crime that had been committed.