User:Micheladv92/sandbox

'''IF YOU ARE GOING TO GIVE ME A SUGGESTION AS PART OF THE TASK OF WEEK 10, PLEASE CONSULT THE PAGE https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Giuseppe_Marc%27Antonio_Baretti AS I HAVE BEEN WORKING THERE, WITHOUT USING THE SANDBOX ANYMORE. THE SECTION I WORKED ON IS "MURDER TRIAL". Thank you''' Micheladv92 (talk) 11:34, 16 November 2015 (UTC)

The trial
On 18th October 1769 in a trial at the Old Bailey Baretti was accused for the murder of Evan Morgan. In the trial Baretti is called with the English name Jospeh. Being Italian he had the right to be tried by a jury of half foreigners, which he refused to, as we can read from the first lines of the Old Bailey Proceedings Online, so that he was normally tried by a jury of Englishmen.

Testimonies and versions of the facts
The trial opens with the witness of Elizabeth Ward, a well-known prostitute which described when and where the events started. Following her own account, in the evening on 6th October 1769, between nine and ten, she was sitting down on a step together with another woman in the Haymarket, an area which used to be popular for being the place of prostitutes and footpads, but with coffeehouses and shops too. She said, the other woman approached Baretti, who was passing there, and she thought she touched him. But she accused him of having struck her on her face. She said there was nobody around, but when she cried three men arrived, namely Evan Morgan, Thomas Patman and John Clark. One of them asked Baretti how he could strike a woman and then they shoved each other, Baretti ending up being on the ground. She saw Baretti taking out his knife, but did not see him using it against the men. She also says that then Baretti ran away and they ran after him. She saw him going into a shop in Panton-street. In the cross-examination she is asked to give more information about the woman who was with her, but Ward says she did not know her, she can only describes her physically. She is asked also more and more details, for example where the other lady did put her hands when grabbing Baretti and she said towards his private parts. This was possible because eighteen-century breeches used to have some slits on the side, and prostitute often tried to slip a hand as a way of attracting a possible client. She added she did not know the three men who arrived, but that she remembered having kissed one of them (namely Clark) the night before. The court asked if Baretti was insulted, she firstly denied, but then seemed to be unsure, adding at the end that maybe somebody called him bad names, but she did not know who.

The second person to testify was Thomas Patman, one of the three men who came up at the Haymarket. He told the court he was with his two friend that evening, they had been drinking together and then decided to go to a house in Golden Square, but when they were in the Haymarket they saw a gentleman, meaning Baretti, striking a woman, who was Elisabeth Ward. He said he was pushed against Baretti, who gave him a blow. He denied any insult or offense to Baretti. He said also that Morgan ran after Baretti and was struck by him. In the cross-examination he was also long asked about the stabbing he received.

John Clark was the next to speak and confirmed the version of his friend Patman. He was asked about the stabbings, how, when, where they happened. He claimed Morgan was stabbed in Panton Street, but then there are some inconsistencies about when it happened: during the trial Clark said Morgan was stabbed after Patman was, but by the examination by the magistrate and coroner he had said Morgan was the first to be stabbed. He also added that somedoby then collared Baretti and he thought it was Morgan himself.

John Lambert testified as he was the constable who caught Baretti. He said he was having dinner that night when he heard the cry of "murderer" or "stop murderer" and saw a man pursued by other two or three going into the grocer's shop in front of his house. So he went there and saw Patman had blood on him and he said he had been stabbed by Baretti. In the meanwhile a crowd gathered and Lambert asked Baretti to surrender. He then seized Baretti and thought to carry him to the round-house. But hearing the name of John Fielding, Baretti expressed his will to go to him. In the cross-examinations he confirmed that Baretti did not try to escape nor to conceal the knife. He added he also tried to find the other prostitute at the Haymarket, but could not.

Then it was the turn of two patients and the surgeon, who were at the hospital when Patman and Morgan were brought there. John Llyod and Robert Lelcock were two patients who were in Middlesex hospital that night and they were told the story by Morgan, the victim. Morgan told them he was stabbed thrice and this was then confirmed by the doctor, John Wyatt. He said that Morgan's death was caused by the abdomen wound and he again recollected the sequence of the events, as they were narrated to him.

Baretti's version
After having heard different versions of the facts and the witnesses for the victims, the court let Baretti defend himself and he took the chance to read something he had previously prepared and written in his defense. He started by narrating the fact of that day. He had spent his day at home working, correcting his Italian and English dictionary and then after 4 pm he went to the Royal Academicians in Soho and he explained his other movements, till he got to the Haymarket. He said he was passing near there when he saw a woman, who firstly asked him for a glass of wine and then clapped his hand on his genitals with violence, which hurt him very much. He also said there might have been two women as well, as other testimonies said, but he only saw one. Therefore he stroke her hand and the woman insulted him for being a foreigner. By then he was going away when a men struck him with a fist asking him how he dared striking a woman. He was beat by them and other people who surrounded him, but found a little place to escape, even if they then caught him again. When he later managed to get into a grocer shop to find protection and he said he was grateful for the arrival of the constable and other people. He said he then went to Fieldings and he also described his several wounds and bruises on his face and body.

He explained his short-sight as a possible cause for not having seen the other woman and he gave explanations for his carrying a knife with him - which was a common habit in France where they did not put knives on the tables, so that also ladies wore them in their pockets. Moreover he claimed he did not want to be tried by a jury of half foreigners to demonstrate he was a gentleman and trusted England's law system.

Testifying for Baretti
As we read in The Proceedings the next to testify was a passenger, Ann Thomas, who again told the story and what she saw.

What we find next are a series of witnesses of Baretti's friend or acquaintances, who all testify for him. The first to talk were Mr. Peter Molini and Mr. Low, who said they saw themselves the bruises on Baretti's body, on his back, shoulders, cheek and jaw and they affirmed it was common for them to use and carry knives such as the one Baretti had.

Justice Kelnynge and Mr. Perrin stated the Haymarket was a place "impossible to walk up [...] in the evening" because of the indecent women you can find there and Kelnynge said that a similar episode happened to him as well before. Major Alderton added it was not a safe place to be, as very often there were aggressions.

There were then many witnesses which testified Baretti's good character and quiet lifestyle. Hon. Mr. Beauclerck described him as a gentleman of letters and a studious man, Sir Joshua Reynolds said he was a man with great humanity and always ready to help his friends, he outlined his sober disposition, saying that he never drank more than three glasses with him. Doctor Johnson described him as very diligent and peaceable, a man who did not frequented prostitutes. Edmon Burke claimed he was an ingenious and good-natured man, whereas David Garrick said of him he was a man of great probity and morals.

As we learn from The Proceedings there were other several gentlemen who were there to testify for Baretti's good temperament, but the court did not think it necessary to call them all, as they already had enough.

Verdict
Evan Morgan died at the Middlesex hospital the day after the quarrel took place. The death was caused by one of the three wounds Baretti gave him with his knife. However, Baretti was found not guilty and acquitted, as his acting was considered self-defence.

This trial is reported in Hitchcock and Shoemaker's book "Tales from the hanging Court" as an example of how important were in court testimonies of friends and neighbours, who could assert for the good character of the accused. Defendants usually tried to call them to testify for them, talking of the accused good behaviour, quite ways etc. These testimonies could influence a lot the perception of the accused and also have a weigh on the jury's verdict and choice of the punishment.

Trials in the Eighteen-century
At that time trials at the Old Bailey had the purpose of establishing the facts of what had happened and of outlining the victim's and defendant's character, also and mostly by witnesses.

After having being heard by Sir John Fieldings, Baretti was sent to Tothill Field Bridewell till they had more information about the conditions of Evan Morgan. Being a wealthy man Baretti did not walk to the prison, but a coach was called and once there he paid for a private room, where he had also food and drinks. These were not the conditions of ordinary or poor people, who normally had to suffer much worse and primitive treatments, being pushed into an overcrowded cell, without much provision.

In eighteen-century England there was no policemen and Baretti was actually caught by John Lambert, a constable. Constables were ordinary men whose job was to prevent crime and to arrest people suspected of felony by taking them to a justice of a piece.

It is necessary to consider that most information about trials come from The Proceedings, a publication which from 1664 to 1913 took note and told all (or at least most) of the trials which took place at the Old Bailey. However, in these accounts and transcriptions of what was said in court we do not find everything. Many details are missing, therefore they are not to be intended as a fully and complete account of trials.