In the case I studied of Mr Templeman, I found it interesting as to how many loopholes there were in the case and to how disjointed this trial seems. I wanted to explore Mr Gould further and to see where his arrest took him and discuss his trial. Once the police had whittled down their suspects and removed Mr Jarvis as a suspect, the trial then turned to Gould as their prime suspect. He underwent “many examinations at Hatton Garden police-office, upon the charge of being concerned in the murder, the utmost interest and excitement being occasioned by the mystery connected with its committal” which consequently sparked a lot of interest between the media and a somewhat frenzy occurred.
It seems interesting that the suspects that were of the only people in the household when the crime occurred, were found to be not guilty of the murder of Mr Templeman. It left the case very open and there is little information about what justice was indicted for this murder, once Gould had been removed as a suspect. The Old Bailey online has no furtherdocumentation concerning the case, it all solely focuses around Richard Gould and the Jarvis’. This evidences further that a lot of proceedings focused around the hype of a crime, as all of the suspects came from well to do backgrounds, which makes it more shocking for a reader of the broadsides that were created. It seems that the charges were elevated during certain periods in order to maintain public interest, when it was probable that the courts knew entirely that Gould had nothing to do with the murder and that the “dark lantern” (murder weapon) found at the crime scene – was coincidental.
Richard Gould was sentenced to a life sentence of transportation for his crime of stealing around £50 (today’s money) from Mr Templeman and he was transported to New Wales (Australia) in 1840. However, upon further research into similar crimes of the period, two young boys aged 17 and 18 were actually hung for burglary, which makes it questionable as to how reliable the court system actually was. Did the courts favour suspects from well to do backgrounds as they had already paid into society? It seems those belonging to the lower / working class were eradicated from the system as the country had no interest in reforming those who had no education. They would provide no social or monetary benefit (in the eyes of the courts) therefore it was easier to simply kill them.
I also found it interesting as to how the interviews were conducted for the witness statements around this trial. It seems unprofessional in some areas and a lot of thestatements only really focus around Mr Templeman and his life, as opposed to gaining insight into the suspects (which would make more sense to do so as it evidences what kind of a person Gould was.) One court response to a witness describes their statement as “foolish”, which presents an element of bias throughout the interviews which makes them somewhat unreliable.
References:
Clark, R. (1995). Children & juvenile executions. [online] Capitalpunishmentuk.org. Available at: http://www.capitalpunishmentuk.org/child.html [Accessed 21 Nov. 2017].
Johnjohnson.chadwyck.com. (n.d.). Information Site – the John Johnson Collection. [online] Available at: http://johnjohnson.chadwyck.com/browse/collection.do [Accessed 9 Dec. 2017].
Exclassics.com. (n.d.). The Newgate Calendar – RICHARD GOULD, alias ARTHUR NICHOLSON.. [online] Available at: http://www.exclassics.com/newgate/ng901.htm [Accessed 22 Nov. 2017].
Oldbaileyonline.org. (2015). Old Bailey Online – The Proceedings of the Old Bailey, 1674-1913 – Central Criminal Court. [online] Available at: https://www.oldbaileyonline.org/ [Accessed 21 Nov. 2017].
Whispers from the cell 