|
The prosecutor presented the case and supported it with
thirty-three witnesses, none of whom were challenged by the defense.
Only four were even cross-examined. By the afternoon of the
first day, the prosecution rested its case of deliberate
premeditated murder for gain.
It became clear that Fyfe was going to rely on a defense of
insanity. He wanted to show Haigh's aberrant behavior.
He tried to show that Haigh was in a good mood at a restaurant
following the murder; he entered Haigh's confessions into evidence;
and he questioned Inspector Mahon about the penknife in Haigh's car
(with the implication that it had been used to take blood from Mrs.
Durand-Deacon).
Then Fyfe described for the court the type of mental illness from
which Haigh suffered and how it would affect his ability to
appreciate the morality of his acts: He could not know that what he
was doing was wrong. For this, he called Dr. Yellowlees.
The psychiatrist talked about his interviews with Haigh and
described how Haigh's mental condition was consistent with the
description of paranoia in the Text Book of Mental Diseases.
Since he could not satisfy himself that Haigh's condition prevented
him from appreciating right from wrong, his testimony was limited to
describing the illness. He did not commit himself on the
position of the prisoner's actual thinking processes at the time of
the murder. Because of this, on cross-examination he offered
as much to the prosecution as to the defense.
Under pressure, Yellowlees admitted that he had not seen Haigh
each time he visited the prison. All in all, he had spent a
total of about two hours with the man, forming his conclusions.
He admitted that he had no objective evidence to corroborate
anything that Haigh had told him. The prosecutor also pointed
out that Haigh had been seen to drink his urine on only one occasion
and a motive of wanting to produce an effect could not be ruled out.
Yellowlees acknowledged this. He also said that he was not
prepared to express an opinion on whether Haigh knew that what he
was doing was morally wrong. He was forced to admit that Haigh
seemed to know that what he was doing was wrong by law, as evident
from his attempt to cover his crimes.
With that admission, the defense collapsed. Fyfe called no
further witnesses and the prosecution decided that no rebuttal
witnesses to this medical testimony were necessary. Yellowlees
had not proven Haigh to be insane.
Throughout the trial, Haigh toyed with a crossword puzzle, making
no move to speak on his own behalf. He paid little attention
to the proceedings until the two sides made their closing speeches.
Fyfe spoke mostly of Haigh's mental illness, which Yellowlees had
insisted was the most difficult of all illnesses to feign, and the
fact that Haigh's world was filled with fantasy. He mentioned
the drinking of urine, which Haigh had claimed to do as a habit
since he was a teenager, which indicated the possibility of a
primitive throwback. He also pointed out that the dreams,
combined with the blood drinking, were an important example of
Haigh's disturbed fantasy life. When his delusions pressured
him, his rational side slipped away, Fyfe insisted, and ceased to
have any importance. Delusion, he said, is the true character
of insanity. In that case, Haigh could not appreciate the
nature of what he was doing or that it was wrong.
The Attorney General rose and pointed out that there was only one
issue to be decided: the question of the prisoner's sanity.
The defense's psychiatrist failed to prove his speculations in fact
or with evidence. His entire case was dependent on the
prisoner's statements, which were suspect. In fact, Haigh had
asked about getting released from Broadmoor, as if he already had an
insanity plan up his sleeve. To Shawcross, it seemed a simple
case: a man thought he had discovered the perfect method of
concealing a crime, committed murder for gain, and then raised
sanity as an issue when he got caught.
Then for another hour, the judge summed it up. He
instructed the jury to disregard the accused's admission that he had
killed Mrs. Durand-Deacon, due to the fact that he was unreliable.
The jury was to look at the case that the prosecution presented and
see if it was conclusive. If there was any doubt, they must
acquit. He then reminded them that for an act to be punished
in England, it had to be done consciously. Despite the fact
that there was some dispute whether paranoia could be considered a
mental disease or defect, the judge told the jury to go ahead and
make the assumption that it was. The defense had used only one
witness, although they presented statements that could have been
substantiated by witnesses such as Haigh's father or Haigh himself.
No one was called but Dr. Yellowlees, who himself could not say that
Haigh failed to realize that what he was doing was wrong.
There was also no evidence that Haigh had drunk his own urine, aside
from the one instance in which he was proving to a doctor that he
could. Hence, the insanity defense could not fully satisfy the
McNaghten Rules on this matter. The judge also reminded the
jury that previous serial murderers, such as the man who had
murdered his various wives by drowning them in a bathtub, had not
been judged insane, so the jury was not to count prior murders as
evidence of a mental defect that interfered with reasoning.
Haigh listened to the entire speech and said afterward that it
was a masterpiece.
It took only fifteen minutes for the jury to come to a consensus:
Haigh was guilty.
The judge asked if he had anything to say for himself. He
cocked his head and said, "Nothing at all."
The judge donned a black cap and sentenced Haigh to die.
The sheriff's chaplain said, "Amen."
After Haigh's trial, two more medical officials observed him in
Wandsworth prison and they found no sign of insanity. To their
mind, he was shamming.
The Home Secretary, under the Criminal Lunatics Act of 1884,
ordered a special medical inquiry, just to be sure. Three
eminent psychiatrists examined Haigh's case thoroughly. All
believed that Haigh was malingering. He was not insane and did
not suffer from a mental disease or defect that would free him of
moral responsibility for his actions. There was no reason to
interfere with the course of the law.
Haigh finished his life story for the newspaper that had paid for
his trial. He also wrote letters to Barbara Stephens and to
his parents. He hoped to be reunited with them in heaven.
His elderly parents did not make the journey to see him before he
died, but his mother sent greetings through a reporter. Haigh
mentioned that he believed in reincarnation and told Barbara that
since his mission was not yet finished, he would be back. He
insisted that he was not afraid to be hanged. Madame Tussaud
requested a fitting for a death mask, which Haigh was more than
happy to provide.
 |
| Haigh as a Madame Tussaud wax
figure |
On August 6th, 1949, at Wandsworth Prison, John George Haigh, the
murderer who dissolved his victims in acid, was executed. He
bequeathed his clothing to Madame Tussaud's Chamber of Horrors,
where a wax figure of him was erected. He sent instructions
that it must always be kept in perfect condition, the trousers
creased, the hair parted, his shirt cuffs showing. Among other
murderers cast in wax, Haigh received his place in history.
|
