How Charles Bravo died : the chronicle of a cause celebre / Yseult Bridges
By: Bridges, Yseult.
Material type:
TextPublisher: London : The Reprint Society, 1957Description: 319 p.Subject(s): Trials (Poisoning) | MurderDDC classification: 364.15230924 B851H 1957 Summary: The Bravo case was called "the prize puzzle of British criminal jurisprudence". Late one evening, Charles Bravo called for help from his bedroom. He soon vomited and collapsed. Summoned doctors and consultants determined he'd swallowed a fatal dose of antimony. He regained consciousness and was "in full possession of his faculties" until he died, some two days later. During that time he made it clear that he suspected no one of poisoning him. The jury at the coroner's inquest returned an open verdict, and public gossip focused on the beautiful young widow and her companion. Another inquiry was called; that jury deliberated 23 days before returning a verdict of Wilful Murder, but added there was not enough evidence to blame any person or persons. No charge was ever preferred. A private letter written by the renouned judge, Sir Arthur Channell, offers a later insight.
| Item type | Current location | Call number | Status | Date due | Barcode |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Books
|
Masood Faisal Jhandir Library | 364.15230924 B851H 1957 (Browse shelf) | Available | 015382. |
Include index
The Bravo case was called "the prize puzzle of British criminal jurisprudence". Late one evening, Charles Bravo called for help from his bedroom. He soon vomited and collapsed. Summoned doctors and consultants determined he'd swallowed a fatal dose of antimony. He regained consciousness and was "in full possession of his faculties" until he died, some two days later. During that time he made it clear that he suspected no one of poisoning him. The jury at the coroner's inquest returned an open verdict, and public gossip focused on the beautiful young widow and her companion. Another inquiry was called; that jury deliberated 23 days before returning a verdict of Wilful Murder, but added there was not enough evidence to blame any person or persons. No charge was ever preferred. A private letter written by the renouned judge, Sir Arthur Channell, offers a later insight.
There are no comments for this item.