Beating the Devil's Game: A History of Forensic Science and Criminal by Katherine Ramsland Page B

Nathan Keep, Parkman’s dentist, insisted that the jawbone found in the furnace with the false teeth was in fact that of George Parkman. He recognized his own handiwork, and while the gold fillings had melted, there were “peculiar angles and points” on the teeth that he knew well. He had made a wax mold of the man’s protruding jaw and filled it with plaster, and this he used to demonstrate how it matched the pieces of jawbone found in the furnace. Then he placed the loose teeth found in the furnace into his exhibit. It was a demonstration that initially impressed the jury, although dentists for the defense would try to undermine it.
    Then came handwriting experts. Some witnesses talked about Webster’s uncharacteristic behavior after Parkman disappeared, and finally, three letters were brought into evidence that had been written to deflect the investigation away from the Medical College, and all were unsigned. One had clearly been written by an educated man, but the other two diverged from that style. A man familiar with Webster’s handwriting testified that he believed Webster had written all three letters. Even worse, Webster’s handwriting was recognized on the face of one of Parkman’s loan notices, reading “ PAID .”
    Sohier produced twenty-three character witnesses, and then brought out medical experts who insisted it was difficult to definitively identify these remains, or to say how the person had met his end. Dr. Willard Morton, a famous dentist around town, said there was nothing in the jawbone found in the furnace that would mark individual identification. Lots of people had protruding jaws. He produced a few false teeth of his own making that fit into the mold made by Dr. Keep. Once again, the jury members nodded, proving that it was a strong moment for the defense.
    To round out the proceedings, Sohier said that the prosecution had to prove that the remains were those of Parkman, Parkman had been murdered, and Webster had not only done the deed but had exercised planning and malice. Clifford responded by reminding the jury of the strong medical testimony. He thought there could be no reasonable doubt that Parkman was dead and that he’d been located in pieces inside Webster’s lab.
    While this case marks a first for dental testimony, which presumably improved over the years, it’s also notable for certain unusual procedures. Three of the doctors who had testified about medical facts for the prosecution also came in for the defense. Dr. Holmes mentioned the leading authorities on quantity of blood in a human body (not himself) and said that there was no way to tell with certainty whether a human bone had been broken before being burned. It was assumed that since medical expertise relied on objective knowledge and was therefore “neutral,” it would not matter for which side they spoke, but their presence on both sides had the effect of undermining what these experts had said for the prosecution.
    On the same evening that they went to deliberate, the jury had a verdict: Guilty. Webster was sentenced to be hanged. While he then admitted that he had murdered Parkman but had done so in self-defense, the sentence stood and he was hanged on August 30.
    Another incident in 1850 opened up a new area for toxicology. In Bury, Belgium, Count Hippolyte de Bocarmé had married Lydie Fougnies, the daughter of a merchant, seven years earlier. However, her income was less than he had expected, so they knew their only hope lay in her father’s fortune. It went to her brother, Gustave Fougnies, a sickly man, and as long as he remained a bachelor, they were optimistic that the money would come to them once he died. But then he decided to take a bride. So Hippolyte and Lydie invited Gustave to dinner. Lydie dispensed with the servants for the evening and served the food herself.
    That very evening, November 20, her brother appeared to suffer from some sort of stroke. He fell over and died. Lydie and Hippolyte did