Compare Documents
This page compares two reports at the document level. The column on the left shows the first report and the column in the middle shows the second. The column on the right highlights any differences between the two documents. Pink shows differences in the first report and purple in the second report. The Match percentage shows the percentage of similarity between the two documents.
The Yorkshire Evening Post - Tuesday, May 21, 1895
At the resumed trial of Alfred Taylor on charges of misdemeanour at the Central Criminal Court to-day, Taylor left the dock and entered the witness-box. He gave his evidence with perfect self-possession.
In re-examination, Taylor stated that many of the persons whose names had been mentioned were old acquaintances. With none of these had he ever misconducted himself.
Mr. Grain, addressing the jury, appealed to them to place no reliance upon the testimony of blackmailers and accomplices, and maintained that the prosecution had failed to establish Taylor's guilt.
The Solicitor-General replied on behalf of the Crown, submitting that the evidence left no doubt as to accused's guilt.
The verdict of the jury was:—Taylor found guilty on certain counts.
Sentence was deferred.
Sentence will be passed after the trial of Wilde.
Kerry Weekly Reporter - Saturday, May 25, 1895
London, Tuesday.The trial of Alfred Taylor on certain serious charges was resumed at the Old Bailey to-day. Taylor, on going into the box, gave an emphatic denial to the whole of the allegations.
Mr Grain, addressing the jury, appealed to them to place no reliance upon the testimony of blackmailers and accomplices, and maintained that the prosecution had failed to establish Taylors guilt.
The Solicitor-General replied on behalf of the Crown submitting that the evidence left no doubt as to the accused's guilt.
Justice Wills, in summing up, said it was an established rule that a prisoner ought not to be convicted on uncorroborated evidence of accomplices, and it was for the jury to say what weight ought to be attached to the evidence adduced in corroboration of the statements of accomplices. They should satisfy themselves before giving an adverse verdict, that corroborative evidence warranted conviction. His lordship, reviewing specific charges, said he was abuntly justified in not withdrawing the case from the jury.
The jury retired at 3.22.
The jury returned a verdict "guilty" on two charges. Sentence was postponed.