Famous Trials

by John Mortimer (Editor), Harry Hodge (Editor), James H. Hodge (Editor)

Recounts the stories of nine trials involving murder and treason, and includes the stories of some unjustly convicted individuals

Genres: True Crime, Nonfiction, History, Crime, Anthologies

375 pages, Paperback

First published January 1, 1984

About the author

John Clifford Mortimer was a novelist, playwright and former practising barrister. Among his many publications are several volumes of Rumpole stories and a trilogy of political novels, Paradise Postponed, Titmuss Regained and The Sound of Trumpets, featuring Leslie Titmuss - a character as brilliant as Rumpole. John Mortimer received a knighthood for his services to the arts in 1998.

Series:
Rumpole of the Bailey
Rapstone Chronicles

Reviews

[Paul Weiss · Rating 1 out of 5]

Dry as dust and almost as entertaining!

Interesting summaries of the investigation and trials of a number of both well known and lesser known murderers from the early to mid-20th century. But sadly, the writing suffers from a clinical, pedantic style that is simply dreary in the extreme. There was nothing about these summaries that any reader might classify as gripping or compelling. I was, quite frankly, very disappointed that an author of John Mortimer's skill and celebrity would put together an anthology with such a low readability factor.

Paul Weiss

[Cherie · Rating 4 out of 5]

I LOVE THIS BOOK!!!
ALL THE DETAILS AND EVERYTHING!
One particular case I liked is the Stoner vs. Rattenbury! It's such a classic tale of murder, of crime, of justice, even though justice was never served. Still, I feel like this book exposed the true human nature, which was what interested me in the first place.

[zara sayel · Rating 2 out of 5]

very dry

[Dave · Rating 2 out of 5]

A one-volume anthology derived from a series of books of abridged versions of chapters from the Notable British Trials series. How could it be bad? It's like the cream of the cream, right? Well, first of all, whoever derived and abridged wanted it both ways: stories of famous crime and British legal wrangling. And no matter which one you're interested in, there's too much of the other, and definitely too much in-between. And John Mortimer is by far the best author in this book, and all he did was select, not edit. So things trail off and drag on and have sentences like this in them: "What art has the monster practiced that deep-rooted loathing and deserved contempt are banished and confiding submission rules this poor creature on whom Death is soon to lay his icy grasp?" Ugh. Interesting to hear about famous true crime that is no longer so famous, but wow.

[Peter Burton · Rating 3 out of 5]

Not a bad book but written in an old fashioned style.The crimes have been chosen by John Mortimer of “Rumpole” fame but the actual authors are different and from older sources so their phraseology can be old fashioned as are some of their attitudes.Nevertheless the cases are varied and interesting and would make very entertaining tales for TV series today.All of course are very sad.Some were acquired and so are unsolved murders,others were guilty but what impelled them to chose murder rather than simply leaving their partner is a mystery.Some also were mentally ill,perhaps all murderers are !I found the Crippen case particularly interesting.

[Kate Carter · Rating 2 out of 5]

DNF - The writing style was so convoluted that I couldn’t figure out why the first trial was famous. I couldn’t finish even though I’m a lawyer and have owned this book for 20+ years. Oh well, doesn’t happen often.

[Surreysmum · Rating 2 out of 5]

[These notes were made in 1984:]. It is a sign of the times, I suppose, that this 1984 reissue is a selection from abridgements of the Notable British Trials series. Mortimer's name is stuck on the front chiefly as a selling point, I think, but he has managed to inject a little modern sensibility into his introduction, objecting violently to the slightly gruesome complacency about capital punishment which pervades these accounts (written up in the '40s, I think). [2010 note: actually the series ran from 1921 until late into the 1950s] The trials themselves are fairly interesting, and so was the variety of tone taken by the authors of the accounts: one felt far closer to the motives and personalities in - say - the Madeleine Smith trial, even tho' it took place in 1857, than in the Ronald True case, which revolves largely around legal technicalities about the insanity defence. The trial itself, except where it was mishandled (as in the Slater case) is not usually the focal point of the account: rather, the whole case, whether properly unravelled in the trial or not, is usually presented. It is rather a gruesome act to collect these better-forgotten facts together (and, I suppose you will add, a gruesome act to buy and read them). The trouble is that one brings a divided consciousness to it - half the history/biography reading part of one (and that includes the slightly prurient part that reads People magazine), and half the intellectual puzzle-solver that likes mystery stories. And in the end, neither is entirely satisfied by this bombastic '40s [or early-century:] prose.

[John Carter · Rating 1 out of 5]

The cases here are mostly those known to any reader of mysteries (‘But he didn’t look like a murderer.’ ‘Neither did Dr Crippen, ma’am.’). Unfortunately these write-ups were selected in 1984, not written then, and they suffer a great deal from the style that their times (as early as 1920 for Crippen’s trial, for instance) deemed appropriate for serious accounts of serious matters. I made a quick start this morning to confirm my recollection that George Joseph Smith’s story was in fact that of the brides in the bath, and found that ‘for the gratification of his strong animal propensities … [he] cast his basilisk glances over Miss —, a very respectable and industrious boarding-house keeper’. Shortly after he ‘married’ her (he was already married) he met ‘Mrs F. W.’ (whom he also ‘married’). She in turn introduced him to Mrs M—. (Mrs M— disliked him intensely and seems to be about the only woman he ever met with whom he didn’t go through a marriage ceremony.) Surely Miss —, Mrs F. W., and Mrs M— had names at the trial. Unless, as well may be, none of his hobby of bigamy was felt relevant once he actually got around to murdering his wives.

Which is all just to say that when you’re curling up on a rainy Sunday with a book filled with blood and courtroom drama, this is not the book to choose. On the other hand, if you’re having trouble sleeping…

[Granny · Rating 5 out of 5]

This is my favorite of all my true crime books. I keep it and reread it from time to time because the insights into human nature are so insightful and droll. Here are some examples:

...Mrs. Rattenbury was asked whether her married life was happy, and she answered: "Like that...!" with a gesture of her hand. A gesture that sketched the married life of the better part of muddled humanity.

"His childhood was healthy and remarkable free from illness, and he grew up into a powerfully built young man, well above the average height. Sound bodies; however, do not necessarily contain sound minds."

"Smith's protective antennae seemed to have guided him well enough in the search for likely victims, where they failed him was in the inability to warn him of the women in whom his pronounced animal sexuality aroused and instant and enduring antagonism."

It's a delight to read true crime by the British authors in this collection. The crimes alone are interesting, but the excellent writing makes it even better. This is a deliciously good read.

[Eric · Rating 5 out of 5]

I have the hardcover.

[Azura Mustafa · Rating 4 out of 5]

30 cases, 1 wrongly executed case, a few cases the defendants walk but mostly the justice has been served. Almost all the cases tried at the famous Old Bailey.