Since first publishing Elizabeth Woolcock’s tragic story – No Monument of Stone – extensive additional research by the author has uncovered much more evidence than was available at the time of his initial writing.
This later book – Dead Woman Walking – now contains that information. Information that perhaps one day may instigate an official investigation into the case and consequently lead to a posthumous pardon being granted for Elizabeth, for being denied access to fair and impartial justice at her trial in 1873, and thereby being unjustly convicted and executed for a murder she did not commit.
From the Foreword: Between May 1838, and November 1964, more than sixty people were legally put to death in South Australia. Each and every-one of these convicted persons has a tale to tell. None however is more horrific or tragic than that of Elizabeth Lillian Woolcock, nee Oliver, the one and only woman among them.
Elizabeth Woolcock was just twenty-five years of age when her life was brought to an abrupt halt on the gallows of the Adelaide Gaol. Since birth she had been stalked by more tragedy and misadventure than most people could possibly imagine. Yet, convicted by unsubstantiated gossip, innuendo, and misrepresentation, she unflinchingly faced her death and an eternity entombed in unhallowed soil on Murderers Row with no monument of stone to mark her grave.
This is Elizabeth Woolcocks own tragic story, and a significant part of Australian history. And though she died the death of a felon, the truth is she may well have been the innocent victim of circumstance.
Interesting story and an easy read and an important tale in SA's history. I would like to have known what was factual and what was fiction. Putting 'feelings' on the long deceased characters, and the dialogue between (e.g. the prostitute) characters made the book seem between genres - something between a fiction and creative non-fiction. I would have liked to have seen sources referenced and to have a more non-fiction style especially given the 'new evidence' referred to at the end and the apparent purpose of the revised book. There seems to be lots of assumptions made toward the end regarding the Doctor's role, especially given that Elizabeth Woolcock admits her own guilt. I respect all of the work that has gone into this book but not sure that the creative elements of the book do that justice.
Interesting novel about the only woman ever hanged in South Australia. The author presents several arguments at the end of the novel about why Elizabeth Woolcock should not have been found guilty. The writing was captivating in parts (I cried at the series of trauma she faced as a young child) but I would have liked to know a bit more about what was factual and what wasn't (e.g. did she actually befriend prostitutes in ballarat or was that artistic license?)
I found the book interesting, from a historical perspective, reading about life in mining communities back in the 1870's(?). What I didn't like about the book was the assumptions the author made about how Elizabeth Woolcock was 'feeling' throughout the book. It's not like he would have been able to talk to friends or Elizabeth herself & I doubt strongly that there would have been letters that the author could use to interpret how Elizabeth coped or responded to what life had in store for her. Because of this I felt a great deal of invention was used when the author described how and why Elizabeth acted in response to experiences. I felt it was more a work of fiction than a biography. I don't doubt that there was serious injustice in the arrest, subsequent trial and execution of Elizabeth, but what I want to know is how the author came to describe everything that happened to Elizabeth from the age of 4 until her death in her mid-twenties - how could he possibly know what was going through her mind?