Subscribe
Share
Share
Embed
On the final day of the trial, the prosecution and defence present their final pleas. By then, the prosecution had woven together what seemed an almost inescapable account of Betty's fate. Yet one crucial element remained missing: Definitive proof. Every link in the chain was circumstantial, and the defence had spent the entire trial exploiting that single weakness, determined to plant the seed of reasonable doubt. Whether they succeeded would remain unknown until the following Monday, when the judges revealed their verdict.
RATING & REVIEW
FOLLOWING (be informed about future episodes)
FEEDBACK & COMMENT (written or audio recording)
SWISS MURDRER MYSTERIES WEBSITE
FOLLOWING (be informed about future episodes)
FEEDBACK & COMMENT (written or audio recording)
SWISS MURDRER MYSTERIES WEBSITE
Author & Host
- Rudolph Isler
Get in touch
Donations
Copyright
- Playground Media Productions Ltd.
- Interview Cyril Belshaw©RTS
Creators and Guests
What is Swiss Murder Mysteries?
Uncover Switzerland’s most enigmatic murder cases with this riveting investigative true crime podcast.
This is episode five of The Belshaw Case. The Trial Day Three. Welcome back to the Belshaw Murder Case. I'm Rudolph Isler, and this is the fifth, but not yet as I had previously announced final episode of our deep dive into one of Switzerland's most enigmatic murder cases and trials. When getting near the end of this episode, I realized that with almost sixty minutes running time, it would be too long.
Narrator:So I decided to split it into two sections. Today's episode covering the third day of the trial and the last one, episode six coming soon, dealing with the verdict and my personal interpretation. I do hope you share this last minute decision, and I thank you for understanding. Was Cyril Belshaw a grieving husband caught in a tragic storm of circumstances? Or was he a cold blooded, calculating killer who believed he could outsmart the system and fool the investigators?
Narrator:That was the question the jurors had to answer. And decades later it remains the same question that you, dear listener, must answer for yourself. Join me as we step into the courtroom one more time, sift through the pros and cons, hear the prosecution and defense final pleas. It's been a long road, but the end is near. Now let's begin.
Narrator:By the end of day two, the mood in the courtroom and outside of it had shifted. Even the notoriously conservative Swiss press had to admit it. The tanning impressions of day one, when Belshaw looked like guilt in a tailored suit, were starting to fall apart. The turning was certainly due to the appearance of the acute's daughter. In perfect French, her words laced with emotions and honesty, she didn't just testify.
Narrator:She painted a picture of a man who wasn't a monster but a loving father and husband. Flawed, yes, but certainly not the killer the headlines had made him out to be. Belshaw himself was a study in control. He didn't flinch, didn't stumble. Every question thrown his way he mastered with cool logic.
Narrator:But recently something new crept through the cracks in his armor. Emotion. Real, undeniable. It wasn't much, but just enough to catch the goodwill of those present. But it was there.
Narrator:And in that moment the image of a cold blooded calculating murderer began to disperse. By Friday morning the city stirred to headlines that cut through the fog of early routines. Newspapers spread on cafe counters, tucked under arms of those who rush to work, or stacked at kiosks all over Switzerland read, Belschaw defends himself every step of the way, or Who killed Betty Belshaw? The enigma remains. Certainties that had been installed in the prosecution's cracks were replaced by doubts.
Narrator:The story was no longer clear cut. It was a riddle in a trench coat waiting for someone to loosen the belt and take it off. With Swiss precision, the doors flung open again at nine A. M, sharp, on Friday morning, and a tired and somewhat shaken Cyril Bellshaw was led into the courtroom. To everyone's surprise, President Guignard started the day by granting the judges and jurors permission to ask the so far appeared witnesses any questions, should they have any.
Narrator:The big part of the questions that came up circled around the fact, why Belshaw, and like usually when abroad, did not use his credit card but paid in cash for all the meals, petrol, and hotels while on the trip to Paris, and why he did not keep any of the receipts. And as always Bellshaw replied with calmness, and came up with some sort of logic explanation. When there were no more questions, the main prosecutor, Willie Haim, rose and started his final plea, which we'll hear in a condensed but nevertheless convincing version. Firstly, he recounts a scenario based on if we are to believe Bellshaw's testimony. Dear jurors and judges, on 01/17/1979, around ten a.
Narrator:M, after having breakfast, Cyril and Betty Belshaw leave their hotel and take the Metro to the center of Paris. At Labour Station Betty steps off the train to walk the remaining distance to the Bibliotheque Nationale, while her husband remains on the train, planning to do some shopping. But Betty Belshaw never arrives at the library. We know that for certain because her admission card was never registered. Therefore, on her walk from the metro station to the library, a distance of 200 metres, she vanished.
Narrator:Eventually she decides to return to Cromontana, and does so without first going back to the hotel to get her suitcase, or to inform her husband, whom she left just some minutes ago. Instead, she takes the next train to Switzerland and arrives in Sierre, the train station closest to Cromontana, at around 07:20 p. M. And again she does not rush to their apartment to freshen up or sleep, let alone call her husband in Paris. We know that for certain because there were no traces of her in the apartment.
Narrator:Instead, she goes to a restaurant with a stranger she had met on the train, a stranger that offers her a ride to Cromontana. But he makes advances which Betty repulses. There is a struggle, and this unknown person kills her. He then puts her body in the trunk of his car, drives to the Lisepe lay by, removes her clothing, her wallet, rings and watch, wraps her naked body up in three garbage bags he happened to have in the car, and throws the body down the slope. Then this unknown figure disposes of all her belongings and disappears.
Narrator:Meanwhile, her husband back in Paris reports his wife missing and pursues every possible avenue in locating her, yet avoids informing the Swiss police, and never telephones the concierge at the Jurg Ebe or their apartment. And when three months later old newspapers proclaimed that the body of an unknown woman was found in Lisepe, a few kilometers from Cromontana, he makes absolutely no connection to the disappearance of his wife, claiming he never heard or read about it. And yet he subscribed to the local newspaper where the discovery made headlines. Now, since Mrs. Bellshaw disappeared in Paris between Labour's and the National Library, and her body, not having been found drifting in the River Seine, or for that matter anywhere else in France, but on an alpine road in Switzerland, not far from their residence in Cromontana, the circumstances leading to the discovery rule out just about any other explanation than the one I have just given you.
Narrator:The absurdity of this scenario is only matched by the equally unlikely fact that no one in his right mind would take the risk of carrying a dead body across an international border. It is therefore, dear President, jurors and jury, highly unlikely that Mrs. Bellshaw was killed in Paris. Simply because Mrs. Belshaw never was in Paris.
Narrator:Chaim then argued that the entire trip to Paris is fiction, carefully planned and executed by an outstandingly smart and cold blooded murderer that did not leave anything to chance. A piece of fiction with the sole purpose to explain her disappearance. Jurg Ebe mentioned some of the details that support his conclusion. During the entire trip, Bellshaw paid cash, Although he usually used his credit card, not a single receipt, neither for accommodation nor a restaurant, could be presented. No one ever saw Betty Belshaw in France, neither in Beaune nor in Paris.
Narrator:At the hotel in Paris, Belshaw explicitly signed in with Cyril Belshaw and Betty, something he never did on their previous journeys. The testimony given by his daughter about Betty's suitcase containing used lingerie does not prove anything. It could have been placed easily after his return, unbeknown to even his daughter. The fact that this evidence was for the first time ever mentioned only a day before the trial makes it particularly suspicious, Hyme argued. Who would go through all such efforts if not the person that would be put in a very bad position, if the identity of the body could be revealed?
Narrator:Only one person had a reason to conceal Betty's identity, stripping her of all her clothes, removing her rings and jewelry. No one is more likely than the accused to have killed Betty Belshaw. Haim made a pause and took a step towards Belshaw, letting his words settle. Then he turned on his heels to face the jury and gave an account of what he thinks was much more likely to have occurred. After January 12 there were very few people in the Jolie Lack apartment.
Narrator:A dispute, even a violent one, could have passed unnoticed. An altercation that, by accident or not, tragically ended with Betty Belshaw's death, and suddenly a desperate Cyril Belshaw was to deal with a dead body in his apartment. He carefully considered his options, and having already booked and planned a trip to Paris, came up with the incredible ingenious plan of letting her disappear during the trip in France. But taking her dead body along and across the border was certainly no option. Hence he had to get rid of her body as soon as his car was returned from the shop, which was on the January 12.
Narrator:Once his car was available, transported the body either by means of the ground window across the yard or else by use of the elevator to the lobby, then dragging the plastic wrapped body on the snow to the parked car at night. The trunk of his car could easily hold a body of Betty's size and weight. Now all that remained was to get rid of the corpse in a fashion that it would never be found. And in the very unlikely event that this should be the case, it was absolutely necessary that the identity of the body be concealed. Therefore he had removed her clothes and jewelry before wrapping her in garbage bags, which made it slide effortlessly on the snow covered surface and in the night of the twelfth to the thirteenth he loaded Betty's body into the Citroen and drove the relatively short distance from Cromontana up the Alpine Pass to the Col De Maas.
Narrator:At the L'Essipe lay by, just past the L'Arabois Bridge, he found an ideal spot and dumped the corpse on the steep slope, watching it slide on the frozen snow and disappear in the darkness. He returned to his car, unaware that the corpse had been stopped by a single tree, not far below, and drove back to the Jolie Lac apartment. Once home he prepared his and Betty suitcase. Carefully he packed the clothes she would have worn on the trip hence he was later able to make a detailed description, and packed additional clean clothes and some of her worn lingerie into a suitcase. The next morning he left for Paris.
Narrator:Somewhere on his journey, maybe near Bourne, where he stayed for the night, he got rid of Betty's clothes, her purse, jewelry, and wallet. And to give the impression that Betty was still with him, in case something went wrong, he made certain of a few details that would and the sooner Betty was about to disappear the better. Therefore it happened first thing in the morning, before she could possibly have registered at the Bibliotheque Nationale, which would have confirmed her presence in Paris. Betty was reported missing in France and the Swiss authorities, because he never informed them nor anyone in Cromontana, were unaware of her disappearance. It all seemed to work out well, until that faithful day in May when a road worker discovered the remains of a decomposed body below the Lessepi Labbe.
Narrator:Despite the discovery being printed across all major and local newspapers, Cyrill remained calm. He might have already planned his return to Canada when a routine visit by two Swiss policemen regarding the discovered missing person changed his plans. Of course, he was very much aware that the corpse found was that of his murdered wife. A hasty return to Canada and not assisting the police to get his wife's dental charts made no sense and would have made him increasingly suspicious. Hence he became proactive and collaborated in so far as to personally claim the charts from his wife's dentist.
Narrator:By the time they arrived three weeks later, he had already figured out the plan. Carefully, Belshaw falsified the document. Using liquid white paper, he cleared black spots indicating fillings and added a few black markings on other teeth. He made copies at the local shop, destroyed the original, and deposited the fake chart at the police station. The next day he settled his rent for the apartment and left Cromontana in his car for Amsterdam, where he boarded a flight to Vancouver, while the Citroen was being shipped across the Atlantic and, interestingly enough, ended up in a car shop in Vancouver to undergo a ground up restoration.
Narrator:Chaim briefly paused, then continued, putting the emphasis on a possible motive explaining the Bellshaw marriage wasn't quite as perfect as everybody assumed. Proof of this he finds in the affair that Bellshaw had with Mrs. Harris, and neither of the two disputed it. Why is it, he asked the jury, that just a few weeks prior to his wife's disappearance he openly met and presented himself in the company of his affair, Mrs. Harris, in the streets of Cromontana.
Narrator:Worse even, showed up with her when having a meeting with Mrs. Meier's, the real estate agent. Yet three months after the death of his wife, back in Vancouver, he chooses to meet her in a secluded area on the campus in her sports car. The reason is simple. Had they done so secretly in Cromontana, and someone seen them together, it could have appeared as them having an affair.
Narrator:It would have been very suspicious and could have easily been interpreted as a possible motive for getting rid of his wife. Then Haim made it clear that although the affair may have triggered the fatal occurrences that followed in one way or the other, he is convinced that Bellshaw did not plan to murder his wife. It is simply not his character to solve a problem like this. Much more likely, he says, is that Betty had found out about his affair with Mrs. Harris, that some sort of quarrel ensued, and Betty had freaked out, becoming hysterical, especially since this was not the first time, and Cyril having had assured her that it would never happen again.
Narrator:The dispute got out of hand. Maybe Cyril pushed her, she lost her balance, and fell, hitting her head against a hard object. Or Cyril did indeed lose his control entirely, grabbed her by the neck to silence her screaming, not realizing that he was about to strangle her. And Cyril ended up with his wife dead. He, who had always had everything under control, had now to deal with the result of having lost his countenance and the love of his life.
Narrator:With this, Heim concluded with what everybody agreed upon being a masterpiece of a final plea. It was not surprising that no one dared to move or break the silence. When Chaim returned to his bench, the president, since it was shortly before noon, asked the defense whether they preferred to deliver their final speech after lunch or wish to continue. Perhaps unwilling to give the prosecution's brilliant argument any more time to take hold in the jurors' minds, Maitre Paschoud chose to begin immediately. Clearly impressed by Chaim's dramatic and convincing plea, he rose to deliver his own.
Narrator:Unlike Chaim, Paschoud adopted a completely different tone and demeanor when addressing the jurors. From his very first sentence, he sought to establish a more personal and direct relationship with them. He maintained almost constant eye contact, his voice calm, level, and subdued. He began by stating that, from the very beginning of the case to that very moment, he had been convinced of his client's innocence. Otherwise, he said, he would never have accepted the case.
Narrator:To some this might have sounded self evident. After all, he was the accused's lawyer. Others may have even wondered how he could seemingly act as a character witness for his own client. But this was Paschoud, a respected local heavyweight. And his opening words may have had quite a different effect.
Narrator:For some of the locals listening, the thought may have quietly taken hold: Well, if Paschoud relieves he is innocent, he might as well be. Paschoud then continued with characteristic humility explaining why he had brought Meier Restudmann into the case to assist him. He openly admitted that criminal law was not his forte. His colleague, on the other hand, he explained, was an expert in the field. He went on to state that of all the Belshaw's friends and colleagues who had been interviewed, only two parties had given unfavorable accounts of the couple.
Narrator:One was Professor Murder and his wife, both colleagues of Cyril at UBC and, on more than one occasion, opponents of the Belshores in political disputes within the University's Anthropology Department. They claimed that Cyril had been either responsible for or had at least been present during the execution of two young people on a Pacific island many years earlier. But this accusation soon began to fall apart. Investigations in London revealed that it was pure fabrication, an accusation apparently borne out of personal animosity and internal disagreements between the two professors dating back several years. The other person to give a somewhat doubtful account of the Belshores was Doctor.
Narrator:Mel Will Shaw, serials doctor in Vancouver, whose statements were heard in the previous episodes. For the record, Shaw gave two slightly different accounts. His first, more spontaneous statement reflected his genuine surprise at how utterly detached Cyril appeared when he met him in Vancouver shortly after his return from Switzerland. What he witnessed concerned him enough to openly question Cyril's mental state. But later, in a sworn statement, Sean was shown photographs of Betty's decomposed body, and at that point he qualified his earlier remarks.
Narrator:Despite what he had observed in Vancouver, he said he was very certain that Cyril would have been incapable of committing a crime of such ferocity. Having dismissed the two accounts that painted Cyril in a negative light, Paschoud continued to present the jury with his own view of the man he believed Cyril to be, a fundamentally honest and good man, a human being with strength, greatness, yet also the weakness and frailties common to us all, a man who, in the heat of the moment, made a terrible mistake by tampering with the dental records, a mistake which, once discovered, he omitted to and explained. And yet it still lingers like a dark cloud above his head, creating flashes of lightning that, some might argue, appear to illuminate his guilt. Only briefly, Paschoud strayed from his focus on serial as a person and returned to the evidence itself. He pointed to the absence of any signs of a struggle in the apartment.
Narrator:Nothing had been broken, no traces of blood or violence had been found, there had been no reports of cries, shouts for help, or even unusual noise, And there were no scratches, visible signs of violence, or swollen features that might have indicated strangulation. It sounded convincing, but there was one crucial problem. As we know, Betty's face was already in such a state of decomposition that such signs could no longer be reliably established. Paschoud then returned to his central argument. Once again he assured the jury that all the testimony they had heard supported the image of Cyril and Betty as a united, if not perfect, couple who had remained together for many years.
Narrator:And Cyril's liaison with another woman, he argued, had in no way diminished the love, admiration, affection, and respect he had for his wife. Then he paused. He looked at the jurors, and with a hint of iron in his voice continued: Would it not be more likely, knowing that Mrs. Bellshaw was the more spontaneous, more lively, more emotional of the two, that she killed her husband? It is an absolute gruel, ladies and gentlemen, that usually the deceived responds with violence and not the deceiver.
Narrator:Paschoud walked back to his desk, shuffled through his papers, and pulled out the sheet. It was an extract from Betty's private journal. And then he was about to read it to the jury.
Betty Belshaw:As I sit in the car, which is moving at great speed southward, I think of this fragile thread by which we are all held to life. And I think what I would leave behind for those I love, not only material things which will come to them in any case but the knowledge of what is beautiful in life the love of children of husband and the joy they have given me the hope that they will remember me in the good years of laughter and adventure, and not in the years when I was half ill with fatigue and ill humor that goes with it. The places where we were happy as they come to me without any specific order just a string of memories which come to my mind as we drive along at a 120 kilometers per hour. The new snow powdering the hills covered with green foliage the mosaic and columns of the temples of the Acropolis Spring in Delphi when Adrian read the street names in Greek Rome so cold and damp and suddenly the sun of the Forum the bohemians in Ireland, the crossing by boat, Edinburgh on the scramble for seats on the train and before that station in Montreal with our 17 suitcases, dinners, friends.
Betty Belshaw:The sun shines. It's hard to write. Another day I will write all these memories for you.
Narrator:When Paschoud finished reading, something remarkable happened. Although Betty's words had been translated and were now being spoken by a man, it was almost as if, for a brief moment, Betty herself had entered the courtroom. Her words seemed to have reached every person in the room. A spell had fallen over the courtroom, and nobody dared to break the silence. Then, without another word, the court was dismissed.
Narrator:Paschoud had concentrated not on details and facts, but on emotions, and on presenting a positive image of Cyril and his marriage. Now he stepped back and cleared the stage for his colleague, Meier Stuttman. As they had agreed from the very beginning, Stuttman's task was to deal with the facts, to challenge the prosecution's account, counter its assumptions by exposing the lack of evidence, and questioned the testimony of its witnesses. And this he did, in equally brilliant fashion. After only a short lunch recess, Studemann addressed the court with an opening statement that went straight to the core of the case.
Narrator:The affair, Belshaw, he said, is an enigma, and our epoch does not like enigmas. They remind men of their weaknesses and force them to admit it. They go against our logic. Reason cannot penetrate them therefore we find them intolerable. And so we tend to give them a rational explanation where none exists.
Narrator:And that is exactly what the prosecution has done. For them the mystery is solved. Everything is logical, reasonable, explainable. In a calm, polished voice he continued, peering at the jurors from behind glasses that had slipped down his nose. But ladies and gentlemen, it is not enough to be reasonable.
Narrator:We are not here to be reasonable. We are here to find the truth. And the truth, alas, is not always reasonable. He paused briefly, allowing his words to sink in. Then he continued pointing out that his client was accused of murder when there was not even sufficient evidence to establish that the victim had been murdered at all, let alone how she had been killed, when, where, or why.
Narrator:Belshaw, he argued, had only become the prime suspect after the falsification of the dental records. From that moment on the prosecution had stopped looking left or right. It had focused solely on finding evidence that supported its assumptions. The conclusion, Stuttman argued, was that Cyril was the most likely murderer, that his guilt was simply the least improbable of all the possibilities. Stuttman then began to challenge individual points made by the prosecution.
Narrator:One concerned the claim that Belshaw had failed to notify Swiss police. Studemann pointed out that Cyril had told the Canadian embassy by telephone to notify the Swiss authorities. To support this, he cited a letter Bellshaw had written to the Canadian consul in Bern on February 17. I thought you had already told the Swiss and English police. The accusation that Bellshaw had failed to inform the Swiss police, Stuttman argued, was therefore incorrect.
Narrator:In my modest view, this statement was not accurate. Belshaw had never personally informed the Swiss police, nor had he ever called them to inquire about the progress of their investigation. He only assumed that someone had done this on his behalf, which is clearly not quite the same. But back to Studemann, who then turned to Cyrill's mental state during those lonely days in Cromontana. He described his mounting anxiety and desperation as he sat alone in his apartment, without support, day after day, facing the uncertainty of what had become of Betty.
Narrator:Eventually, he said, Cyril decided to travel to London to escape his solitude and clear his head. There was little in Stuttman's account that the court had not heard before. Yet his calm and convincing presentation gave Cyril's story a certain authenticity, lending weight to the picture of a man overwhelmed by circumstances beyond his control. Stuttman then turned to his own version of the dental records episode. His aim was to show how desperate and confused Cyril had been when the falsification took place.
Narrator:The picture he presented was of a man of science and intellect whose normally detached mind had begun to unravel, to the point where he even thought help from a psychic. He, a man of science. His deteriorating state, Stuttman argued, was already apparent in a letter Serial had written to his daughter Diana shortly before receiving the records from his dentist. The pressure, he wrote, was slowly breaking him. He feared there was no longer any hope.
Narrator:He felt like a coward, afraid to face the truth. And when the records finally arrived, lying on his desk, cereal cracked. He could not, or would not want to, face what the identification might reveal. Driven to an irrational act, he altered the records. A terrible mistake, Stuttman argued, but one that Cyril regretted.
Narrator:Here again, for the sake of recollection, is Cyril's own account of what had happened.
Cyril Belshaw:It was a highly charged emotional thing. At the minute, almost without control. And, well, there it was. There it was done. I felt, totally irrationally, but there it is, I felt that I didn't want to see her dead.
Cyril Belshaw:I just didn't want that.
Narrator:Stuttman then took the argument a step further. He claimed that in legal terms, the dental records were not an official document at all. They were not a written document, he argued, but merely a diagram or drawing. Therefore altering them could not constitute forgery and consequently could not amount to a crime. He then turned to the forensic evidence, citing European experts who had agreed that the pinkish coloration found around the roots of the victim's teeth could be considered irrelevant.
Narrator:And, however unlikely it might seem, he argued, neither a natural death nor a sexual offense could be ruled out. Next, Stuttman addressed Cyril's affair with Mrs. Harris, and the prosecution's argument that it provided a motive for murder. Bellshaw, he reminded the court, had always admitted to the affair, and it had meant so little to both Cyril and Mrs. Harris that it could hardly have provoked an act of such violence.
Narrator:To accept the prosecution's theory, Stuttman maintained, meant accepting too many things that had never been proven. Firstly, that Betty Belshaw knew about the affair secondly, that she had reacted violently to it and thirdly, that Cyril Belshaw in turn had responded with violence of his own. Studemann then turned to another part of the prosecution's theory, that Bellshaw could have dragged Betty's seventy kilogram or one hundred and forty five pound body to the elevator, across the reception area, out onto the street, and then some 80 meters along the snow covered road to where his car was parked, and all of that with no one having seen him. And that, Stuttman argued, was not even the most implausible possibility. The alternative scenario was even more absurd, that Bellshaw had carried Betty's body over the one meter high wall of snow separating the Jolie Lac from the neighboring Bellevue apartments, before placing her body in the boot of his Citroen Maserati.
Narrator:He would have had to be an alpinist to accomplish such a task. Just look at those little hands, he argued. Only briefly did Stuttman return to the prosecution's allegation that Betty had never been in Paris. He reminded the court that he himself had travelled to Bourne and Paris, showing photographs of both Betty and Cyril to staff members at hotels and restaurants. Neither had been recognized.
Narrator:So what, he asked, did it prove if nobody remembered seeing Betty? As for the suitcase and Betty's soiled lingerie, which had been discovered only a day before the trial began, Studemann made his position clear. It was, after all, the prosecution's own neglect that had prevented this evidence from being properly addressed during the investigation. Then Studemann paused. He took a deep breath and prepared to deliver his final plea.
Narrator:Who killed Betty Belshaw? Let us remember and be clear about it. That is not the question we must resolve. But did Cyril Belshaw kill Betty? That is the question.
Narrator:And to answer this we must ascertain that there is enough proof, or if there is not. And when we consider this, there is one major absurdity. We do not know how she was killed. Was it manslaughter or was it murder? In the end, when the prosecution demands that you have the courage to convict, they demand something monstrous.
Narrator:They demand that you have the courage to convict an innocent man. It is not a question of doubt. It is a question of lack of certitude. Today your role is paramount. You are equal in weight to the judges and the President.
Narrator:Reflection, honesty, conscientiousness. These are human qualities that have nothing to do with the law or the knowledge of the law, but rather with us as human beings. Therefore, at the very least, you must give Cyril Belshaw the bitter victory of an acquittal by reason of doubt. If you are honest, it is impossible to reach the conclusion that Cyril Bellshaw killed his wife. Remember, it is not enough that it is possible, even very probable.
Narrator:That is not enough for a conviction. There must be complete certitude. All doubts of his innocence must be completely ruled out from your mind. And so you cannot, you ought not, convict, because no one knows how, when, or why Betty Belshaw was killed. True courage is to admit the inexplicable.
Narrator:One day the murderer may be known, and you will be relieved and proud to have acquitted this man, Cyril Belshaw. As Sudmann sat down, the courtroom fell silent. His eloquence had clearly left an impression. All three men, Heim for the prosecution, and Paschoud and Studemann for the defence, had risen to the occasion. Each had presented a compelling case for his respective side and perhaps more than one of them had delivered what would rank among the finest speeches of his career.
Narrator:The President then called a short recess before the Court would hear the rebuttals from both sides. But neither the prosecution's nor the defenses' final counter arguments introduced anything of significance that would fundamentally alter the case, so I will not go into them here. But instead allow me to take you to the final words of the trial. The moment when, under the law of the Canton Of Voe, the accused himself was given the final word. Slowly, almost as if in slow motion, Cyril Belschaw rose from his seat.
Narrator:He turned towards the jurors, steadied himself, and then addressed the court in a calm but trembling voice. I loved my wife, and I still love my wife. I have not committed murder. I have not hurt my wife. I could not do such a thing.
Narrator:I am not capable of doing such a thing. And then his voice broke. Now I'm in your hands. The trial was over. The jurors, judges, and president withdrew to their deliberation room.
Narrator:Reporters milled around the lawyers. Papers were shuffled and gathered. Doors were flung open, allowing fresh air to sweep into the courtroom. It was Friday, December 5. The verdict would not be delivered until Monday, December 8.
Narrator:For Cyril Bellshaw, the weekend that lay ahead would be one he was unlikely ever to forget. But what would the judges and jurors decide? After three days of arguments, accusations, contradictions, and unanswered questions, the fate of Cyril Bellshaw was now in their hands. If you have been drawn into this extraordinary story, and if you wish to find out how the jury decided, then please follow my podcast so not to miss the sixth and final episode of the Bellshaw case, the verdict. This was episode five of the Bellshaw murder case, researched, written, and hosted by me, Rudolph Isler.
Narrator:Please check out the show notes to find a link to our website for more detailed information, like maps, photographs, and even the possibility to support its fully independent creator and keep this podcast refreshingly commercial free. Thank you for listening, and looking forward to you hearing me soon again.