impact of marie la farge case on forensic medicine and crime scene investigation The primary study of toxicology concerns

the dosage of poison used in an y situation. Almost every substance has the potential to be poisonous given the right circumstances, but whether or not it becomes dangerous depends on the amou nt of poison involved. symptoms of poisons on trial

Toxicology was first systematized by the Spanish physician 853). Toxicologists examine blood and tissues to ascertain tity of drugs or poisons in a person's body. Toxicological vestigators by showing whether the drug ingested was fatal ime the drug was introduced into the body.

Matthieu Orfila (1787 1 the presence and quan reports can assist in and the approximate t

http://www.crimelibrary.com/criminal_mind/forensics/toxicology Marie Lafarge, a Frenchwoman, was convicted of poisoning her husband with arseni c in 1840. This was the first case in which someone was convicted mainly upon forensi c analysis results. She had purchased arsenic from the apothecary saying that it was to be used to kill the rats that infested her house. Her husband, Charles Lafarge, fell ill and was seen by a doctor. His condition was thought to be due to cholera, a disease that was commo n at that time. Later, suspicions were aroused when residues of white powder were found in a glass he had drunk from. Soon Charles was dead and samples from his body were taken for a nalysis using tests which showed that he had ingested arsenic. Marie was brought before the court, found guilty and sentenced to life imprisonment. http://www.nationalstemcentre.org.uk/dl/91fa4fbd070d1be1cdded979f9339049d3ddc7d0 /26577-catalyst23%204_548.pdf a man in his late twenties was complaining of severe stomach pains allegedly aft er eating a cake sent by his new wife who was reluctant to marry him in the firs t place.

Evidence presented for the arrest consisted of testimonies regarding Marie's pur chase of arsenic prior to her husband's iterminent stomach pains. This was admit ted but Marie interposed the defense of having bought said substance for mice c ontrol. Her trial, which encountered several delays, finally took place on September 2, 1840. And being a woman of renowned charm, the public indisputably did not take her case lightly. The controversy became the center of public discussions such t hat Paris newspapers regularly gave the public updates of the case, the court-ho use was always overcrowded, and that even later, inns could no longer accommodat e outsiders who were likewise intrigued. Several articles even mention that it d ivided France into pro and con Lafarge factions.

"You must be just; you cannot be so if you let this woman escape,"said the prose cutor, whose opposition was the well-renowned M. Paillet as counsel for the defe nse. as the trial progressed, several chemists testified that arsenic was found in the milk, eggnog and the box from which Brun saw Marie take the white powder. Some who studied the ----- also testified that arsenic was likewise found in Ch arles' vomit and stomach content. it was during this stage that Mathieu Orfila, the forerunner in the field of poi sons at that time, was contacted by the defense lawyer. It was Orfila who sugges ted that the chemists use the recently formulated Marsh Test because the results allegedly obtained by the chemists, as to him, were inconclusive and unreliable . The prosecution's lawyers then moved for the adoption of said test to better d etermine whether or not Charles really died of arsenic poisoning. Another batch of chemists were then hired to reexamine the precipitate extracted from Charles' remains. This time, however, tests proved negative. The prosecution, however, were unsatisfied with the results and further moved to exhume Charles' body for further tests. The court acceded to this request despi te finding the body in an advanced state of decomposition. However, after a seri es of tests were again conducted, results still yielded negative traces of arsen ic. Unrelented, the prosecution now moved to invite experts from Paris. Orfila t hen arrived and personally assured the court that amounts of arsenic would be pr esent in the victim's body, that this arsenic does not come from the apparatus n or the substances utilized in testing, that the amount of arsenic supersedes the minute levels found in the human body. It was then that the very man whose sugg estion almost exonerated her weeks ago now declares her guilty. The jury later found her guilty and sentenced her to hard labor for life.