Sir Sidney Smith had concluded that the murderer was the servant. The servant apparently tried to take an advantage from the tense situation between Sathasivam and his wife and then attempted to rape her. How Sidney smith came to the conclusion?
Servant's evidence was that Mr. Sathasivam assaulted her while she was standing. However, due to the fear, Sathasivam's wife had passed urine. Sir Smith only analyzing evidence and even without seeing the body correctly noted the urine had been passed horizontally making the dress wet, whereas in the scenario described by the servant, the urine should fall to the ground vertically. Further, the damages close to the wood panel of the door suggested that there was a fight in the servant room where Mrs. Sathasivam fought with her perpetrator,
Clearly the servant was the murderer. It was solved by Sir Sidney Smith.
Servant's evidence was that Mr. Sathasivam assaulted her while she was standing. However, due to the fear, Sathasivam's wife had passed urine. Sir Smith only analyzing evidence and even without seeing the body correctly noted the urine had been passed horizontally making the dress wet, whereas in the scenario described by the servant, the urine should fall to the ground vertically. Further, the damages close to the wood panel of the door suggested that there was a fight in the servant room where Mrs. Sathasivam fought with her perpetrator,
Clearly the servant was the murderer. It was solved by Sir Sidney Smith.
Last edited:
