conversations.from: human
conversations.value: What could be a title for a book about Laura, Alain, Unhappy with the genre: Literature & Fiction, Genre Fiction?
conversations.from: assistant
conversations.value: A title for this book could be 'IN HOT BLOOD'
conversations.from: human
conversations.value: Do you know the first three paragraphs for this book?
conversations.from: assistant
conversations.value: IN HOT BLOOD
  Mary Jane Rogerson was twenty years old and worked as a nursemaid in the household of a Parsee doctor, Bukhtyar Rustomji Rantanji Hakim. Having come from India to Edinburgh to study for further qualifications, Hakim, who had already attained the rank of captain in the Indian Medical Service, adopted the name Gabriel Hakim and, after deciding to settle in England, eventually changed his name by deed poll to Dr Buck Ruxton.
  While studying, Ruxton befriended the manageress of an Edinburgh café. Isabella Van Ess (or Van Est) was married, but lived apart from her Dutch husband and quickly became infatuated with the dashing Indian doctor and, when he left Edinburgh for London in 1928, she followed him shortly afterwards. Isabella obtained a divorce in October of that year and the couple's first daughter was born in 1929.
  In 1930, Ruxton purchased a medical practice in Lancaster and he and Isabella set up home with their daughter at Dalton Square, engaging Mary Jane Rogerson to act as a nursemaid a year later. Apart from a six-month gap in her employment in 1932, Mary remained with the family for the births of another daughter and a son and by 1935 was the only live-in domestic servant, although several cleaning ladies were employed to assist her with the domestic duties.
conversations.from: human
conversations.value: Do you know four more paragraphs?
conversations.from: assistant
conversations.value: The pathologist estimated the woman's age at between thirty and thirty-five years old and ascertained that she had given birth to at least one child and was around five and a half months pregnant. Slight chafing of her gums showed that she had worn dentures as, with the exception of three roots, all her teeth had been extracted. The woman's body was found at 2.15 p.m. on 19 November 1943 and Simpson believed that death had occurred between twelve and twenty-four hours earlier. Since the men who discovered the body in just six inches of water had been working in the same area at 4 p.m. on the previous day, Simpson favoured the late afternoon or evening of 18 November as the time of death. The picture was printed in newspapers and displayed in shops and, for the first time ever, a slide was created and shown in cinemas in the Luton area. It showed a photograph of the victim with the following description:
  MURDER. Police are still anxious to establish identity of this unfortunate woman. Here is her picture. If any person can help, please communicate with POLICE IMMEDIATELY. Her description is age 30-35, height 5'3", hair very dark brown bobbed, eyes brown, heavy dark eyebrows, no teeth, appendix scar, 5½ months advanced in pregnancy.
  As the investigating officers had hoped, the publicity brought forth a flurry of information. Thirty-nine people viewed the body, thinking that they might know the dead woman's identity and no less than nine of them positively identified her, giving four different possible names. However, the police subsequently traced all four of those women, leaving them back at square one.
conversations.from: human
conversations.value: Add another sentence about Because, fresh, retouched, swelling, bruising.
conversations.from: assistant
conversations.value: The pathologist estimated the woman's age at between thirty and thirty-five years old and ascertained that she had given birth to at least one child and was around five and a half months pregnant. Slight chafing of her gums showed that she had worn dentures as, with the exception of three roots, all her teeth had been extracted. The woman's body was found at 2. 15 p. m. on 19 November 1943 and Simpson believed that death had occurred between twelve and twenty-four hours earlier. Since the men who discovered the body in just six inches of water had been working in the same area at 4 p. m. on the previous day, Simpson favoured the late afternoon or evening of 18 November as the time of death. 
  Because the body was relatively 'fresh', the police took photographs of the woman's face, which were retouched to remove evidence of the extensive swelling and bruising on the right-hand profile. The picture was printed in newspapers and displayed in shops and, for the first time ever, a slide was created and shown in cinemas in the Luton area. It showed a photograph of the victim with the following description:
  MURDER. Police are still anxious to establish identity of this unfortunate woman. Here is her picture. If any person can help, please communicate with POLICE IMMEDIATELY. Her description is age 30-35, height 5'3", hair very dark brown bobbed, eyes brown, heavy dark eyebrows, no teeth, appendix scar, 5½ months advanced in pregnancy. 
  As the investigating officers had hoped, the publicity brought forth a flurry of information. Thirty-nine people viewed the body, thinking that they might know the dead woman's identity and no less than nine of them positively identified her, giving four different possible names. However, the police subsequently traced all four of those women, leaving them back at square one.
conversations.from: human
conversations.value: Do you know the last five paragraphs?
conversations.from: assistant
conversations.value: The appeal judges commented that it was highly unusual that Ruth Ellis had not appealed her own sentence and Mansfield pointed out that she had no desire to live. After shooting Blakely, she had fully intended to kill herself but the gun jammed.
  In December 2003, the appeal judges ruled that Mrs Jakubait's posthumous appeal was 'without merit', deciding that Ruth was rightly convicted of murder. They questioned whether an appeal on behalf of a woman who had committed a serious criminal offence and who had consciously and deliberately chosen not to appeal herself was a sensible use of the limited resources of the court of appeal. Under current law, they explained, a conviction for murder could be reduced to manslaughter either on the grounds of provocation or diminished responsibility. At the time of the original trial, diminished responsibility was not an option – it was introduced in 1957, partly as a result of Regina v Ellis.
  On the matter of refusing to allow a provocation defence to be put to the jury, the appeal court ruled that, for a provocation defence to be successful, it was necessary to show that Ellis was subject to an affront immediately before killing Blakely, one that caused her to lose all self-control. Thus, under the law at the time of the trial, Havers was correct to withdraw the defence of provocation from the jury.
  The appeal judges conceded that, if the trial took place today (2003), it would be likely that the jury would have been asked to decide on an issue of diminished responsibility but, so long after the original trial, there was no way of gauging what the jury's response might have been. Although disappointed by the decision, Muriel Jakubait vowed to continue her fight to overturn her sister's conviction for murder.
  During the original trial, Mr Justice Havers instructed the jury, 'You will approach this without any thoughts of sympathy either for the man or for the accused, who is a young woman and, you may think, may be a young woman badly treated by the deceased man.' Arguably, the case was best summed up in a French newspaper, which wrote in 1955, 'Passion in England, except for cricket and betting, is always regarded as a shameful disease.'