Do you need a body to prove murder?

II. THE CORPUS DELICTI REQUIREMENT. P.266

A. Meaning: "The body or substance of the crime." It must be proved in all cases before there can be a conviction. It cannot be presumed, but must be proved in all cases by legal evidence. The evidence can be circumstantial, but must be so conclusive as to eliminate all reasonable doubt in showing the crime was actually committed. See Commonwealth v. Leslie (text) where a conviction of arson was reversed after there had been a confession, but there was insufficient independent evidence that the fire was actually caused by arson.

B. Proving Corpus Delicti in the "no body" cases.

1. The old rule: no body, no case.

2. The modern rule: circumstantial evidence can be used to establish the existence of the murder.

People v. Lipsky, p. 267. The court found corpus delicti, where the victim was missing, but her important personal effects were found. Although the defendant confessed, there had to be factual corroboration.

Epperly v. Commonwealth. p. 268. Defendant's murder conviction was upheld; only evidence of victim's death were her blood soaked clothes, and evidence of a violent struggle, and defendant's incriminating statements.

C. Where there is a body but no evidence of cause of death. In general, if doctors are not able to testify that the cause of death was due to an unlawful act, there is no corpus delicti. In People v. Arched, (p. 269) the defendant was finally convicted of murder by insulin, although he had probably murdered several women. Only in 1967, did death from this cause become provable.