Ruth Ellis

[Jeff Leahy]

Hi,
Why is it every criminal case has to have some intrigue entangled within?
We have Hanratty .. who is innocent because he ''said so.''.

Really Richard surely every case should be judged on its merits not as some general rule of thumb.

Actually its now widely accepted that Hanratty was innocent.

We have the more then one shooter in the Kennedy assassination , when we all know ''Lee-Harvey did it''.

True. But then its known Lee Harvey Oswald was an excellent shot quite capable of making those shots and probably did. Can the same be said of Ruth Ellis?

We have Hitler escaping to Argentina, when we all know he committed suicide in the bunker on 30TH April 1945..

This only really happened in the mind of fiction writers there is not any really evidence for this.

We have the suggestion that Frederick Deeming was JTR, when everyone knows he was not[ TV last night] although the female DNA on the reverse of the stamp is an insight.

Sir Robert Anderson clearly stated that 'Undiscovered crimes in London are rare, and that the Jack the Ripper murders are not within that catigory"

Having spent many years looking for DNA ascociated with the Ripper murders, unless someone has found and dug up MJK (even then they would find Jack DNA) I can assure you all it doesnt exist.

And now we have Ruth Ellis who in the presence of witnesses,shot her lover, are we suggesting that the smoking gun taken off her, by a police officer was the result of a ingenious mime.
And the list goes on .
Everyone loves a mystery, but lets not invent one, when the truth is obvious.
Regards Richard.

I again ask the question could Ruth have physically fired four accuate shots?

Did anyone actually see her firing them?

Why was no forensics bought to court demonstrating that the shots fired came from the gun she was carrying which failed and broke when tested?

What were Cussens connections to Stephen Ward?

What were Wards connections to the Film industry?

And why are the fies on the Stripper murders still unavailable given that Seabrook had access? or did he?

Yours Jeff

[Graham]

Actually its now widely accepted that Hanratty was innocent.

It most certainly is not.

Everyone loves a mystery, but lets not invent one, when the truth is obvious.

Exactly, Richard. The fact is that Ruth Ellis admitted shooting Blakely and pleaded guilty.

Graham

[richardnunweek]

Hello Jeff,
I would suggest that it is more likely now, then at any other time, that James Hanratty was guilty as charged, and I strongly disagree that it is accepted in the media that he was innocent, it may well have been the case in the 60/70s, when peace protests , and capital punishment disbelievers were abundant, but nowadays [ apart from the A6 thread] very few will share that sentiment.
As for Ruth Ellis.
I would question the 'no witnesses' referral.
Clive Gunnell? who was with David B when he was shot is one for starters, did he imagine his friend running for his life past him, with the crazed Ruth Ellis firing at him , did he imagine her shouting to him ''Get out of the way Clive'', as she prepared to release another shot.
How about poor Mrs Yule walking down the hill with her husband to have a drink, did she imagine seeing Ellis firing wildly , and did she imagine a bullet tearing through her hand.
How about the off duty police officer who witnessed Ruth against a wall with a smoking gun hanging from her hand, how about the spent cartridge cases.
And as Graham states she admitted shooting him, she also told a witness a half an hour previous in a distressed state''Oh I have got a gun''.
How did she manage to accurately fire a weapon of that weight and trigger force so accurately?
Come on ..she could hardly miss from that range.
Regards Richard.

[sdreid]

Didn't AP's Stripper theory have Lee Harvey Oswald in it somewhere?

[Jeff Leahy]

It most certainly is not.

Yes I do apologize I was obviously mixing the names/case with Derek Bentley

Exactly, Richard. The fact is that Ruth Ellis admitted shooting Blakely and pleaded guilty.

Graham

I remind you that so did Kenneth Archibald, who was also involved in private drinking clubs.

He was clearly innocent

Yours Jeff

[Jeff Leahy]

Hello Jeff,
I would suggest that it is more likely now, then at any other time, that James Hanratty was guilty as charged, and I strongly disagree that it is accepted in the media that he was innocent, it may well have been the case in the 60/70s, when peace protests , and capital punishment disbelievers were abundant, but nowadays [ apart from the A6 thread] very few will share that sentiment..

Yes sorry about this a name mix up on my part

As for Ruth Ellis.
I would question the 'no witnesses' referral.
Clive Gunnell? who was with David B when he was shot is one for starters, did he imagine his friend running for his life past him, with the crazed Ruth Ellis firing at him , did he imagine her shouting to him ''Get out of the way Clive'', as she prepared to release another shot.
How about poor Mrs Yule walking down the hill with her husband to have a drink, did she imagine seeing Ellis firing wildly , and did she imagine a bullet tearing through her hand.
How about the off duty police officer who witnessed Ruth against a wall with a smoking gun hanging from her hand, how about the spent cartridge cases.
And as Graham states she admitted shooting him, she also told a witness a half an hour previous in a distressed state''Oh I have got a gun''.
How did she manage to accurately fire a weapon of that weight and trigger force so accurately?
Come on ..she could hardly miss from that range.
Regards Richard.

Sorry Richard I just did a long post answering in depth and discovered Casebook has a habbit of logging out and it disappeared into the ether, reminds me to post in word on casebook.

However in breaf...the copper you mentioned was in the pub not outside.

Mrs Yule (her husband didnt testify) change her statement

Clive Gunnells statements are also inconsistent in detail.

Cussen was seen in the area and like Oswald was a crack shot.

The trigger on Ellis Smith and wesson required 10lb of preasure and was notoriously inaccurate in an untrained hand. Ellis had no experience with guns.

Ellis was not the only person losely involved in this seedy underground club scene to make a bizarre confession. Check out Kenneth Archibald

Sorry about haste but have stuff to do

Yours Jeff

[Jeff Leahy]

Didn't AP's Stripper theory have Lee Harvey Oswald in it somewhere?

Ah AP Wolf...

Yes I no this name is contrivercail and I certainly would not agree with everything he posted. But he was monitoring the FBI site and made some interesting observations and conections...

I'll add some: Antony Beauchamp was a freind and photograspher for Stephen Ward. He was married to Winstone Churchills daughter and first photographed Marylin Monroe..(I'll let you figure the obvious question)

Hes also the only person I can discover running a photographic studio in Victoria?

Can you really see Hannah Tailford afording expensive photographic equipment?

Yours Jeff

[Jeff Leahy]

I dont know if anyone can help me wit some person spotting?

I think the first person is Ruth Ellis, the third is Diana Dors.

My guess would be Jone Collins on the end. Though could be behind Dianna?

I'm interested in knowing which one was Jane Hart?

Yours Jeff

[richardnunweek]

Hi Jeff,
Exactly what are you suggesting?
If I recall David and Clive both left together, and Ellis was standing close by, there was also a young couple in a doorway who witnessed the whole scene.
It is correct to mention that the off duty police officer was inside the pub until the shooting was over, but Gunnell was fully aware what was happening, the guy was petrified, and so was Mrs Yule.
Surely it beggar's belief that Ruth Ellis only fired the gun once, which must have been the case in order for the weapon to be still smoking , are you suggesting that the other five cartridge cases were not used during the shooting, and only one live round was loaded?
I have to say this act of mime was worthy of an award, what incredible timing, the real shooter saying to Ruth ..'Just point the gun' and pretend, and then fire the one live round when its over..
Great stuff Jeff...
Regards Richard.

[Jeff Leahy]

Hi Jeff,
Exactly what are you suggesting?

I’m not suggesting. I’m stating as fact that Ruth Ellis had a very poor, incompetent, defense lawyer.

If I recall David and Clive both left together, and Ellis was standing close by, there was also a young couple in a doorway who witnessed the whole scene.

According to which account?

Mrs Gladys Yule 11th April: saw a young man run out of the saloon bar “followed, almost on his heels, by a blonde woman”

28th April: She said she saw a lady in front of two men “I could see her hair was very blonde and she wore a light coat”

A good defense lawyer should have spotted these inconsistencies..he made no attempt to challenge Mrs Yule

It is correct to mention that the off duty police officer was inside the pub until the shooting was over, but Gunnell was fully aware what was happening, the guy was petrified, and so was Mrs Yule.

OK but Gunnell’s statements are also inconsistent. And did he have other motives?

Surely it beggar's belief that Ruth Ellis only fired the gun once, which must have been the case in order for the weapon to be still smoking , are you suggesting that the other five cartridge cases were not used during the shooting, and only one live round was loaded?

Well we’ll probably never know as no forensics were done. If she fired the weapon there should have been residue from the gun on her clothes. But standard procedure was not followed.

If Cussen fired the shots theyd be no way of telling. A gun like this would have had to have been held with two hands by an experienced marksman to have hit their target. Ellis was neither and all witness accounts describe her as having the gun in one hand..it was never proved that the bullets that killed Blakley came from the gun in Ellis hand..as that gun broke when tested (strange)

What we have are gun shots. And inconsistent witness statements.

I have to say this act of mime was worthy of an award, what incredible timing, the real shooter saying to Ruth ..'Just point the gun' and pretend, and then fire the one live round when its over.. Great stuff Jeff...
Regards Richard.

Almost ten year to the day after Ruth Ellis committed her crime another drinking club (knocking shop) manager walked into a police station and confessed to a crime he did not commit. His name was Kenith Archibald.

Both He and Ellis had connections to a sleazier side of London life, the production of 16mm porn films.

Some of which were made to order for specific tastes at … well lets just say 'well to do' London parties

Yours Jeff

PS I'm having probs with the casebook quote system it keeps shutting out while I write , hense the bold quotes

PS PS If Ward runs to form my guess is that his girlfreind is the one in the black swimming costume?

[richardnunweek]

Hello Jeff,
Ruth Ellis was hardly easy to defend, she not only was caught red handed, but admitted her guilt, even saying when she shot him , it was obviously intended to kill him, she refused counsel's suggestions that she should dress down for the jury, and came across as a hard non compassionate harlot.
What could a defence council do to improve the situation, the plea of diminished responsibility was not acceptable in law in 1955, even when sentence of death was announced she simply said ''Thank you''.
As for Mrs Yule's apparent evidence I see nothing out of hand, when Blakeney followed Clive out of the pub, Ruth was standing in a doorway, and walked out to challenge him, which would give Mrs Yule the impression that she followed him out, and in front of the two men was a reference to Ruth being in front of Clive, who in turn was in front of the fleeing Blakeney.
No mystery in the Ruth Ellis case Jeff, although Cussens's involvement should have been very much included in her trial, and she should have escaped the hangman.
Regards Richard.

[Jeff Leahy]

Good Morning Richard

Ruth Ellis was hardly easy to defend, she not only was caught red handed, but admitted her guilt, even saying when she shot him ,

Yes I agree entirely. I’m reminded of a famous Many Rice Davis comment “Well he would say that wouldn’t he?”

I don’t think I’ve ever been a supporter of conspiracy theories per se but some ‘conspiracies’ clearly took place. No one can deny that the Cold War period of the nineteen fifties gave rise to espionage and spying. The Soviet Government was looking to develop their atomic bomb and we know that London had double agents working at the top. Anthony Blunt, MacClean, Burgess, Philby. These are real life conspirac’ists, so they did exist during this period.

The Head of M15 Hollis, appears to have recruited a man called Stephen Ward then 37, in around 1949. Ward attended parties and drinking clubs mixing with the rich and famous.

I’m fairly certain he was operational long before the Perfumo Scandal. Supplying Drugs, girls and creating porn, which he both procured and produced. Not the glamorous world portrayed in films like Scandal but a world with a darker under belly. A world with real victims and deaths. I think ward had contacts with people who supplied girls and in particular he had contact with a Madam in Putney.

it was obviously intended to kill him, she refused counsel's suggestions that she should dress down for the jury, and came across as a hard non compassionate harlot.

Well yes it all could have been as straight forward as that. I’m aware that she was sexually abused as a child and perhaps had a non-compassionate side. But then wasn’t her crime supposed to be one of passion?

What could a defense council do to improve the situation; the plea of diminished responsibility was not acceptable in law in 1955, even when sentence of death was announced she simply said ''Thank you''.

“She would say that wouldn’t she’

As for Mrs Yule's apparent evidence I see nothing out of hand, when Blakeney followed Clive out of the pub, Ruth was standing in a doorway, and walked out to challenge him, which would give Mrs Yule the impression that she followed him out, and in front of the two men was a reference to Ruth being in front of Clive, who in turn was in front of the fleeing Blakeney.

Possibly but a good defense council should have noticed the disparity in the witness accounts and pointed them out to the Jury. Ellis trial was over in two days. The Jury reached their verdict in 24 minutes. No one questioned if Ellis was telling the truth. No forensics proving she was telling the truth. Again I site Keneith Archibald.

She was described by prison wardens as being clean a tidy when bought in. Yet her Smith and Wesson gun was described as covered in oil. And shooting someone at close range should have covered her in blood.

No mystery in the Ruth Ellis case Jeff, although Cussens's involvement should have been very much included in her trial, and she should have escaped the hangman.
Regards Richard.

Well yes it is Cussen that I’m interested in. A man who stayed living close to Stephen Ward right up to his end. A man who claimed to be an ex bomber pilot.. a man who was actually in the home Guard and a crack shot to boot.

I think a warrant was made for Cussens arrest but he was never picked up and disappeared back into the shadows.

Like it or not Ellis does appear to have the possibility of an alternative motive if she was mixed up with people involved in Spying, she wasnt running an ordinary pub.

Yours Jeff

[richardnunweek]

Hello Jeff,
Just one point about the oily gun , and the clean appearance of Ellis in the police cell later that night with a female officer in close attendance.
It surely is not in dispute, that Ruth handled the gun[ even if she only fired one round into the pavement] that being the case, if the gun was oily, she must have had some staining if only on her hands.
As for the woman officers remarks [ some time after] that there were no traces of blood splattering on her clothing, we should understand that first few shots were at distance, and only one shoulder wound was inflicted which was fired at point blank, the last remaining round was fired into the pavement,
So apart from her hand,hands being soiled, one would not expect her clothing especially under her main coat to have any signs of the shooting.
The fact is Jeff, here we have a case of a woman firing a weapon , that was awkward for her size, managing to release six shots, and finding her target several times, and keeping her clothing free of soiling.
Impossible.. but a simple case of ''Strange but true'', a crime of passion, carried out whilst in a state of diminished responsibility , a case of overkill, which is normal in cases like this.
Regards Richard.

[Bridewell]

In The Main

Hello Jeff,
I would suggest that it is more likely now, then at any other time, that James Hanratty was guilty as charged, and I strongly disagree that it is accepted in the media that he was innocent, it may well have been the case in the 60/70s, when peace protests , and capital punishment disbelievers were abundant, but nowadays [ apart from the A6 thread] very few will share that sentiment.
As for Ruth Ellis.
I would question the 'no witnesses' referral.
Clive Gunnell? who was with David B when he was shot is one for starters, did he imagine his friend running for his life past him, with the crazed Ruth Ellis firing at him , did he imagine her shouting to him ''Get out of the way Clive'', as she prepared to release another shot.
How about poor Mrs Yule walking down the hill with her husband to have a drink, did she imagine seeing Ellis firing wildly , and did she imagine a bullet tearing through her hand.
How about the off duty police officer who witnessed Ruth against a wall with a smoking gun hanging from her hand, how about the spent cartridge cases.
And as Graham states she admitted shooting him, she also told a witness a half an hour previous in a distressed state''Oh I have got a gun''.
How did she manage to accurately fire a weapon of that weight and trigger force so accurately?
Come on ..she could hardly miss from that range.
Regards Richard.

Hi Richard,

I agree with the above, apart from the certainty of the last sentence. A young woman, not used to handling a gun, probably in a highly nervous state and firing a large calibre hand-gun for the first time could miss from that range, I suspect (which is not saying that she did).

Regards, Bridewell.

[Stephen Thomas]

I dont know if anyone can help me with some person spotting?

I think the first person is Ruth Ellis, the third is Diana Dors.

My guess would be Joan Collins on the end. Though could be behind Diana?

I'm interested in knowing which one was Jane Hart?

The film is Lady Godiva Rides Again made in 1951 and retitled Bikini Baby in the USA. Obviously that is DD in 3rd place when she would have been 19 and very nice too. She wrote several autobiograhical books in later years and given the notoriety of Ruth Ellis may have mentioned her if they had appeared in a film together. I read one of the books ages ago but only remember some salacious stuff about 2 way mirrors. There may be other stuff mentioned in passing in these books that might assist you in your research. I don't see Joan Collins at all in that lineup and don't think the young lady at the front is Ruth Ellis because she is pretty and RE wasn't. In 4th or 6th place is the beautiful French/Italian 1950s starlet Simone Silva.

Some nice photos of her here...

http://www.google.co.uk/search?q=simone+silva&hl=en&qscrl=1&nord=1&rlz=1T4ACPW_enGB445GB448&prmd=imvnso&tbm=isch&tbo=u&source=univ&sa=X&ei=MZdfT7HZDMeZ0QXbwfD_Bg&ved=0CD4QsAQ&biw=1280&bih=764