Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Hammersmith Nude Murders (Stripper)

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Hi Trevor. If you can't be bothered to watch again where it mentions Shaw and Kilburn, then you will never know the answer! And if you can't be bothered to read my posts carefully then you will never notice that I have told you that you will glean no further information from me. You come over as pretty clever. Do your own research.

    Comment


    • It doesn’t take very much research to highlight the significant flaws in your research and the content of the prog

      www.trevormarriott.co.uk

      Comment


      • I've been interested in this case since reading David Seabrook's book several years ago-a book with lots of factual detail, although regrettably some of the comments made by the author in respect of the victims were unfortunate to say the least.

        I've just seen the latest documentary, which I found to be impressive, and I think a very good case was made in favour of Harold Jones being the perpetrator. Particularly intriguing was the discovery that an HL Stephens worked at the Napier factory in the 1950s, and that Jones went under the name of Harry Stephens whilst living in London.

        However, in respect of Bridget O'Hara, wasn't the main suspect, or at least the last person to be seen in her company, a Scotsman in a suede jacket, who apparently had previously tried to throttle a woman, who was seen leaving the Shepherd's Bush Hotel with the victim?

        Regarding victimology, the fact that Harold Jones's two known victims were children is somewhat problematic: serial killers who target children are not usually interested in adults. However, it's not unprecedented: One of the victims of Peter Sutcliffe was a schoolgirl, who he attacked on a quiet country lane; and Arthur Shawcross was originally imprisoned for raping and murdering two children: after this release he committed a second series of 12 murders, all of the victims being adults, primarily sex workers. And, of course, it should be remembered that Jones was a child himself when he committed the two murders, and may therefore have lacked the confidence to target an adult victim.
        Last edited by John G; 02-28-2019, 09:57 PM.

        Comment


        • Hi John G. I have already stated that Jones' "taste" in females changed when freed from prison as he married a woman eight years his junior, but still a woman. The B.B.C. documentary is being released as a 3 parter soon and will contain 51 minutes more footage than in the 90 minute one already shown. More information has been gathered about Jones and will shortly be revealed. There have been so many so-called witness statements that have mudied the waters. All the murder victims were seen by various persons before their murders but I believe that no one actually saw the victims with the killer.
          Last edited by Neil Milkins; 02-28-2019, 11:44 PM.

          Comment


          • I always thought the Police Drawing of the Killer from the time of the Hammersmith Nude Murders looked like the studio portrait of Jones taken of him in his Adolescence. Just my 2 cents worth. Perhaps, the Drawing of the killer was more accurate then folks thought it was. Also Jones could of trained himself to mimic a Scottish Accent.

            Comment


            • Originally posted by Neil Milkins View Post
              Hi John G. I have already stated that Jones' "taste" in females changed when freed from prison as he married a woman eight years his junior, but still a woman. The B.B.C. documentary is being released as a 3 parter soon and will contain 51 minutes more footage than in the 90 minute one already shown. More information has been gathered about Jones and will shortly be revealed. There have been so many so-called witness statements that have mudied the waters. All the murder victims were seen by various persons before their murders but I believe that no one actually saw the victims with the killer.
              Hi Neil,

              Thanks for the reply. Yes, I agree that the two earlier child murders are in no way fatal to his candidacy, particularly considering his subsequent marriage, the possible parallel with Shawcross, and his young age at the time.

              I very much enjoyed the documentary, especially as I'm a big fan of Professor David Wilson, who I have seen on other serial killer documentaries.Do you know when the follow-up is due to air?

              As regards further points made in the documentary, the prison psychiatric report certainly makes grim reading, painting the picture of an unreformed sexual sadist. And I agree with Professor Wilson's view that this type of killer doesn't simply stop of his own volition, so further victims, following his release, would be very likely.

              I take your point about witnesses and, of course, caution is required. Thus, in the O'Hara case, Joseph Kelly claimed that he'd seen her leave with William Kelly-they'd arranged to leave together-via the Goldwalk Road entrance to the pub and, that in any event, the man he saw her with didn't have a suede jacket. However, during a conversation between the two Kellys, who had both been drinking with Bridie that night, William Kelly totally disputes this version of events, claiming that he waited for Bridie in vain. He then said that she must have left by the saloon bar door, thus contradicting Joseph's testimony, and that he subsequently saw her going off with another Scotsman, wearing the suede jacket.

              Perhaps, therefore, Joseph Kelly saw what he expected to see. Maybe both witnesses were mistaken. William Kelly then tells the story of the Scotsman suspect trying to throttle a woman, but this was obviously hearsay.

              Interestingly, a few weeks before her disappearance Bridie was drinking at the Shepherds Bush Hotel with William Kelly, a friend Flora Forbes, two Welsh brothers, and the mysterious Scotsman in the Suede Jacket. Considering the Welsh connection, I wonder if these brothers, assuming they were actually brothers, were ever identified.

              Comment


              • Originally posted by John G View Post

                Hi Neil,

                Thanks for the reply. Yes, I agree that the two earlier child murders are in no way fatal to his candidacy, particularly considering his subsequent marriage, the possible parallel with Shawcross, and his young age at the time.

                I very much enjoyed the documentary, especially as I'm a big fan of Professor David Wilson, who I have seen on other serial killer documentaries.Do you know when the follow-up is due to air?

                As regards further points made in the documentary, the prison psychiatric report certainly makes grim reading, painting the picture of an unreformed sexual sadist. And I agree with Professor Wilson's view that this type of killer doesn't simply stop of his own volition, so further victims, following his release, would be very likely.

                I take your point about witnesses and, of course, caution is required. Thus, in the O'Hara case, Joseph Kelly claimed that he'd seen her leave with William Kelly-they'd arranged to leave together-via the Goldwalk Road entrance to the pub and, that in any event, the man he saw her with didn't have a suede jacket. However, during a conversation between the two Kellys, who had both been drinking with Bridie that night, William Kelly totally disputes this version of events, claiming that he waited for Bridie in vain. He then said that she must have left by the saloon bar door, thus contradicting Joseph's testimony, and that he subsequently saw her going off with another Scotsman, wearing the suede jacket.

                Perhaps, therefore, Joseph Kelly saw what he expected to see. Maybe both witnesses were mistaken. William Kelly then tells the story of the Scotsman suspect trying to throttle a woman, but this was obviously hearsay.

                Interestingly, a few weeks before her disappearance Bridie was drinking at the Shepherds Bush Hotel with William Kelly, a friend Flora Forbes, two Welsh brothers, and the mysterious Scotsman in the Suede Jacket. Considering the Welsh connection, I wonder if these brothers, assuming they were actually brothers, were ever identified.
                Hey are you Gannon? I've been reading your book and using it for research purposes on the Wallace case (Kindle version so I got the search function which is really useful). You should post on that thread.

                Comment


                • Hi John G. I don't know if or when a follow-up will be. The 51 minutes extra to the 90 minutes was filmed a while ago and I assume that will be shown worldwide on satellite channels C.B.S. etc. I just hope the Met. review doesn't go on for much longer. I have felt for a long time that Jones worked at the paint spray and body repair shop. His daughter said he worked in Acton. Just have to wait and see.

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by WallaceWackedHer View Post

                    Hey are you Gannon? I've been reading your book and using it for research purposes on the Wallace case (Kindle version so I got the search function which is really useful). You should post on that thread.
                    No, although, believe or not, the question has been asked before!

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by Neil Milkins View Post
                      Hi John G. I have already stated that Jones' "taste" in females changed when freed from prison as he married a woman eight years his junior, but still a woman. The B.B.C. documentary is being released as a 3 parter soon and will contain 51 minutes more footage than in the 90 minute one already shown. More information has been gathered about Jones and will shortly be revealed. There have been so many so-called witness statements that have mudied the waters. All the murder victims were seen by various persons before their murders but I believe that no one actually saw the victims with the killer.
                      Well the prog depicted a couple who appeared to be struggling with each other, and it was suggested that was one of the victims, and a description of the man given which fitted Jones.

                      It would seem that I stand alone in suggesting that the prog content was far from conclusive as to his guilt.

                      On another point he was released from prison on parole if that was a life parole then the parole officers should have known his whereabouts, and if that were the case should have made the police aware of his presence in the murder locations at the time,was that ever looked into.

                      There was more missed out of the prog to prove his potential innocence but very little hard evidence to prove his guilt

                      www.trevormarriott.co.uk

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by Trevor Marriott View Post

                        Well the prog depicted a couple who appeared to be struggling with each other, and it was suggested that was one of the victims, and a description of the man given which fitted Jones.

                        It would seem that I stand alone in suggesting that the prog content was far from conclusive as to his guilt.

                        On another point he was released from prison on parole if that was a life parole then the parole officers should have known his whereabouts, and if that were the case should have made the police aware of his presence in the murder locations at the time,was that ever looked into.

                        There was more missed out of the prog to prove his potential innocence but very little hard evidence to prove his guilt

                        www.trevormarriott.co.uk
                        Hello Trevor,

                        I think the documentary presented a good circumstantial case- in my view, he's definitely the best candidate that's been proposed-but this obviously does not amount to beyond reasonable doubt.

                        There are also, in my opinion, some obvious weaknesses with his candidacy. For instance, I don't think the photo-fit was a particularly good likeness, although like most photo-fits it could be pretty much anyone!

                        I also think you made a very good point earlier regarding the fact that there would have been a substantial period between killings: he was released from prison way back in 1941, and the first suggested Hammersmith Nude Murder wasn't until 1959, Elizabeth Figg, and she's far from a definite victim. But even that represents a substantial period of 18 years, a very long time for a serial killer to go without killing, possibly unprecedented. And it's even more problematic when you consider that he was portrayed as an unrepentant sexual sadist who was almost certain to strike again.

                        Comment


                        • Hi John G. You state:"And it's even more problematic when you consider that he was portrayed as an unrepentant sexual sadist who was almost certain to strike again." I don't see that as problematic. I am convinced Jones committed many murders after his demob and possibly during his life in the army. Let's get the review over with first though before we dig any deeper regarding unsolved murders. Jones without a doubt is the best candidate put forward by myself 10 and a half years ago for the Nudes' murders.

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by Neil Milkins View Post
                            Hi John G. You state:"And it's even more problematic when you consider that he was portrayed as an unrepentant sexual sadist who was almost certain to strike again." I don't see that as problematic. I am convinced Jones committed many murders after his demob and possibly during his life in the army. Let's get the review over with first though before we dig any deeper regarding unsolved murders. Jones without a doubt is the best candidate put forward by myself 10 and a half years ago for the Nudes' murders.
                            Hi Neil,.

                            Thanks for the reply. Yes, I absolutely agree that Jones is by far the best suspect that has hitherto been proposed. I hope that at some stage there is more research into his life in the post-war period, with a focus on any unsolved violent crimes, with similar MOs/signatures, that he could have committed.

                            I would also point out that if Elizabeth Figg was a victim of the same killer, and I believe she most probably was, then there is a considerable gap of over 4 years to the next possible victim, Gwynneth Rees. That would indicate a perpetrator who has the willpower to restrain his urges/murderous inclinations for significant periods.
                            Last edited by John G; 03-02-2019, 08:11 AM.

                            Comment


                            • Hi John G. Although there were large gaps between some of the nudes' murders as you say, there are still many unsolved murders in the London area and other areas that may or may not be the work of Harold Jones. Grounds for further research. Muriel Maitland for instance murdered near Hayes Middlesex still unsolved. You only have to google unsolved murders in London 1946-1971 to see many unsolved murders that someone has committed.

                              Comment


                              • And I suppose, depending on the outcome of the police review, there may be miscarriages of justice where a murder has been 'solved.'

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X