Hammersmith Nude Murders (Stripper)

[Robert]

Thanks Neil.

That's a tough one. Normally when researching a name like "Jones" one is hoping for a female Jones to marry a male who has an easier name.

[Neil Milkins]

Hi Robert. I don't know what syndrome Harold Shipman suffered with to kill all the people that he did but I believe Jones' was self-inflicted with the same syndrome and possibly killed more people than Shipman. Muriel's killer left D.N.A. at the scene. However the killer has a Y -STR profile which means only a male relative of Jones can be tested to match the killer. I have been unable to ascertain whether the male relative refers to a son only or a nephew etc. I received the following email from South Wales Police on 20 February 2019. Good Morning Mr Milkins,

Thanks again for your continuing interest in the case. I have now moved from the Specialist Crime Review Unit to a new role. However I am happy to provide you with relevant updates on the Drinkwater case as previously communicated.
I know my colleagues who are working on the Drinkwater case are actively considering the family connections to Harold JONES.
Kind Regards. Mark.

[Robert]

Hi Neil

I wonder if Jones's daughter would consent to a DNA test.

Yes, no telling how many people he may have killed in the war, plus he may have come back with a syndrome - I can't remember what it's called, but Vietnam vets were supposed to suffer with it - an addiction to danger, or something like that.

[Neil Milkins]

Hi Caz and Robert. You have to bear in mind that Jones' "taste" for females changed or alternated to women as he married a woman. I don't believe his interest was just in women as South Wales Police are linking him to the murder of 12 year-old Muriel Drinkwater in 1946. This murder was committed 4 months after he was demobbed from the army in Libya. It doesn't take much to work out that as Jones told the prison authorities just before he was released from prison in 1941 that he "did not want to lose the desire to kill," then he would kill again. Then they arm him with a rifle and let him loose on the Libyans for 5 years. How many Libyans did he kill "for pleasure."

[caz]

Yes, it did occur to me that a child killer would have continued to kill children and not adults. But then I took into consideration that Jones himself was little more than a child at the time, and may not have had the physical and psychological confidence to tackle a woman.

And of course, had he been old enough himself, he'd have hanged.

[Robert]

Yes, it did occur to me that a child killer would have continued to kill children and not adults. But then I took into consideration that Jones himself was little more than a child at the time, and may not have had the physical and psychological confidence to tackle a woman.

[caz]

Trev, I meant a woman to woman situation. No one else present.

I'd be up for that, Robert. Not that I'm a professional interviewer, but I lived through the sixties like Jones's daughter did, and went to school in Hammersmith [although I lived south of the river in Southfields], so I could jog the sort of memories that she and many others might not have thought about.

Yes he committed two murders of young girls when he was 15, the girls were much younger than him. Were these later victims young girls of that age no they were not.

Trevor, I don't think it's a big deal that Jones killed girls younger than himself when he was fifteen. He could have picked on them - one was eight, the other eleven - because they were easy to overpower. He doesn't look big and strong in the photos of him taken at the time. If he was JtS he again picked on females younger than himself at the time, who would have been relatively easy to overpower. So it doesn't follow that he would have preyed on young girls when he was in his fifties if he still had the urge to kill.

Love,

Caz
X

[Robert]

Trev, I meant a woman to woman situation. No one else present.

[Neil Milkins]

Hi Trevor. See my post below dated 22-2-19.
02-22-2019, 08:00 PM
Hi Trevor. Your questions can only be answered by the Met. and hopefully will be answered soon. The programme correctly stated that the paint samples came from Shaw an Kilburn. (My post from 22-2-2019.( I do know now what I didn't know before regarding a car. However you will glean no more information from me.

[Trevor Marriott]

Well she clearly didnt ask the right questions did she ?

let me ask you two more questions

What new evidence/facts were obtained between the 2011 prog and the current prog to justfiy a remake, and why was the case not referred to the police in 2011?

www.trevormarriott.co.uk

[Neil Milkins]

Hi Robert. It has already been done by a woman. Former Detective Chief Inspector Jackie Malton.

[Robert]

Trev, maybe that would be best done by a woman.

[Trevor Marriott]

Hi Trevor,

I'm not sure why you are being so negative. Surely anyone with an interest in true crime would like answers to the serious question of what a character like Harold Jones was doing in the vicinity of the JtS murders, considering he had attacked and killed two young females in his youth and had shown no remorse. Did prison reform him, without even trying, to the extent that he emerged a model citizen, who was never again tempted to do any harm to a woman? That would be pretty rare, wouldn't it? Someone committed those murders in the 60s, and Jones was around, almost certainly reading all about them. So I see nothing wrong in putting the two cases out there, so we can compare the known details and make up our own mind, and I think it's admirable that the police are finally persuaded to review the unsolved murders, to see if they can eliminate Harold Jones from any involvement, or else establish how strong a suspect he actually might be.

What is wrong with that? If the police had already refused to look at the case again, or had supplied evidence to the documentary makers to suggest they were barking up the wrong tree, then you might have had an argument against it being broadcast. But you never know who might have watched it and recalled some little detail that could shed more light. That's why Crimewatch was so popular - the opportunity for members of the public to help solve serious crimes. I also think Jones's daughter would probably be able to reveal more about her early life with her father, if a professional interviewer were to ask the right questions.

Love,

Caz
X

Caz
I am not being negative but I take the professional view of prove or disprove which is what the police do when investigating crimes, and the caveat is beyond a reasonable doubt

The prog attempted to show Jones was a prime suspect but fell short of producing any hard evidence to support this. He is clearly a person of interest because he was resident and worked in West London at the time of the murders, but does that aspect alone make him a prime suspect? The prog left me with a number of unanswered questions, and in my opinion a number of other relevant issues which could prove or disprove his involvement were never mentioned.

Neil Milkins and prof Wilson were directly involved in both progs, the first in 2011 what new evidence was forthcoming since the first ,why did they not go to the police in 2011?

Yes he committed two murders of young girls when he was 15, the girls were much younger than him. Were these later victims young girls of that age no they were not.

Those involved in the making of the prog failed to mention 2 almost identical murders which preceded the ones they did refer to why did that happen?

They also failed to disclose whether or not he owned a car, which is an important part to consider for obvious reasons. In fact on the prog he was seen riding a bus. Alt those experienced experts on that prog and no one managed to ascertain if he had a car or a licence, or perhaps they did and found that he didnt.

They made no mention of where he did his army service, whether of not there were any unsolved murders where he was stationed

The first hammesrsmith murder was 23 years after his release that's a long time for a potential serial killer to fester before starting again.

He died of cancer in 1971, we do not know how is health was at the time of the murders.

You mention he showed no remorse, well how many criminals who commit crimes show any signs of remorse, and the ones that do are often told by their lawyers to do so to aid their case, and a reduction in sentence or early release.

I totally agree that Jones should be looked at as a person of interest but at this time he is no more than that, and the current prog didnt show anything to suggest otherwise, in fact it showed up potential flaws in his suspect viabilty. However, the viewing public will be convinced that he was the killer.

This prog had all the ingredients of the Charles Cross debacle, where prog makes go to great lengths to show a persons guilt but fail to show what proves a persons innoncence,

I am sure his daughter would be only to willing to be interviewed if it might prove her father innocent, and if i had her contact details I would willingly do so

https://www.trevormarriott.co.uk

[Neil Milkins]

Hi Caz. A very sensible comment. Approximately 90 percent of people who have contacted me say they are convinced Jones was J.T.S. A few say it seems that he was while just a few rubbish the idea. Only the police will be able to find information that has eluded myself owing to privacy laws. I am eagerly expecting a result one way or another soon. Best wishes. Neil.

[caz]

Hi Trevor,

I'm not sure why you are being so negative. Surely anyone with an interest in true crime would like answers to the serious question of what a character like Harold Jones was doing in the vicinity of the JtS murders, considering he had attacked and killed two young females in his youth and had shown no remorse. Did prison reform him, without even trying, to the extent that he emerged a model citizen, who was never again tempted to do any harm to a woman? That would be pretty rare, wouldn't it? Someone committed those murders in the 60s, and Jones was around, almost certainly reading all about them. So I see nothing wrong in putting the two cases out there, so we can compare the known details and make up our own mind, and I think it's admirable that the police are finally persuaded to review the unsolved murders, to see if they can eliminate Harold Jones from any involvement, or else establish how strong a suspect he actually might be.

What is wrong with that? If the police had already refused to look at the case again, or had supplied evidence to the documentary makers to suggest they were barking up the wrong tree, then you might have had an argument against it being broadcast. But you never know who might have watched it and recalled some little detail that could shed more light. That's why Crimewatch was so popular - the opportunity for members of the public to help solve serious crimes. I also think Jones's daughter would probably be able to reveal more about her early life with her father, if a professional interviewer were to ask the right questions.

Love,

Caz
X