Tweet
Hi Darryl. It has been confirmed that Bridget was murdered on or shortly after 11 January 1965. The official police inquiry in 1965 concluded that Ireland was definitely working in Scotland the night Bridget was abducted.
-
-
Hi Neil, thanks for the reply. But I am just wondering if the official police enquiry in 65 concluded that Ireland was definitely working in Scotland the night Bridget was abducted. Why is he seen as such a strong suspect in 1970 by Du Rose? It doesn't seem to make sense.
Regards DarrylComment
-
If she was murdered on or shortly after Jan 11th we must assume she was murdered shortly after abduction. Is there evidence to show the date she was actually abductedOriginally posted by Neil Milkins View Post
Comment
-
The consensus of opinion now regarding John du Roses' claim in his 1970 book that he knew who the killer was in 1965 is that he was lying to save face over the fact he could not catch the killer. I received the following email from a cold case detective on 16 July 2010. "On 6th May 1965 inquiries were extended to include all personnel and visitors to the entire Heron Estate. This resulted in 7,214 current and past workers being interviewed. This would suggest he [John du Rose] didn't already know who the murderer was." It seems quite logical to me that if he had been aware by May 1965 that Ireland was the killer, then why waste valuable resources. Ireland had killed himself in March 1965. It will be interesting to see if a quiet unassuming man by the name of Harold Jones/Harry Stevens.Harry Jones was one of the 7,214 persons interviewed by the police in 1965.Last edited by Neil Milkins; 03-11-2019, 12:32 PM.Comment
-
Would Ireland's family not have been able to sue Du Rose for libel if he was blatantly lying? I know this is before computers but say, an investigative journalist checking the death records and cross referencing them against the heron estate security employees would probably dig up Ireland. It was only five years later when he made his statement, any friends or family seeing that statement on TV would put two and two together and come up with the fact that he was trying to slander Ireland.
If Du Rose wanted to fit someone up for the crime he could have easily said "They had a strong suspect who would have been arrested but died shortly after the last murder". Thus leaving it totally ambiguous without mentioning the suicide bit and the security guard detail.
Regards DarrylComment
-
I am in regular contact with children and grandchildren of Mungo Ireland. They are anxious that their loved one's name be cleared. John du Rose didn't publicly give Ireland's name. It was David Seabrook who gained illegal access to the nudes' murders files who was the first person to name Ireland. Regardless, Seabrook, and John du Rose are now dead and a libel action couldn't be brought anyway.Comment
-
Can I ask which book people would recommend to read on the murders ?
Regards DarrylComment
-
Hi Darryl. The only book that identifies Harold Jones as the Hammersmith killer is my book, Who Was Jack the Stripper - The Hammersmith Nudes's Murders. If you google Who Was Jack the Stripper-The Hammersmith Nudes' Murders-Neil Milkins-Amazon you can find them second-hand for £99.00 each. However I have new copies at £12.95 each plus £3.60 p+p recorded delivery. The book has a foreword by Professor David Wilson and Professor Bernard Knight who both featured with me in the B.B.C. documentary Dark Son - The Hunt For a Serial Killer.Comment
-
You dont identify him, you merely put him forward as a person of interest, there is a big differenceOriginally posted by Neil Milkins View Post
Can you also be so kind as to reply to my post 678
Comment
-
I am limited in my knowledge of the murders but I have to agree with Trevor here. If Bridget went missing on 11 Jan and her body not found till 16 Feb what evidence do we have that she was murdered on 11 Jan ? Prostitutes often lead a dysfunctional life, going missing for days. Could she not have easily been murdered a few days later?Originally posted by Trevor Marriott View Post
Regards DarrylComment
-
The specific date of her murder is also questionable from a forensic perspective. I can only assume this was determined by forensic pathologists. But of course forensic pathology has moved on since the 60`s. Here is what Dr Biggs a modern day forensic scientists tells us about the process of determining times of death.Originally posted by Darryl Kenyon View Post
"the official guidance from the Forensic Science Regulator is that pathologists shouldn’t attempt to "estimate" the post mortem interval"
Of course we are not privvy to the full post mortem report, or the results of any other tests on the body that may have been carried out. In any event I doubt they would have been able to pin it down to a specific day.
www.trevormarriott.co.uk
Comment
-
Hi Darryl. From what I understand the police were convinced that Bridget was murdered on the night she was abducted. No one had seen her after her visit to a pub in Shepherd's Bush on January 11. Obviously the police could have been wrong and she could have been wondering around for days without contacting her husband before Ireland came back from Scotland and killed her. All I can say is we will all have to wait for the police review.Comment
-
-
"Comedy is simply a funny way of being serious." Peter Ustinov
Comment
Comment