The Christie Case

[contrafib]

Hi everyone,

Forgive the shameless plugging but some revisionism seems to be in order since the BBC have regrettably missed a great opportunity here. I echo Sherlock and Honest John's general comments.

For those new to the forum, Honest John and I did an unofficial audio commentary to the 1971 film, outlining fairly thoroughly the finer details of the case (including the case for Evans's guilt, see link below). Once again, I feel the need to point out that Brabin's finding in 1965 was that EVANS PROBABLY KILLED HIS WIFE but not his daughter, the crime for which he was hanged. As the band Skunk Anansie once sang, 'Everything's political'

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gMlF_ejXwyw

[caz]

Looking forward to the final episode on Tuesday. I will get the book finished at some point!

I feel it is a pity that the serial hasn't included one or two flashbacks to Christie's youth so as to give us some idea of why he became a murderer in the first place, such as the cruelty of his father, the domination by his elder sisters and the ridicule he suffered after his first attempt at sex. I have attempted to explore these issues in my own writing on the case.

I feel like that woman in the Fast Show who is never listened to by the men.

Once again, Sherlock, the serial so far could not have included any such flashbacks because part one was written from Ethel's perspective, while part two was from Evans's.

While it might have been better not to do it this way, with the inevitable introduction of fictionalised scenes between killer and victim, and instead concentrate on the known facts, it is what it is. Those flashbacks might be included tonight, when the story is told from Christie's perspective, but they would still be speculative at best, if not fictional, if the source for Christie's miserable childhood and early sexual experiences was Christie himself.

By the same token, any attempt to explain why he became a murderer in the first place would be pure speculation. At least we know he did commit several murders. If we would prefer not to see any errors, fictionalised scenes or unwarranted speculation in a dramatisation of events, we shouldn't really be critical if Evans is not shown to have killed anyone at all, should we?

I thought Beryl and Geraldine were found to have been killed in the same way, and Christie confessed to killing Beryl (but not the baby, which was understandable if he feared the reaction of his fellow prisoners).

I'm afraid I will never understand why some people believe Evans was rightly convicted of murder. To me, knowing what we do about Christie, this is the stuff of fiction. If we took Christie out of the equation does anyone think Beryl would still have died when and how she did? And if Christie's other victims had been found at any point prior to Evans's arrest and conviction, does anyone think the pair of them would - or should - have hanged?

Love,

Caz
X

[Sherlock]

Just watched the final episode of Rillington Place. It was interesting that the sexual motive for the murders was explored in a way which the 1971 film did not, as we see Christie handling the tin of pubic hair and later being asked by the police from whom he obtained them.

As far as I could see there was a fair amount of historical accuracy in this episode; for instance we see Christie having Christmas dinner with his neighbours after murdering his wife, having told them she was visiting relatives. This is reasonably acccurate as Honest John records in his book that Christie spent Christmas night of 1952 with his neighbours the Greggs and enjoyed a glass of port with them.

We also see the Christies visiting Ethel's brother and his fictional wife Janice. In reality, Henry Simpson Waddington was a bachelor and was older than he is portrayed in the programme. In the course of the visit the Christies see some new houses being built and Ethel expresses a wish to move into one of them. Interestingly, Honest John also records that in the early 1950s the Christies apparently made several serious attempts at obtaining other accommodation; one avenue explored by them was an approach to Ethel's brother to see if he could accommodate them in property owned by him in Sheffield, which apparently he could not.

There is also a scene where a police constable visits Christie to warn him of burglaries which have taken place in the street. While sitting in the front room he comments on a foul smell which is caused by the decomposing body of Ethel hidden beneath the floorboards a few feet from where he is sitting. This scene seems to have been inspired by a real visit by detective Trevallian who claimed to have entered 10 Rillington Place in search of a thief and to have spoken to Christie in his front room. Trevallian commented on a nasty smell and was apparently told by Christie that it was caused by the cooking done by the West Indian tenants upstairs, which is also stated in the programme. Christie then sprinkles disinfectant on the floor to mask the smell, which he apparently dud in reality.

We briefly meet upstairs tenant Beresford Brown, who discovers the bodies in the kitchen in the opening scenes, and we also see Christie being interviewed by Dr Dinshaw Petit, who recommends that Christie enters hospital for psychiatric evaluation, which Christie declines to do. This is also factual.

We finally see Christie's gassing and strangling technique, and the correct names are given for all of his victims, the final three of whom we see briefly. Hectorina Maclennan appears with her boyfriend Alexander Baker, and we see Christie claiming to be able to perform an abortion on Rita Nelson. As Nelson was found to be pregnant when her body was discovered, it is not impossible that Christie murdered her on the pretext of being able to abort her.

As the serial was filmed in Glasgow, I think a building just off George Square was used to represent the Old Bailey. I recognised this as I actually live near Glasgow myself.

I would say that of the three episodes I liked this final one best in which we get to see Christie's modus operandi and what a psychopath he really was.

I accept that to include flashbacks of Christie's earlier life it would have been necessary to present the story in a different way. One possible flashback might have been of Christie viewing his grandfather's body in his coffin as a young boy, which apparently fuelled his fascination with corpses and may have had an influence on his development as a murderer.

[Limehouse]

I found the last episode ghastly in the extreme. When they hanged him, I said to my husband 'never did a man deserve it more' and yet I do not even hold with capital punishment.

Like Caz, I don't believe Evans killed his wife or daughter. Christie was a monster and poor Evans was rather inadequate and immature but, in my opinion, not a killer.

[caz]

I found the last episode ghastly in the extreme. When they hanged him, I said to my husband 'never did a man deserve it more' and yet I do not even hold with capital punishment.

Me too, Limehouse. There could be more than one reason why Christie refused to admit to the murder of baby Geraldine, after confessing to the others. Evans was only convicted of killing his daughter, so if Christie had owned up to that one too, he'd have had absolutely no chance of escaping the hangman on the grounds of insanity or any kind of diminished responsibility, nor of being shown the slightest mercy by the jury, his fellow prisoners or the public at large.

The child's killing would have been seen as a necessary practicality to get her out of the way following the murder of her mother, and it would have been crystal clear to all that he had acted out a cruel and calculated charade throughout Evans's trial, knowing the man was entirely innocent and that he was the one sending him to his execution to shift the blame from himself. By denying this one murder - arguably the saddest of them all - he has left himself with just enough wriggle room to this day, to allow people to believe that Evans was at least rightly on trial and equally guilty of murder, regardless of numbers.

Love,

Caz
X

[caz]

I accept that to include flashbacks of Christie's earlier life it would have been necessary to present the story in a different way. One possible flashback might have been of Christie viewing his grandfather's body in his coffin as a young boy, which apparently fuelled his fascination with corpses and may have had an influence on his development as a murderer.

Hi Sherlock,

I suppose it depends on the source for your 'apparently'. If it was Christie himself who blamed this boyhood incident for his morbid fascination as an adult, I wouldn't trust it for a moment. And who else could say that one had had a bearing on the other?

Many children of that era - and beyond - would have had similar experiences without any lasting ill effects, never mind developing criminal tendencies as a result. Even when my daughter started school in 1992, not yet five years old, her teacher showed the class a photo of somebody's "grandma and grandad" in their coffins to get the children used to the idea of death! Luckily I had already had that discussion with her so she took it in her stride. Later, in her next school, the teacher unaccountably decided to give the girls a sex education lesson by showing them a film of horses mating. You wouldn't give it credence, would you? But again, luckily, I had already had that discussion with my daughter, so she took that in her stride too.

Love,

Caz
X

[spyglass]

Hi,
The fact that the Police messed up big time.
If they had searched the garden properly in the first place.
The drama didn't show this whole debacle of the case.

Regards

[Sherlock]

Hi Caz


Yes, as far as I am aware we only have Christie's own word about seeing his grandfather in his coffin. If I remember correctly he told that to one of the psychiatrists who examined him before the trial. Apparently he enjoyed playing in the cemetery at All Souls church near his home in Chester Road, Halifax after this. Ludovic Kennedy stated in his book that one of Christie's friends noticed that he seemed to be particularly fascinated by a number of children's coffins which could be seen through a broken slab which covered a grave.

Interestingly, two other murderers are believed to have had similar experiences. Dennis Neilson apparently envied the peace and serenity which seemed to surround the body of his grandfather after it had been brought home following his death on a fishing boat, and I think Harold Shipman had similar feelings after seeing his mother's body after her death from cancer. However, I accept that in both of these cases, as with Christie, it would be very difficult to determine if this was indeed a factor which influenced them in committing murders.

One of the psychiatrists who gave evidence at Christie's trial, although I forget which one, possibly J.A. Hobson who gave evidence for the defence, stated that he felt that Christie enjoyed living in close proximity to the corpses he had concealed in his house. I shall have to check up on this.

[Sherlock]

I think Christie also mentioned seeing his dead grandfather in his memoirs which were published in the Sunday Pictorial with the help of journalist Harry Procter, but of course we have no way of knowing how much of what he said was true.

Incidentally, I believe this newspaper paid for Christie's defence team at his trial in return for his memoirs. He was defended by Derek Curtis-Bennett QC.

[contrafib]

Hello friends, Merry Xmas to all.
I have now belatedly watched the BBC Rillington Place drama and have a few observations to share. I think we’ve already covered the differences in details between this and what we know to be true in terms of dates and switching of the identities of certain people, and I’m going to refrain from calling them ‘errors’, as the makers clearly knew most or all of them. I concur with Honest John that an opportunity was missed, and I will address the validity of ‘drama based on real events’ in my conclusion.
I feel that Tim Roth did a good characterisation of Christie, with his physical stoop and overall air of weakness and sickliness, and his quite subtle but noticeable shortness of breath was effective. Samantha Morton also gave a good performance, at first appearing too attractive for Ethel but getting progressively plumper and dowdier as the years went on. This is important because whether or not Ethel was naive, she would surely have suspected something over such a long period with Reg, and her lack of sexual market value would be a plausible explanation for her staying with him. Their relationship was believable, and in a drama the makers are forgiven some license and use of dramatic tropes, such as her covering for Reg in the case of Muriel Eady’s coat and her moral quandary. However, the choking scene was pretty unnecessary and the same idea could have been conveyed in a more subtle way.
The gloominess of Rillington Place was effectively conveyed, with the use of smoke, grime and the lack of people around adding to the sense of isolation and a genuinely sad life. I was surprised how oversized the Christies’ front room was, as was the Evans’ front room and indeed the courtroom. In the case of the rooms in the house, I suppose this was done for filming purposes but was clearly inaccurate. As for Evans, I felt that John Hurt’s portrayal of an excitable young drunk in the first film was more effective than the one here. There was much use of dramatic license in the trial scene, and I would have liked to have seen Christie breaking down to cry as he did in reality, because it would have made it less cut and dried (see conclusion for more comment on this) and offered more ambiguity as undoubtedly existed.
The episode from Reg’s point of view was interesting, and I was pleased to see that his killing of his wife was not melodramatic, as I feared that some kind of domestic scene would play out where she threatened to shop him to the police and he slowly tightened the noose around her neck. Instead, it was quick, brutal and messy, as I believe it probably was in reality.
In conclusion, I wanted to address the unsatisfactory ending. As mentioned above, I forgive the filmmakers their artistic license for the sake of drama and also the tropes of making characters and certain scenes more clear-cut and less ambiguous. However, I must ask why there was no explanation at all offered for Christie’s crimes if this is the case. He was interviewed by psychiatrists, and we know certain things about his childhood, so as others have mentioned why not at least attempt to explain a few things to at least offer some lessons from this otherwise sordid and sorry tale? It’s also worth pondering whether real events should be used for drama for any reason other than to draw in viewers. I don’t have a definitive answer on this but I’d definitely be interested in others’ opinions.

[Semper_Eadem]

I think the reason no explanation was offered for why Christie did what he did was because there was really no explanation offered in Christie's real life. Not Really! Sure people have theories but that is all they are theories and as for anything Christie said well I would take that with a grain of salt.

[John Wheat]

I think the reason no explanation was offered for why Christie did what he did was because there was really no explanation offered in Christie's real life. Not Really! Sure people have theories but that is all they are theories and as for anything Christie said well I would take that with a grain of salt.

I think we've got to bare in mind Christie was a perverted necrophiliac serial killer.

[Sam Flynn]

...as for anything Christie said well I would take that with a grain of salt.

"Or NaCl₂ as we call it"

(oblique reference to the Attenborough film)

[Writerboy]

I've recently seen the first television drama to cover the Christie case, The Dreams of Tim Evans (ITV 1970).

This late-night half-hour was a sort of acorn from which grew the 1971 Richard Attenborough film (same writer), and as I've recently seen it, some may be interested to know a little more about it:

https://dreamsgatheringdust.wordpress.com/2017/03/07/192/

[Pcdunn]

Interesting read!

I've recently seen the first television drama to cover the Christie case, The Dreams of Tim Evans (ITV 1970).

This late-night half-hour was a sort of acorn from which grew the 1971 Richard Attenborough film (same writer), and as I've recently seen it, some may be interested to know a little more about it:

https://dreamsgatheringdust.wordpres...017/03/07/192/

Very informative, as I know next to nothing about the murders or the films about it. Thank you for sharing the link, Writerboy.