The Christie Case

[Mayerling]

I tend to think that Christie helped frame Evans, but you never can really tell. However, I am aware that Kennedy was a fierce supporter of the abolition of the death penalty, so he went to any extreme to cast doubt about evidence that led to convictions. He also did this with the more curious case of Bruno Hauptman in THE AIRMAN AND THE CARPENTER.

I do have an unrelated question. As "Eddowes" is an unusal name, has anyone checked to see if Michael and John are connected to the unfortunate "Catherine" of 1888?

Jeff

[contrafib]

Various

What a great forum to stumble across!

Have read all posts so far, and got a million things to say but will just make a few points.

First of all, there are 2 audio programmes that can be found on the IMDB forum of Rillington Place. The first isn't bad but the 4-part documentary is superb, written and narrated by Martin Fido . It is chilling (espec. the music!), strikes just the right tone and really puts you in 40's/50's London without any reliance on drama.
The series on serial killers that someone mentioned earlier was called 'To Kill And Kill Again' (and featured Mr Fido among others), and did indeed interview residents of R Place from the time. A few things were mentioned, such as Christie telling people he was a doctor, and that he used to go out late and say that he was going to buy something or other, though the shops were well shut by that time. One of the residents even mentions Beresford Brown running down the street in a panic after discovering the alcove bodies. Perhaps the most interesting part was an interview with a woman called Peggy Baker who nearly become one of Christie's victims. She encountered him during the War in his police uniform, and he apparently was trying to help her find a place to stay (sorry, can't remember the exact details), but luckily for her, she had to work and couldn't keep the appointment. They had some footage of the inside of the house, including the upstairs flat, which was very eerie. Any ideas where this footage came from?? Also, on the BBC website on this day section, there used to be a short video of Michael Parkinson no less, standing by the original house talking about the case (now on the webpage, there's an audio interview with Evans's mother). Same question. I'm guessing it may have been recorded at the time Evans was reprieved.

I think the continuing interest in R Place must stem partly from the fact that we'll never know what REALLY happened, it's impossible. I'll get onto my thoughts about the possible innocence and guilt of Evans in the next paragraph, but it must be agreed that there is an extraordinary kind of 'magic' about this case. Now, before you all log off in disgust, i should qualify that although the words 'magic' and 'extraordinary' (incidentally, 'extraordinary' was how Richard Attenborough described Christie on the R Place DVD) are usually used in positive terms, i don't believe there's anything positive about this case, except perhaps as an illustration of warped human nature, but the main and incidental characters, if i can use that expression, do seem to have been fairly bizarre. John Hurt talked a lot about the naivety of the period on his DVD audio commentary, and it seems incredible that a human thigh bone could prop up a fence for years without anyone, including the police, noticing, as well as incredible that Christie thought of doing it, or that CHristie could do all his activities in such a tiny space without anyone seemingly suspecting. Look at the photos on the RIllington Place website, and tell me how you could do anything in that garden without someone seeing/hearing/being aware. Or that Ethel's brother could sleep so near Ruth Fuerst's still-warm body without feeling something. Perhaps he did of course, we don't know exactly what these people thought or said becuase a lot of things happened years before anybody outside the area knew about the house. My other relatives told me that undoubtedly, people used to 'think less' in these days, unlike now where we're constantly analysing everything. Life seemed to just happen, and unless something was obvious or major, people didn't tend to get involved. Of course, when the murders happened and were known about, this wasn't the reaction. I mean it more in everyday life. Ethel Christie's knowledge is a big mystery, as mentioned by others. By the way, has anyone ever read that Mr Hookway thought Christie and Beryl were having an affair?? can't remember where i read that.

So, was Evans guilty? Unfortunately, i don't have the answer, and any of the different scenarios (Christie did both Evans murders, the two men did one each, Evans did both with CHristie totally innocent of them, Evans did both with Christie having some awareness of them) are possible. I think the fact that Evans had an I.Q of 65 just adds to the mystery and intrique, and it would be (or have been) useful to hear from from Hookway, Kitchener, Lucy Endecott, Joan Vincent, PC Ledger, the Harrow Rd woman, Beresford Brown, Margaret Forrest etc..... I'm sure they were interviewed at some time or another, does any audio/video (rather than just written) archive material exist.I'm sure we all want to hear more. Also, are there any more photographs of the main protagonists beyond the familiar ones??

First of all Kennedy's book. I agree that it seems very driven by a personal passion, and contains many inaccuracies. It totally downplays the marital rows of Tim and Beryl (neighbours have talked of violent rows), and since the book, when official files have been released, it seems that Evans's violent temper has been confirmed, which doesn't make him guilty but makes him a different character than Ludo portrays him as. Kennedy also clearly underestimates the time it would have taken for Christie to have seen his doctor and returned home on the day of Beryl's murder I know because i lived for a while in Chesterton Rd, near the old house. He also states that the house was so small that if you jumped from the top floor onto soft earth, you wouldn't hurt yourself. A friend who's been to the original house has said this is nonsense. It's also important to say that the official version really rests on one of Evans's 4 statements (Merthyr 2), although he did repeat the facts of the statement very accurately a few weeks later in court. One other point is that Ludo's book mentions that Beryl told Lucy Endecott that CHristie was going to abort her. Has this been verified? if it was, it would be significant. I got a bit irritated on the DVD of the film that Attenborough and Hurt seem so sure, as does everyone else. I would very much like to see a new detailed, well-researched revisionist programme made about this ( a movie with 2 possible scenarios prob. wouldn't really work). Can't somebody do it?????

FInally, i spoke to John Eddowes about his book on the phone, and aside from being a rather truculent man to talk to, he seemed utterly convinced by Evans's guilt. But then Martin Fido was equally convinced the other way, and Kennedy didn't even think to revise his inaccurate identification of the 2 women in the garden in one of the photos (he identified the rather more attractive Maureen Evans, who is holding Geraldine, as Beryl) in subsequent reprints of his book; he must be very convinced, too!

If you're come this far, thanks for reading, and please help if you have any info. on my questions.

[Graham]

It's ages since I read Kennedy's and Eddowes' books on the Christie Case, but my take on it is that Evans was, sadly, guilty of murdering his daughter.
I know what you mean, Contrafib, regarding Kennedy's stance on the death-penalty - the Lindbergh Kidnap Case is one I know a bit more about than Christie, and Kennedy seemed totally convinced that Hauptmann was framed, yet IMHO he was most definitely involved. Maybe he didn't actually kill Lindbergh's son, but he sure as eggs knew what happened that night.

I'm guessing it may have been recorded at the time Evans was reprieved.

Am I misunderstanding you here, Contrafib? Evans most certainly was not reprieved, and his execution became a long-standing cause-celebre for abolitionists for damn near the next 20 years. His very low i.q. and apparent inability to understand what was going on led many people at the time to believe that no Home Secretary would agree to the law taking its course, but they were wrong.

The Attenborough/Hurt film was excellent, and extremely atmospheric, but not all that historically accurate. A good watch, though.

Cheers,

Graham

[contrafib]

Yes, i meant posthumously pardoned, not reprieved.

As i mentioned earlier, the film was just a bit too straightforward for me. I would love to see some kind of less-commercial, more artistic film with no star actors in it which goes purely for atmosphere, shows Evans as he truly was (backward rather than a little childlike as John Hurt was) and examines both possible scenarios (Evans guilty/Evans innocent).
The more i think of it, the more it seems impossible that Evans could have done the murders without Christie knowing. The house was tiny and Christie was sensitive to any activity in it. He even bored a spyhole so he could see who was coming in to the house when he didn't answer the door.

[contrafib]

On this day in 1953, Mr Christie met Mr Pierrepoint (briefly).

Was looking at the picture of the waxwork of Christie. It looks way too tall, Christie was about 5'8", wasn't he??

[Sara]

I watched the film again last night on BBC for the first time in many years, and was enthralled again (if a little depressed!) by its seeming authenticity - I dont; think collating the incidents with Beryl's women friends into one fictional character is cheating, for example. I don't know enough aobut the case in detail to have an opinion on the innocnece of Evans - I've always grown up with the conviction Christie committed both murders, as most of us have.

I knew John Hurt very well in the mid/ late 1970s, not long after he made the film, and certainly he was utterly convinced of Evans' innocence - but he is unfailingly liberal in his beliefs and attutudes anyway and very anti-establishment, so would be inclined to question the verdict and believe in the miscarriage of justice, on principle.

The interesting thing about the case is Ethel and her involvement if any. Those houses in Notting Hill were quite noisy (I had several friends living in such houses in the area in the 60s, and flats had nto changed much in the post-war years). Any carpeting woudl be very thin, and it was impossible to move stuff around without everyone hearing - even next door let alone in the same house. But what truly is amazing, is that no-one SMELT the bodies as they decomposed. Murders hidden in domestic settings are usually fairly quickly discovered due to the noxious smell of the corpse.

By the way, the account of Christie being such a busy-body and minor local tyrant ties in with other serial murderers; I was esp reminded of the famous US guy who killed several families in Wyoming (sorry the 'case name' escapes me right now - it's a kind of logo iirc). He was very keen on interfering with and/or re-directing his neighbours' habits etc

[Sara]

Just looked at the pics on the 10 Rillington Place website - fascinating! One can see much more clearly that Christie might have been attractive to women - as he must have been, in effect, not least to the somewhat unattractive Ethel.

But doesn't Beryl remind you of Cherie!!??
:^0 Quite scary

[sdreid]

BTK (Rader) was a busybody but was from Kansas.

[contrafib]

Interesting stuff, Sara. The official line is that the cold weather refridgerated the bodies and stopped them smelling. As mentioned in an earlier post of mine, part of the mystique of this case is how noone seemed to notice anything in that doll's house.
Something that i need an answer for. What exactly happens to bodies physiologically after they are buried? I ask becuase i always thought they became skeletons, but Beryl's body was exhumed 3 years after her burial to check for gas. So?
While i'm about it, a couple of other things. When Beryl's body was first examined, was a swab taken for semen? This would have been revealing. One more, in everything i've read, there's no mention of fingerprints? Did they not exist then? Surely, if semen can be identified, so can prints. Wouldn't the tie that was still round baby Geraldine's neck when her body was found have had fingerprints on it???? I'm puzzled

[Limehouse]

I watched the film again last night on BBC for the first time in many years, and was enthralled again (if a little depressed!) by its seeming authenticity - I dont; think collating the incidents with Beryl's women friends into one fictional character is cheating, for example. I don't know enough aobut the case in detail to have an opinion on the innocnece of Evans - I've always grown up with the conviction Christie committed both murders, as most of us have.

I knew John Hurt very well in the mid/ late 1970s, not long after he made the film, and certainly he was utterly convinced of Evans' innocence - but he is unfailingly liberal in his beliefs and attutudes anyway and very anti-establishment, so would be inclined to question the verdict and believe in the miscarriage of justice, on principle.

The interesting thing about the case is Ethel and her involvement if any. Those houses in Notting Hill were quite noisy (I had several friends living in such houses in the area in the 60s, and flats had nto changed much in the post-war years). Any carpeting woudl be very thin, and it was impossible to move stuff around without everyone hearing - even next door let alone in the same house. But what truly is amazing, is that no-one SMELT the bodies as they decomposed. Murders hidden in domestic settings are usually fairly quickly discovered due to the noxious smell of the corpse.

By the way, the account of Christie being such a busy-body and minor local tyrant ties in with other serial murderers; I was esp reminded of the famous US guy who killed several families in Wyoming (sorry the 'case name' escapes me right now - it's a kind of logo iirc). He was very keen on interfering with and/or re-directing his neighbours' habits etc

Hi Sara,

I noticed in Radio Times that the film was beingshown on Thursday night but did not have the bottle to watch it again. It's just so utterly creepy and miserable!

I believe Contrafib may be right about the reason for a lack of the smell from the bodies. Those old houses were very cold and people tended only to heat one room in the winter.

[Limehouse]

Interesting stuff, Sara. The official line is that the cold weather refridgerated the bodies and stopped them smelling. As mentioned in an earlier post of mine, part of the mystique of this case is how noone seemed to notice anything in that doll's house.
Something that i need an answer for. What exactly happens to bodies physiologically after they are buried? I ask becuase i always thought they became skeletons, but Beryl's body was exhumed 3 years after her burial to check for gas. So?
While i'm about it, a couple of other things. When Beryl's body was first examined, was a swab taken for semen? This would have been revealing. One more, in everything i've read, there's no mention of fingerprints? Did they not exist then? Surely, if semen can be identified, so can prints. Wouldn't the tie that was still round baby Geraldine's neck when her body was found have had fingerprints on it???? I'm puzzled

re what happens to bodies when buried - well it depends on the surroundings. I believe that if the environment is dry and cold, the body will be better preserved than if the environment is damp or too warm.

I agree about the tie around the babies neck - whose tie was it? Was that ever established? Finger prints may not have been detectable on the tie fabric but there would surely have been hairs or skin fragments or fibres from a sweater that was worn close to the tie (men tended to wear sleeveless pull-overs with shirts and ties in those days.

[Sam Flynn]

I noticed in Radio Times that the film was beingshown on Thursday night but did not have the bottle to watch it again. It's just so utterly creepy and miserable!

...to make it worse, GerALDine's constant wailing adds a painful auditory dimension to what's already a visual and mental ordeal. Brilliant performances by all concerned, though.

[Graham]

Julie,

I'm with you all the way regarding "10 Rillington Place". I've seen it several times, and always felt the need for a hot shower afterwards. It is film noir taken to extraordinary limits. You can feel the dirt and the shame and the sordidness oozing out of the screen....brrrrr! But for all that, absolutely brilliant and one of the few examples of a movie acheiving what it was meant to acheive.

That famous clip of James Mason visiting 29 Hanbury Street gives me the almighty creeps, too...especially as I visited that place myself years ago, and it was exactly as the Mason clip portrays...horribly sordid, mean, and dirty.

Graham

[contrafib]

Re: buried bodies. Surely conditions in a sealed coffin don't vary, do they?
Is it me, or does it seem that in those days people were more naive/negligent/unassuming??? I keep making the same point, don't i? (see my earlier posts)
The experts at the time confirmed the lack of smell idea. Soon after the Evans trial, a fellow called Ernest McNeil was interested in buying 10 R Place but decided against it due to the bedbugs and general filth. He remarked to Christie that he was amazed that Christie's dog hadn't smelled the bodies in the wash house. At that point, Reggie got a bit snappy with him and told him to stop asking questions.
I like the film but it bothers me because it's one-sided. Again, apologies for reiterating earlier posts, but do you agree it would be a good idea to make a two-sided film/programme? Evans has been proved by official files to have not been the harmless fool as played (superbly) by John Hurt.

[Suzi]

I agree as to it pushing all the buttons for a 'le filme- noire' but at the end of the day- it's a great movie- GeRALdine notwithstanding!!!- especially the 'er wallpaper sequence and our man Dew on the bridge-'Mr Christie....'

Lots of dark moments- and you wouldn't want a gas fire again would you- but a GREAT piece of work! (IMHO!)

Never made me want a shower- but maybe it may be doing it's bit for hygiene standards in the UK today if it's shown often enough!!