The Christie Case

[Sam Flynn]

our man Dew on the bridge-'Mr Christie....'

It wasn't Dew wot spotted 'im, Suzi, it was PC Ledger. You must be thinking of Donald Pleasance... erm, Dr Crippen

[contrafib]

No action here for a while. Still wondering about the fingerprints issue. The system had been in use for a long time by the time of this case. Surely, a search of the Evans flat would have provided some clue as to whether Christie had been up there. Or fibres?? Maybe the police didn't bother much, as they were sure it was Evans since he'd voluntarily come to the police station in Merthyr to confess.

[algernon]

Id imagine the presence of Christies fingerprints in Evans room wouldnt have meant very much anyway.
Ive always been intrigued by Ethel Christie,or rather,how much she knew.After reading Eddowes book ,it appears she lied,or at best was mistaken in some of her evidence at Evans trial.I dont go along with idea that Christie murdered Ethel because she somehow,at that late date,discovered what a monster her husband was..
Personally I believe the Evans verdict was correct..and that Christie had no hand in any of it.....

[contrafib]

Everyone wonders what Ethel knew. I think Christie killed his wife becasue he got sick of her, and i guess the urges came to him.
You could be right about Evans but what's the main thing that makes you think that? hard to believe Christie knew nothing. That was a doll's house and Christie was a busybody who made a point of knowing what was happening in the house.

[Sherlock]

I've just managed to obtain a copy at a reasonable price of The Christie Case by Ronald Maxwell. This was published in 1953, possibly even before Christie's execution, and may therefore be the very first account of the case to appear in book form.

This short book contains a good deal of interesting background information, including the facts that Christie usually read The Daily Mirror and The News of the World, was a heavy smoker (although he claimed to be a non-smoker and a teetotaller), that there was an indoor nudist club near 10 Rillington Place(!), and that just before Christie's arrest Maxwell had tried to get a medium named Rita Bycroft into 10 Rillington Place in order to discover how the victims had met their deaths!

Ther are also photographs of Beresford Brown who discovered the bodies in the kitchen, Alexander Baker who was the boyfriend of victim Hectorina Maclennan, and Maureen Briggs who was the last person to see victim Kathleen Maloney alive when she left a bar with Christie and who broke down in hysterics when asked to identify him at the Magistrate's Court.

It would appear that Maureen Briggs was the "prostitute named Maureen" whom Christie had photographed in the nude in the presence of Kathleen Maloney in December 1952 and whom Ludovic Kennedy mentions in 10 Rillington Place.

In The Christie Case Maxwell records that when giving evidence to the magistrate Maureen Briggs stated that "I last saw Christie when he came to Sale Place. I was with Maloney, It was before Christmas", although he does not record the reason for this visit. No doubt this came out at the hearing but Maxwell decided that this was somewhat risque for publication.

Sale Place is just off Praed Street in Paddington and could therefore be the true location of the "room off Marylebone Lane" mentioned by Kennedy as the venue for this photographic session, although the two streets are a good distance apart.

[contrafib]

Could you answer some questions for me?? There's a book called 'The Two Stranglers Of Rillington Place' by Furneaux, which i haven't read. Does it follow the same logic as John Eddowes' book, and do you know how much attention it received when it was published?? Apparently, it came out in 1961 so did it precede Kennedy's book?

[Sherlock]

The Two Stranglers of Rillington Place by Rupert Furneaux was published as a Panther paperback 1961, I think just after Kennedy's book as it is mentioned in the list of publications on the final page.

Furneaux takes the view that Evans killed Beryl but Christie killed Geraldene; interestingly, the Brabin enquiry reached the same conclusion in 1966. John Eddowes, on the other hand considers that Evans killed both Beryl and Geraldene, although Christie probably had some knowledge of this.

I don't know how much attention Furneaux's book received when it was published; as it came out in paperback I suspect it was treated more as a cheap thriller and not taken that seriously, whereas Kennedy's book came out in hardback and was regarded as a serious study of the case. In spite of this, Furneaux's theory is interesting, and the book is very readable if perhaps a little over-dramatic in places.

Another book on the case published in 1961, I think as a direct response to Kennedy's book, was The Crimes at Rillington Place; A Novelist's Reconstruction by John Newton Chance. As John Eddowes was later to do, Newton Chance considers that Evans was guilty of the murders of both Beryl and Geraldene, although Christie was fully aware of this.

[contrafib]

Very interesting that Brabin reached Furneaux's conclusion 5 years later. I've always suspected that the Brabin conclusion meant that they could pardon Evans from the crime he was hung for (the baby) while not having to admit that they'd hung an innocent man. In 2004, they paid compensation to Evans's family and suggested he was 'probably innocent' but also basically said that it wasn't worth reopening the case once again. I wonder how much money the family received, and whether they really did believe that Tim was innocent.
Sherlock, forgive me if you've already expressed this on your forum, but having read so much on the case and heard so many different points of view, what is your personal view of who did the Evans murders, and what do you think is the most revealing evidence?? Thanks for all the info.

[Sherlock]

At the moment, I do not think that I have any firm view on whether Christie or Evans was responsible for the murders of Beryl and Geraldine. Like John Eddowes, I think it may well be the case that Evans was more violent and less of a simpleton than Kennedy makes him out to be, but this need not necessarily mean that he was also a murderer.

As part of his research for The Man on your Conscience, John Eddowes' father Michael Eddowes asked the owners of Lancaster Food Products where Evans had worked immediately prior to the murders about his character. They gave him the following information:-


1) Evans was "quick, reliable, punctual and honest".

2) Their business was substantial and the accounting side had to be carefully attended to. If any employee was dishonest it was known the next morning.

3) Asked if Evans was "spivvy" or "Teddy-boyish", one person laughed and said "Good heavens no! He was just an ordinary working-class boy and quite harmless".

4) They knew him well and they could not believe that he killed his wife and child.

Other people informed Michael Eddowes that "Evans hadn't the guts to kill a fly" and that "Evans was a coward and couldn't have killed Beryl." Another person stated that Evans "was no better and no worse than any of the young men of the district." (see The Man on your Conscience pp119-120)

Of course, this does not mean that Michael Eddowes was correct in his assumption that Evans did not kill Beryl and Geraldine, but there is no reason to suppose that the people who provided this information were lying.

On the other hand, I think John Eddowes states in The Two Killers of Rillington Place that Evans informally told a constable in Notting Hill police station who attended to him in his cell that he had in fact murdered Geraldine, but once again this is probably heresay.

No doubt the full truth of the matter will never be known.

[contrafib]

You don't know at the moment. Does that mean you're still trying?? good for you.
You're probably right that we'll never know. I think discounting Evans purely on the basis of the coincidences (which Kennedy bloats in his book) is wrong. The main one, that of two stranglers in the same house, is of course unusual, but if you limit it to 2 killers who happened to use the same fairly common and convenient method living in the same house in a very run-down area, it's not impossible. (much less of a coincidence for example than the only two skyscrapers in history to pancake-collapse due to jet fuel being next to each other and burning down on the same day, or a training exercise related to bombs going off at 3 tube stations in London happening at the same time as real bombs at the same time and in the same places). I've never liked the idea that it's a huge coincidence Evans happened to accuse the one other man in London doing the same as him, because he also happened to be the nearest man to Evans in terms of where they lived. If he'd lived on a different street to Evans, and Evans had accused him, that would be a lot different. The coincidence is even less if you take into account the high probability that they had mutual knowledge of what happened. There's not much certainty in this case but one thing i am certain of is that if Evans did the first murder and set the wheels in motion, Christie would have known about it and probably approached him in some capacity. My gut tells me they were both aware and had some influence on proceedings, rather than the pure manipulation in the film.
Remarkable that Evans should be called 'honest and reliable' by his workmates while his mother had virtually disowned him before she knew he'd been arrested, for all the trouble he'd caused and money he owed (presumably some of this trouble and debt happened before the murders). I think Evans's low IQ and its effects need verification. Was he simply like a man-child? For instance, would it have any effect on his memory bearing in mind that although Kennedy's book is based on one statement made in Merthyr Vale, Evans did repeat that story at his trial fairly consistently. Did he have a slow brain, or just lacking maturity in his mind and his basic academic skills?? Let me know whenever you find any other information.

[Sherlock]

Yes, indeed, I'm still trying to come up with a solution to the mystery!!

John Eddowes considers in The Two Killers of Rillington Place that Evans could properly be considered as a psychopath; I certainly think that he was probably more aggressive than Kennedy makes out, but at the same time I do wonder if labelling Evans a psychopath is going slightly too far; I just don't know at the moment.

I wonder if the key to Evans' character lies in the statement that "he was no better and no worse than any of the young men of the district?" It seems pretty clear that Evans could be violent, especially after drinking, but at the same time domestic violence of the kind that went on in the Evans' household might well have been fairly commonplace in working-class households the early 1950s and even later.

In contrast to the reported views of his workmates, John Eddowes remarks that Evans and his mother "hated each other like poison", as she tended to take Beryl's side in any argument. Eddowes also reveals that Evans made a scene in the shop where Beryl was employed on a part-time basis which led to her dismissal; apparently he accused her of flirting with another male employee. This would tend to suggest that Evans could be very aggressive when roused, and was also jealous. Eddowes says that he often told Beryl that her place was in the house with the baby, and disapproved of her having any enjoyment on her own.

At the same time, it is probable that Evans was by no means the only man of his age to hold similar views at this time.

I agree that it is wrong to dismiss Evans as the possible murderer of Beryl and Geraldine merely because he happened to live in the same house as a man who was also a killer. Keith Simpson pointed out in Forty Years of Murder that another strange coincidence in the case was that Christie's last three victims, Rita Nelson, Kathleen Maloney and Hectorina MacLennan, had at different times received medical treatment for venereal disease at the same hospital in Southampton!

Interestingly, Ruper Furneaux stated in The Two Stranglers of Rillington Place that Ethel Christie suspected that her husband may have had a greater involvement in the Evans case than he had admitted, as he had been strange in his manner ever since the trial. Unfortunately, Furneaux does not reveal the source of this information, so it may be no more than hearsay.

[contrafib]

Interesting. Although i've been painted as a 'conspiracy theorist', (that's such a loaded term and implies that people who question government versions of events is mad), i never rule out coincidences up to a point.
Is it true that John Eddowes was prompted to write his book by the release of certain official files in the 1990's? Apparently, these files painted Evans as slightly more sinister than the John Hurt character and clearly a violent man. I read his book, and i have to say that although it was worthwhile hearing the potential of the other side of the debate, his suitcase theory seems pretty wild. Evans may have been no saint but it takes a lot to imagine him murdering his daughter and then keeping her body in a suitcase at Paddington Station. At the same time, if he did the crime, he would do anything to conceal it. I have spent hours researching famous crimes e.g JFK, 9/11, John Lennon, and unfortunately the more you dig, the more questions it tends to open up.
Again, i go back to Evans's supposed mental deficiencies. There are many more types of intelligence than those measured by IQ tests, and lack of schooling and basic skills wouldn't necessarily bring with it naivety and vulnerability to suggestibility though i'm sure Evans got bamboozled by Christmas Humphreys while in the witness box, and maybe Christie could have done something similar. Do you think repeating his Merthyr 2 statement virtually word-for-word a couple of months later would have been too much for him were it not the truth??

[Sherlock]

From an online extract from the relevant edition of the British Medical Journal, I have discovered that Dr Dinshaw Jehangir Petit died on 25th March 1969 at the age of 63. Dr Petit was senior medical officer at Springfield Mental Hospital in London, to whom Christie had been referred for psychiatric evaluation in July of 1952. According to Ludovic Kennedy in 10 Rillington Place, Dr Petit considered that Christie was a "an insignificant, old-womanish, city man. Girlish voice and manner,mincing walk. Latent homosexual, though not overt."

Dr Petit also recommended that Christie should enter Springfield Hospital as an in-patient, but that the latter refused. Kennedy suggests that Christie may have been afraid that Dr Petit would uncover his earlier crimes during the course of therapy.

It is interesting that at least one doctor should consider that Christie may have had homosexual tendencies, although there does not appear to be any other evidence to support this. Perhaps Dr Petit is another person who may have been able to shed more light on Christie's character and habits, alough Ludovic Kennedy also apparently approached him as part of his research for his book.

[contrafib]

Yes, i'm aware of that. Sherlock (oh font of R Place knowledge), were some of the characters in the story such as Lucy Endecott, Kitchener, Alexander Baker, Hookway ever heard of after Christie was caught?? I'm sure Kennedy says in his book that Beryl told her that Christie was going to abort her, but other books challenge this. It seems a huge piece of evidence if it's true. I also read in one book (or perhaps i was dreaming) that someone, i think Hookway, thought that Christie and Beryl were having an affair. Is this in one of your books? Finally, could you address my posts about Evans' mental capabilities with regards to remembering and repeating his M2 statement?? Thanks in advance

[contrafib]

Thta didn't make sense, thinking too fast. I meant that Beryl told Lucy Endecott about the impending abortion.