For several years I have been attempting to write a semi-fictional novel based on the crimes committed by John Reginald Halliday Christie at 10 Rillington Place. I haven't got very far with it as yet, but I might possibly finish it at some point!
Here are a few points which have occurred to me about these murders, which other contributors might possibly be able to shed some light on:-
1) Christie apparently persuaded at least his last three victims, Rita Nelson, Kathleen Maloney and Hectorina MacLennan, to sit in his so-called "strangling chair" prior to their murders. This was an old deckchair with strands of rope instead of canvas.
I wonder what exactly the significance of this chair was in Christie's murder ritual; was it some kind of bizarre prop constructed by himself, or were deckchairs of this type actually used at one time? Has anyone ever seen a similar deckchair anywhere else?
I do not think that the significance of this chair has ever really been explored in any book on the case I have read, including [I]10 Rillington Place[I] by Ludovic Kennedy and Trials of Christie and Evans by F. Tennyson Jesse.
I wonder if there could have been some bizarre connection between this rope chair and his use of a rope to strangle his victims.
2) It is recorded in most accounts of the case that Christie had an affair with a civilian employee at Harrow Road police station while he was based there as a Special Constable in about 1943. It is said that the lady's husband found them together and gave Christie a severe beating, which might possibly have acted as the catalyst for him to commit his first known murder of Ruth Fuerst. Moreover, it is also said that the husband actually cited Christie as co-respondant several years later in order to obtain a divorce from his wife. I do not think the name of the lady concerned has ever been recorded.
If this was the case, Christie's own wife Ethel must surely have known about the affair, and might well have had some knowledge of her husband's other sexual idiosyncracies. One wonders, therefore, if she ever suspected that Christie had actually committed murders? As the bodies of Ruth Fuerst and Muriel Eady were already buried in the garden by 1945, it does seem rather odd that she never found any evidence of this; presumably she did go into the garden on occasions! This is even stranger when one considers that Christie actually used one of his victim's thighbones to prop up his fence, which the police failed to discover when investigating the Evans murders.
It has also never been determined exactly what she did or did not know about her husband's activities at the time of the murders of Geraldine and Beryl Evans. One wonders, therefore, if she had a fairly good idea about her husband's crimes, but was afraid to confide in anyone, perhaps out of fear for her own life. Apparently she was in regular correspondance with her relations in Sheffield, as several letters written by her were found in her sister's former house there several years ago. As far as I know these made little reference to her husband.
3) I do not think that it has ever been determined conclusively that Ruth Fuerst was Christie's first victm, or if he committed any murders other than those to which he confessed. Professor Keith Simpson recorded in Forty Years of Murder that Christie was asked if he might have been responsible for the murder of a little girl in Windsor in the early 1950s, but that he considered that he had not.
Any comments other contributors might have on these and other points relating to the case would be most welcome.
regards
SHERLOCK
Here are a few points which have occurred to me about these murders, which other contributors might possibly be able to shed some light on:-
1) Christie apparently persuaded at least his last three victims, Rita Nelson, Kathleen Maloney and Hectorina MacLennan, to sit in his so-called "strangling chair" prior to their murders. This was an old deckchair with strands of rope instead of canvas.
I wonder what exactly the significance of this chair was in Christie's murder ritual; was it some kind of bizarre prop constructed by himself, or were deckchairs of this type actually used at one time? Has anyone ever seen a similar deckchair anywhere else?
I do not think that the significance of this chair has ever really been explored in any book on the case I have read, including [I]10 Rillington Place[I] by Ludovic Kennedy and Trials of Christie and Evans by F. Tennyson Jesse.
I wonder if there could have been some bizarre connection between this rope chair and his use of a rope to strangle his victims.
2) It is recorded in most accounts of the case that Christie had an affair with a civilian employee at Harrow Road police station while he was based there as a Special Constable in about 1943. It is said that the lady's husband found them together and gave Christie a severe beating, which might possibly have acted as the catalyst for him to commit his first known murder of Ruth Fuerst. Moreover, it is also said that the husband actually cited Christie as co-respondant several years later in order to obtain a divorce from his wife. I do not think the name of the lady concerned has ever been recorded.
If this was the case, Christie's own wife Ethel must surely have known about the affair, and might well have had some knowledge of her husband's other sexual idiosyncracies. One wonders, therefore, if she ever suspected that Christie had actually committed murders? As the bodies of Ruth Fuerst and Muriel Eady were already buried in the garden by 1945, it does seem rather odd that she never found any evidence of this; presumably she did go into the garden on occasions! This is even stranger when one considers that Christie actually used one of his victim's thighbones to prop up his fence, which the police failed to discover when investigating the Evans murders.
It has also never been determined exactly what she did or did not know about her husband's activities at the time of the murders of Geraldine and Beryl Evans. One wonders, therefore, if she had a fairly good idea about her husband's crimes, but was afraid to confide in anyone, perhaps out of fear for her own life. Apparently she was in regular correspondance with her relations in Sheffield, as several letters written by her were found in her sister's former house there several years ago. As far as I know these made little reference to her husband.
3) I do not think that it has ever been determined conclusively that Ruth Fuerst was Christie's first victm, or if he committed any murders other than those to which he confessed. Professor Keith Simpson recorded in Forty Years of Murder that Christie was asked if he might have been responsible for the murder of a little girl in Windsor in the early 1950s, but that he considered that he had not.
Any comments other contributors might have on these and other points relating to the case would be most welcome.
regards
SHERLOCK
Comment