Craig and Bentley

[Graham]

Hi Graham and Jeff,

I haven't seen the Thompson movie but all the others are great.

When I was thinking over this topic, I did consider B. Graham. There was a great deal of sympathy for her but I haven't really heard that the case led to any law changes. I think the outcry was a little like with Ellis, in that, if she'd been an ugly old hag, no one would have been all that upset about the execution. (my view)

I think you're right, Stan. Edith Thompson was also a good-looker. Regarding Barbara Graham, I think it also came out during her trial that she was a sometime lesbian, which wouldn't have helped her case in those days.

The Susan Hayward film was pretty good, and never seems to get shown on TV these days.

Cheers,

Graham

[sdreid]

Hi Graham,

Yes, Maragret Allen and Styllou Christofi were probably mentally ill and few got too upset about their executions. Oh, and they weren't too good looking either.

Lindsay Wagner did a remake of I Want Too Live that wasn't bad.

[Mayerling]

Cause Celebres and Abolishing Capital Punishment

Hi Stan and Graham,

I looked over my list the other night and realized that earlier centuries had also had mass movements against hangings. Look at the trials of Admiral Byng, the Perreau Brothers, and Reverend Dodd in the 18th Century (none of them actually murders - Byng a military court martial on a trumped up charge and the Brothers and the Reverend for forgery), and Eliza Fenning (in 1815) for attempted poisoning. Actually there is a long and fairly honorable tradition of questioning verdicts that were based on questionable evidence or on seemingly antiquated rules or laws (hanging a popular minister because he forged a pupil's signature to a promissory note in Dodd's case: shabby for Dodd, but at the same time the family of Lord Chesterfield did not exactly cover itself in decency or glory by their abandoning him). Of course the best two examples from the latter 19th Century of public outrage or involvement in British cases were 1) the Tichborne Claimant sensation of the early 1870s - leading to massive support for Thomas Castro (Arthur Orton's?) legal fight to establish his dubious claim; 2) the Lipski Case, wherein William Stead tried to force Home Secretary Matthews (remember him) and Mr. Justice Sir James Fitzjames Stephens (remember him) to reevaluate the trial court evidence and reduce Lipski's sentence from a death penalty to prison.

The "looker" problems of some of the female victims, convicted of murder but really condemned for their lifestyles, could also include Florence Maybrick (whose sentence was reduced due to questions about Mr. Justice Stephens'
sanity) and Florence Ricardo Bravo (not tried in court but condemened in the court of public opnion). One case I mentioned (Charlotte Bryant) has some of the weakest linkages of "facts" against a defendant in a poisoning trial I've ever seen (Charlotte did not have to kill her rather weak willed husband; the leading witness against her had a motive - the husband did not like her and wanted her and her kids out of their overcrowded hovel; the identification of who bought the poison was dubious (the salesman remembered it was an
illiterate woman - it could have been Charlotte or the chief witness against her)). What I think convinced the jury was misreading her life style. Charlotte was a slut - she openly sold her sexual favors for cash at the local pubs. What was overlooked was that she equally used the money for her husband (who never complained about this), her children, and herself. In short if she was a whore, she was a conscientious breadwinner. She may have been illiterate, but unlike the educated Mrs. Thompson she did not fall apart on the witness stand but gave a pretty good accounting for herself.
It was only when faced with impending doom that she cracked, writing a pathetic note to King Edward VIII to save her from the gallows. He probably considered her a piece of trash for her life style, never thinking of the irony that such a promiscuous lady with a sense of duty to her family was being dismissed by a princeling who did not see anything wrong with cuckolding Mr. Simpson, and abandoning his kingly duties for trips to the Adriatic with Wallace! As for poor Charlotte, her raven black hair turned white before her execution.

By the way, the most recent study of the Bentley - Craig affair suggested that P. O. Miles may have been fatally shot by one of the policeman, not Craig. A curious thought, and one that makes the story even more annoying
to think about. Christopher Craig I believe became a farmer, but I don't know if he is still alive. He never granted interviews about the crime.

Best wishes,

Jeff

[Limehouse]

Hi All,

Some really interesting contributions to this post. Thanks.

Craig became a plumber and, up until a few years ago, was living in Bedfordshire (he may still be there). He served ten years in prison, during which he became a reformed character. He has never given an interview or spoken publically about the crime.

Another film, loosely based on the Ruth Ellis case was [I]Yield to the Night[I] starring a young and slim Diana Dors. It was made in 1956.

Re the Edith Thompson hanging. I don't think she really wanted Bywaters to kill her husband. She mnay have wanted to have her cake and eat it - a husband who could provide the material things she valued and one who could give her status and respectability - and a young lover who could satisfy her physical cravings. There was some evidence that her husband was a brute - but this was never fully explored. In any event, there is no evidence that Edith Thompson took part in the murder of her husband and I am fully convinced that her hanging was at least partly due to her moral failings.

With Ruth Ellis things seem different. She was guilty of premeditated murder. She believed she should pay with her life for that murder. Most tellings of the Ruth Ellis story have been more than sympathetic to Ellis herself - painting her lover as a heartless womaniser - but I am sure there was fault on both sides. By comparison, there was more reason to hang Ellis than Thompson.

Eventually, capital punishment was abolished - and people tended to point to cases such as Ellis, Thompson, Evans and Bentley to justify abolition. However, would such people have objected to people such as Hindley, Brady and Huntley being executed?

[Graham]

The thing about the Ruth Ellis trial is that it was really a non-trial. She was asked only one question by the prosecution: "What did you intend to do when you fired the gun at Blakely?" Her reply was that she meant to kill him. With that, there was only one possible verdict and one possible sentence.
David Blakely was a s**t of the first order - a bisexual boozer who when he heard Ruth was pregnant (probably by him) he punched her in the stomach and she miscarried. Had this case been in France, it would almost certainly have been labelled a crime-passionelle, and she would certainly not have been executed.

She was also surrounded by several shady characters, including a Desmond Cussins who years afterwards admitted that he had obtained the gun for her (or so I recall reading).

It was also considered that her confessing readily to murder was to a large extent her way of committing suicide, as she felt that her life had run away with her. In my opinion one of the saddest-ever cases of murder in the UK.

Cheers,

Graham

[richardnunweek]

Hi Graham,
Diminished responsibility should have been Ruths plea, but alas that was not a defence in 1955, that came about some two years later , hurried on by common sense.
All the court wished to know was if the defendant was fit to plea, and at the time of the offense was sane this was established by visits to Ruth whilst on remand awaiting trial , by a team of quacks.
Her attitude in court did not help her cause, as she came across as the hard, non caring Soho moll, with her attire and answers to questions.
The prison officers that were responsible for her welfare for the last 23 days off her life in the condemed cell, were shocked to find out that the actual woman, was very likeable, and every one of them ended up, very fond of her.
For the record her last words were''I shan't be needing these anymore' that being a reference to her glasses as she placed them on her writing desk.
According to Pierrepoint she ' Puckered her lips trying to smile' and I acknowledged her.
Regards Richard.

[Graham]

Hi Richard.

She was in court hardly long enough for her appearance to have any kind of effect upon either the jury or the public. As a result of the one question put to her by Humphries for the prosecution, and her reply, the defence team in effect were totally powerless. The judge, Mr Stevenson, gave his opinion to defence counsel on a point of law, and that was about it! The jury were out for only 20 minutes or thereabouts.

She refused all attempts by her lawyers to go for an appeal, and apparently became visibly upset at their efforts to do so.

One little-known occurrence is that about 2 minutes before the time of her execution a phone-call was received at the prison claiming to be from the Home Secretary's office. This was quickly dismissed as a hoax (which it was) and the execution was carried out as planned but about one minute late.

Later commentators essentially agreed that she had chosen her life-style and had no regrets. As I said, all very sad.

Graham

[richardnunweek]

Hello Graham,
Yes, very sad indeed, I remember the case quite well, although only eight years old, my father then had a newsagents, and I had all the papers to read, I found that as I had lost my mother a year before ,when she was only 32, I was saddened to hear that a woman was to be executed , as that brought death back to me once more.
Her alleged remarks to the soon to be Bishop of Stepney[ name escapes me]
'It was not me that shot David, when I saw that revolver in my hand, I knew I was another woman' is a clear description of Diminished Responsibility.
If sentenced on that, she would have been free on parole by the time of the 66 world cup, if only she had made that comment after sentence had been given, instead of the words ' Thank you', although it would have not altered that days verdict, the nationals would have headlined that , and a reprieve would have been much more likely.
Regards Richard.

[jason_c]

At the end of the day both Craig and Bentley were involved in an armed robbery in which a policeman was murdered. I understand that penalty for armed robbery were quite severe at the time. Severe enough for such teams of criminals to pat each other down beforehand to ensure no-one was carrying a gun.

Admittedly a sad case.

[Graham]

At the end of the day both Craig and Bentley were involved in an armed robbery in which a policeman was murdered. I understand that penalty for armed robbery were quite severe at the time. Severe enough for such teams of criminals to pat each other down beforehand to ensure no-one was carrying a gun.

Admittedly a sad case.

Well, yes, you're absolutely right in what you say - a policeman was murdered and someone had to pay for it. But I'm not sure about what you say concerning the carrying of guns by criminals. There are plenty of cases in the 20th century of armed robbery and of policemen being shot and killed. And don't forget that Bentley didn't have the normal mental capacity of someone his age.

Cheers,

Graham

[Mayerling]

Hi all,

Re Ellis: I agree that if the case had been in France, or even the U.S. after 1970, Ruth would have served some years in a prison like New York's Bedford Hills, and then been released. In fact I can think of the case of the murder of Dr. Herman Tarnower in the late 1970s, and how his killer (the head of a private school who was Tarnower's discarded lover) had the public's sympathy from the word "Go". She eventually was released after 15 years, and Governor Cuomo put her to work improving the education opportunities for the female inmates at Bedford Hills.

Ruth gave little choice to the jury or the system. She meant what she said - she'd have killed Dennis. Actually, however, a smaller point may have convinced the jury. A passer by on the scene of the killing got slightly wounded from one of Ruth's bullets. That sort of suggested anyone who got in the way...well Ruth would have just felt it was too bad.

From what I read Blakeley was an anagram of "t" "h" "i" "s"

Thompson's failing was a vivid imagination - those letters are heated and
full of passionate mad ideas. But the key one - her suggestion that she put ground glass in Percy's food to kill him - was examined carefully by Sir Bernard Spilsbury, and he found no proof of it. His biographers mention that this examination was carried out by the prosecution's request, and when they found it was not going to lead to more facts against Mrs. Thompson they didn't have the grace to even admit it!

There are political aspects to most famous homicide cases than we like to think about. I once noticed that Mrs. Thompson actually had an invitation with Percy to attend a dinner or occasion involving (of all people) Stanley Baldwin. The murder occurred in the last days of Lloyd George's coalition government in 1922, and the trial I believe was early the next year in the Tory Administration of Bonar Law ("the forgotten Prime Minister"). I have often wondered how much the change in Governments effected Mrs. Thompson's fate.


Best wishes,

Jeff

[Limehouse]

At the end of the day both Craig and Bentley were involved in an armed robbery in which a policeman was murdered. I understand that penalty for armed robbery were quite severe at the time. Severe enough for such teams of criminals to pat each other down beforehand to ensure no-one was carrying a gun.

Admittedly a sad case.

I am not sure you are correct in saying that they were involved in an armed robbery as such. They originally set out to rob a butcher's shop of its weekend takings. Bentley had stolen the keys a few days previously but when they arrived at the shop, the butcher was there cleaning up. This was unexpected. They decided not to go ahead with the robbery. That suggests to me that they expected to find the place closed. At that stage Bentley did not even know Craig had a gun. If they were really intent on armed robbery, they would have held up the butcher and stolen the takings.

They eventually ended up on the roof of the warehouse with the intention of going inside to see what they could find. They were spotted climbing over the gates by a child across the street and when Craig and Bentley were joined on the roof by policemen, Craig seemed to 'click' into gangster mode and the rest is history.

I really do not know what drove their criminality. Although Bentley came from a relatively poor family, by the time of the murder, they were in relatively comfortable circumstances and he had a loving and supportive family. Craig came from a comfortable, middle class home. However, both boys were illiterate (Bentley had severe learning difficulties and had the IQ of a small child and Craig was dyslexic) and both of their childhoods had been disrupted by the war - especially Bentley's. They were impressed by finery and glamour (not surprising in the grey, rationed days of the early 1950s) and seemed top crave the lifestyles of the gangsters they spent so much time watching at the cinema.

Re Ellis - I agree fully that this was a sad case and did not mean to suggest otherwise but Ruth gave the authorities no chance to save her. She fully believed she should die. I know her lover was a nasty piece of work - but Ruth seemed to play one lover off against another. However, the murder of her lover was, indeed, a crime of passion.

Incidently, it is interesting, and alarming to note how many people hanged for their crimes were below average intelligence. Ellis, was, of course highly intelligent, but as well as Bentley and Evans, who were both mentally feeble, many others have gone to the hangman including the last two men to die in 1964

[larue]

Anyone interested in this case?

hi Limehouse

yes, i am. just now, i am aboot half-way through MJ Trow's "let him have it, Chris"

more on this after i finish it

[larue]

a tragic story indeed...

while there was no problem of identification, there certainly did seem to be some difference of opinion regarding the actual events on that rooftop.

i cannot imagine what the Bentley family went through, as the machinery of 'justice' ground relentlessly onwards, till it crushed them.

many people, mainly police, judiciary etc etc bang on aboot 'joint purpose' and how if two or more people engage in a crime they are 'equally responsible', and 'equally guilty'. shame then, that that 'equality' was not carried over to the sentencing, because they certainly did not recieve 'equal punishment'

obviously, as a policeman had been killed, someone was going to hang for it. to the shame of the english justice system, no-one on the prosecution side seemed to care who it was...

[ianincleveland]

Another one who should never have hung was Robert Hoolhouse who hung for the killing of Mrs.Dobson at Wolviston in Co.durham in 1936.Though he had a very slim motive,his family were evcited from their cottage by the Dobsons 5 yrs previously,independent witnesses claim to see him at the time the murder was being commited.A footprint by the body was also known not to have been Hoolhouses but he was still convicted mainly due to a scratch on his face.Its now thought extremely unlikely he was the killer.Like Bentley he wasnt very literate or articulate and that seemed to count against him.Hos own lawyer didnt call him to the stand to defend himself so convinced was he of a Not Guilty verdict.the jusry found Hoolhouse guilty within an hour.

by any standards there was reasonable doubt he was innocent.