Casebook: Jack the Ripper - Main
   

Introduction
Victims
Suspects
Witnesses
Ripper Letters
Police Officials
Official Documents
Press Reports
Victorian London
Message Boards
Ripper Media
Authors
Dissertations
Timelines
Games & Diversions
Photo Archive
Ripper Wiki
Casebook Examiner
Ripper Podcast
About the Casebook

Most Recent Posts:
Hutchinson, George: Any updates, or opinions on this witness. - by Simon Wood 33 minutes ago.
Hutchinson, George: Any updates, or opinions on this witness. - by Wickerman 42 minutes ago.
Hutchinson, George: Any updates, or opinions on this witness. - by rjpalmer 1 hour and 12 minutes ago.
Hutchinson, George: Any updates, or opinions on this witness. - by Sam Flynn 2 hours ago.
General Discussion: Masonic and the number 39. - by Simon Wood 2 hours ago.
Hutchinson, George: Any updates, or opinions on this witness. - by Wickerman 2 hours ago.

Most Popular Threads:
Hutchinson, George: Any updates, or opinions on this witness. - (30 posts)
General Discussion: Masonic and the number 39. - (10 posts)
Non-Fiction: The Mysterious Fred - (8 posts)
General Suspect Discussion: Joseph Isaacs - (4 posts)
Casebook Announcements: Katherine Bradshaw Amin (1980-2018) - (2 posts)

Wiki Updates:
Robert Sagar
Edit: Chris
May 9, 2015, 12:32 am
Online newspaper archives
Edit: Chris
Nov 26, 2014, 10:25 am
Joseph Lawende
Edit: Chris
Mar 9, 2014, 10:12 am
Miscellaneous research resources
Edit: Chris
Feb 13, 2014, 9:28 am
Charles Cross
Edit: John Bennett
Sep 4, 2013, 8:20 pm

Most Recent Blogs:
Mike Covell: A DECADE IN THE MAKING.
February 19, 2016, 11:12 am.
Chris George: RipperCon in Baltimore, April 8-10, 2016
February 10, 2016, 2:55 pm.
Mike Covell: Hull Prison Visit
October 10, 2015, 8:04 am.
Mike Covell: NEW ADVENTURES IN RESEARCH
August 9, 2015, 3:10 am.
Mike Covell: UPDDATES FOR THE PAST 11 MONTHS
November 14, 2014, 10:02 am.
Mike Covell: Mike’s Book Releases
March 17, 2014, 3:18 am.

Go Back   Casebook Forums > Social Chat > Shades of Whitechapel

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #21  
Old 05-09-2008, 03:35 AM
dougie dougie is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 415
Default

Sherlock,
Interesting and possible scenario you described,but if Evans ran away ,on Christies advice, till things "blew over" why did he later,not only give himself up but also confess to the crime?Ive never found the "he confessed to protect Christie" line very convincing,in fact far from it.Evans actions werent those of an innocent man in my opinion,now whether he killed one or both is up for argument, but I doubt that issue will ever be resolved.My feeling ,for what its worth ,is that he probabley killed both mother and daughter.
regards
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old 05-09-2008, 11:47 PM
Sherlock Sherlock is offline
Detective
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 161
Default

I would say that it is equally possible that Christie killed both Beryl and Geraldine or that Evans killed both of them.

The main points against Christie killing Beryl are perhaps the following:-

1) Despite Christie' s claim that he gassed Beryl prior to raping and strangling her, no trace of carbon monoxide was found in her body either during the first post-mortem in 1949 or after the exhumation in 1953.

2) John Eddowes claims in The Two Killers of Rillington Place that Beryl was not in the house at the time Christie claimed to have murdered her.


3) As Rupert Furneaux states in The Two Stranglers of Rillington Place:-


If Christie had strangled Beryl at lunchtime on November 8th, and was going to tell Evans she had died from an abortion, it was essential to the plot that Christie should be in the house when Evans returned home from work, to frighten him into concealing his wife's death.
Christie left the house at 5.25pm to visit his doctor and on the way back he called for his wife at the Public Library. As Dr. Odess's surgery did not start until 6.0pm, Christie could hardly have got home much before 6.30pm.
Evans did not come home until about 6.30pm, according to his first and final statements...Thus, the house was empty for nearly an hour.
Christie would not have dared to take the appalling risk that Evans might come home early, find his wife dead and rush out and tell someone, his mother or the police. The true cause of Beryl's death, strangulation not abortion, would have been disclosed, the time of death established and Christie, who had been at home all day, would have been the obvious suspect.


On the other hand, there are also indications which might point to Christie as Beryl's murderer, such as the following:-

1) Christie had taken risks before; it was known that he was a friend of Muriel Eady, his second victim, and therefore might well have been connected with her disappearance in 1944, although this did not seem to happen at the time. Moreover, it seems that he actually used her thighbone to mend his garden fence when it came away from the soil! It is interesting that this was not discovered when the police searched the house and garden in 1949. He also claims that his dog dug up her skull at around this time, which he subsequently threw into a bombed house neraby.

2) Apparently, the body of Beryl Evans did not have any underwear when it was discovered in 1949; this was also the case with the bodies of Christie's last three victims in 1953. This could suggest that she had removed her underwear in preparation for Christie's bogus abortion, or that Christie himself had removed it after killing her, which seems unlikely if Evans had been her killer. Christie probably did the same thing to satisfy his sexual fetishes with his victims in 1953.

3) Ludovic Kennedy records in 10 Rillington Placethat when the house was put up for sale in 1950, one prospective purchaser asked Christie how the bodies of Beryl and Geraldine had remained in the wash-house for such a long time without his dog smelling them. Christie was apparantly very annoyed at the question. This could just possibly suggest that Christie himself had placed the bodies in the wash-house and had made sure to keep his dog away from the area so as not to draw attention to their presence there, or at least that he knew they were there.

4) It seems unlikely that Evans could have seen one of Christie's medical books as he stated unless Christie himself had shown it to him. This, coupled with the fact that Christie was apparently suspected of being an abortionist, could suggest that Christie had indeed offered to perform an abortion on Beryl, although whether he actually pretended to do so in order to kill her is open to question.

It seems pretty clear that, whoever was responsible, Evans would not have been found guilty of the murder of his daughter Geraldine in 1950 had the jury known that Christie had already comitted two murders in the house and had buried the bodies in the garden.

regards
SHERLOCK
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #23  
Old 05-10-2008, 08:04 PM
dougie dougie is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 415
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sherlock View Post
I would say that it is equally possible that Christie killed both Beryl and Geraldine or that Evans killed both of them.




to kill her is open to question.

It seems pretty clear that, whoever was responsible, Evans would not have been found guilty of the murder of his daughter Geraldine in 1950 had the jury known that Christie had already comitted two murders in the house and had buried the bodies in the garden.

regards
SHERLOCK
I agree,because the Jury would have jumped to the conclusion that Christie must have been guilty of geraldines murder because he had murdered said women before.Its a natural assumption to make, but not neccesarilly the correct one.
regards
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #24  
Old 05-10-2008, 08:54 PM
Sherlock Sherlock is offline
Detective
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 161
Default

As an interesting side issue to this thread, would Christie still have been executed if he had been found guilty of capital murder under the terms of the Homicide Act of 1957?

It is my understanding that he would not have been executed if he had been tried for the murder of his wife alone as he was in 1953, as he had not killed her with a firearm or killed her in the course of a robbery.

On the other hand, I believe that the Homicide Act allowed for the death penalty in cases where a person was found guilty of more than one murder on seperate occasions, so if he had been tried for all of the murders he comitted at the same time and been found guilty of two or more of them, he would still have been executed.

Similarly, if Evans had been convicted of the murder of Beryl alone after 1957 he would not have been subject to the death penalty, but would have been if he had been convicted of the murders of both Beryl and Geraldine.

I also understand that prior to 1957 anyone charged with more than one murder in England was only tried for one of them at a time, as Christie was in 1953. Did the act of 1957 then provide that someone could be convicted of more than one murder at the same trial?

Could someone clarify these points?

regards
SHERLOCK
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #25  
Old 09-11-2008, 08:01 PM
Brickbat Brickbat is offline
Cadet
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 21
Default

Anyone interested in a copy of Ludovic Kennedy's Ten Rillington Place (the only major book on the case), the hardback edition no less, including all photographs, in almost pristine condition for only a fiver + postage, he or she is invited to send me a PM.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #26  
Old 04-14-2010, 01:24 PM
ceegee ceegee is offline
Cadet
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 6
Default Graves of Christie's Victims

Whilst trawling around the Christie case I came across the details of the last resting places of Beryl and Geraldine Evans (In Gunnersbury Cemetery London)

http://www.findagrave.com/cgi-bin/fg...r&GRid=6532296

I was wondering what happened to the remains of Christies other victims after the post-mortems. Were funerals held for each or any of the victims or were they merely interred/cremated anonomously by the local authority.

Any information especially with regard to the final resting place of Ethel Christie would be welcome
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #27  
Old 04-19-2010, 06:58 PM
nugnug nugnug is offline
Constable
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 60
Default Christie

Christie said he dident kill the baby but then he said he was a respectable married man and that wasnt exactly true. since when has word of a serial sex killer counted for anything they are by there nature psychopathec liars petter suttclif claims to have killed only 4 women but we know he killed more.

why would Christie deny it i dont know only he could no that maybe he was just playing a sick game with everyone you can never know what goes on in a killers mind. but all the facts point to Christie killing the baby.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #28  
Old 08-10-2015, 10:38 AM
David Westlake David Westlake is offline
Cadet
 
Join Date: Jul 2015
Posts: 1
Default Was evans innocent? Indeed he was!

http://www.bailii.org/cgi-bin/markup...method=boolean
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #29  
Old 08-10-2015, 04:02 PM
Rosella Rosella is offline
Chief Inspector
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Posts: 1,542
Default

With all due respect to the link above, if you read John Eddowes book 'The Two Killers of Rillington Place,' the author makes a very good case for Evans being a murderer, and shreds much of the evidence presented by Ludovic Kennedy in his book for there having been a miscarriage of justice.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #30  
Old 08-10-2015, 04:46 PM
GUT GUT is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: I come from a land Down Under
Posts: 7,331
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rosella View Post
With all due respect to the link above, if you read John Eddowes book 'The Two Killers of Rillington Place,' the author makes a very good case for Evans being a murderer, and shreds much of the evidence presented by Ludovic Kennedy in his book for there having been a miscarriage of justice.
I wonder if John was in any way related to that other Eddowes?
__________________
G U T

There are two ways to be fooled, one is to believe what isn't true, the other is to refuse to believe that which is true.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 11:57 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.