Folkestone
Herald 28-5-1938
Local News
Hidden by
bushes in a coppice between Caesar’s Camp and Sugar Loaf hill, a young
Folkestone woman was found dead on Thursday evening. The cause of death is believed to
have been strangulation, and yesterday the Folkestone Police called in New
Scotland Yard to assist them in their enquiries. It was officially stated last
night that the woman was Mrs. Phyllis Butcher, aged 22, who had resided in the town for some years, living apart from
her husband.
The
discovery of the body was made shortly after 6 o’clock on Thursday evening by Kenneth G.
Andrews, a 16 year old boy living in Ethelbert Road. He was
playing about among the bushes at the foot of the hills between Holy Well and
Caesar's Camp when he saw what he thought was a woman sleeping. As she did not
move, however, when he spoke and touched her he realised that something was
wrong and he ran back to his home and informed his father.
The police
were communicated with and the Chief Constable (Mr A. S. Beesley), who was
attending a Masonic function at the time, was informed. He immediately left
for the scene of the tragedy and on arriving there took charge of the investigations.
Chief
Inspector W. Hollands and the Police Surgeon, Dr. W.C.P. Barrett, were also
summoned, and the latter made an examination of the body on the spot. He formed
the opinion that the cause of death was strangulation. The body was
lying on its back with the face upwards. The whole of the body was covered with
a blue stuffed coat, presumed by the police to be the dead woman’s property. Throughout
the night the police continued their investigations and when the Chief
Constable and other senior officers left some time later, other officers were
left on guard. Photographs were taken of the body and the place where it was found before
the body was removed in an ambulanec to the mortuary at the Cemetery.
Yesterday the Chief Constable
called j in the help of New Scotland Yard and Chief Inspector W. Parker and a
detective sergeant arrived in the town shortly before noon. There was no
evidence of a struggle having taken place at the spot where the body was found,
and the possibility of the woman having been brought there from somewhere else
after death was not rejected from the line of enquiry followed by the police.
The period the body had lain there was also closely investigated and the
opinion formed that some hours had elapsed since death when young Andrews made
his discovery. The clothing was damp and rain had fallen heavily up to early
Thursday morning. Although some distance from the string of paths which run
along the foot of the hills, access to the place from either Crete Road West or
Hill Road would not be impossible. A field separates Hill Road from the spot,
and the distance from the road is over 300 yards. This would be the more likely
method of approach if a person
were carrying someone.
The Chief Constable made an appeal through the Press last night asking
anyone who had lodged Mrs. Butcher during the past week to get into touch with
the Folkestone Police at once.
The official
description of the woman is as follows: “Aged 22, height 5 feet 3 inches.
Hair brown and bleached, more flaxen than brown; slim build. Dressed in a dark
green frock with a scarf of similar material which was tied tightly round the
neck. Blue shoes, no stockings or hat, and a blue coat which was covering the
body”. Enquiries which have been made show that the woman was last seen alive
on Monday evening in Folkestone. Since then the police have no trace of her
movements. The police state that they have a number of lines of enquiry which are
being closely followed up.
Although the name of the woman is given as Mrs. Butcher, it is believed that she had used other names, including “Mrs. Spears”.
It is believed that she was employed at a Folkestone hotel as a day
cleaner last summer. The manager of the hotel said the woman was a good worker
and appeared to be of a good type. “I had no complaint at all to make about her
work”, he said. “She worked here most of the summer.”
Kenneth Andrews told the "Folkestone Herald” last night that he
left his house at about 5.20 p.m. on Thursday and cycled up towards Caesar’s
Camp. “I then walked and crawled through trees and
bushes” he said, “at the bottom of the Caesar’s Camp looking for nests. I
crossed a stream and as I crawled through a bush I noticed what appeared to be
a bundle. I took a closer look and saw that it was a girl’s head, and part of
her leg was also showing. I shouted and touched the head with
the stick but nothing happened. I then went home and told my father who fetched
a policeman”.
Mr. John
Andrew, the father, said he had been at that spot that afternoon and must have
been within a few yards of the body.
“I didn’t
notice anything” he added, “as it is a place that one could only crawl into”.
Folkestone
Express 4-6-1938
Local News
Where did
Mrs. Phyllis May Spiers, aged 22 years, the Folkestone woman found strangled
not far from Holy Well in a small coppice at the foot of the hills on Thursday
night in last week, stay on the Monday and Tuesday nights previous to her
murder? That is a point upon which the
Folkestone Police desire to have information from anyone who can assist them. Mr. A.S. Beesley, the Chief Constable, last night
said: It is of the utmost importance that people knowing where Mrs. Spiers
stayed on either of these nights should communicate with us immediately,
without them waiting for the Police to call on them. It certainly would he assisting
the interests of justice if anyone with information of use to the Police
would get into touch with them immediately.
The body
of Mrs. Spiers, a married woman separated from her husband, and a foster child
of Mrs. Minter, who formerly lived at a lodging house in Radnor Street, was
first discovered by Kenneth George Andrews, a sixteen year old youth residing
with his parents in Ethelbert Road. He was looking for birds’ nests at the
time, when he saw what appeared to be a bundle. Looking closer, he saw that a
portion of a woman’s head and leg were showing. He immediately proceeded to
his home and informed his father, who at once found the constable on the beat,
and particulars of the discovery were telephoned to Police headquarters.
Mr.
Beesley, the Chief Constable, was immediately informed and he, accompanied by
Chief Inspector Hollands, Dr. W.C.P. Barrett and Det. Constable Bates, the
Coroner`s Officer, were speedily at the scene. They found amongst the bushes
the body of a woman completely covered with her blue coat, lying on her back
with her head down the sloping ground.
Dr. Barrett
made an examination, and gave it as his opinion that the woman had been
strangled by her green scarf which had been knotted tightly round her throat.
The body
was subsequently removed to the mortuary, where a long and careful examination
was made by the Chief Constable, who took charge of the case, and the Police
Surgeon.
The C.I.
Department worked throughout the night trying to establish her identity and
making numerous other enquiries. It was clear from the first examination by
Dr. Barrett that the woman had been lying where she was found at least 24
hours. Before it was taken away photographs were taken of it and the
surrounding land. An intensive search for possible clues was at once commenced
by detectives of the Folkestone Force.
Early on
Friday morning the Chief Con stable decided to seek the assistance of Scotland
Yard, and a few hours later Det. Inspector Parker and Det. Sergt. Scarsdon,
from the Yard, arrived and began investigations in conjunction with the Chief
Constable and his officers. There were no signs of a struggle at the place
where the body was found, and thf fact that the clothing was very wet showed
that it was there on the Wednesday night when there was heavy rain.
The Chief
Constable, Det. Inspector Parker, and numerous officers have ceaselessly and
energetically carried out investigations from the time they began them. As a
result it has been established that the murder occurred about fifty feet distant
from the place where Mrs. Spiers’ body was found. She had been passing in the
name of Butcher for some time in Folkestone, where she had been employed at hotels
and cafes.
On the
Saturday previous to her death she went to a house in Garden Road, where she
engaged a room, telling the landlady that her name was Minter, and that she had
come from Tooting to take up a position as a waitress at a cafe on the lower
sea front. She brought no luggage with her, and slept at the house on Saturday
and Sunday nights. On Monday morning she left the house, apparently to go to
her work, after arranging with the landlady to meet her so that she could take
her to the pictures. The landlady kept the appointment, but Mrs. Spiers did
not, and she did not see her again. When the landlady returned to her home she
noticed that a "man without a hat and wearing a light mackintosh was
apparently waiting outside. On Monday morning Mrs. Spiers walked
along the Marine Promenade, for she had her photograph taken as she was doing
so. From that time there seems to be no connected story of her movements. It is
stated that she was seen on Tuesday night with a tall man wearing a mackintosh. So far as
is known she was last seen alive on Wednesday at about a quarter to twelve in a
Sandgate Road shop, and therefore the probable time of her death was between
noon and three o’clock on Wednesday in last week.
The enquiries
of the Police have been of a very extensive character, and have extended over a
wide area of the country. Mrs. Spiers attended many dances in the district, and
was known to many men, not only in Folkestone, but in the military camps at
Shorncliffe and the R.A.F. at Hawkinge. Over sixty men have been interrogated
by the Police, and the processs of elimination is still proceeding. The men
include soldiers, airmen and civilians.
On
Saturday night, a report was received from the Sandwich district that a man who
had been stopped in a country lane by a Kent County police officer and
questioned had stated that he had come from Folkestone and that he admitted he
was responsible for the murder of Mrs. Spiers. Mr. Beesley and Det.Insp.
Parker, and other officers without delay motored over to Sandwich, but on questioning
the man they quickly came to the conclusion that he had had nothing to do with
the crime.
A section
of the Force had arranged to visit Epsom to see the Derby, but in view of the
crime the immediately cancelled the arrangements.
Under
Inspector Heastie a number of officers, in plain clothes, have made a
house-to-house visit in the Cheriton, Morehall, Foord and the surrounding
streets and roads, and the East Cliff districts, and have shown a photograph of
Mrs. Spiers to the occupiers. They have also asked if she was known or had
stayed there. Mr. Beesley, asked last (Thursday) night if that had brought any
results, replied “It has brought some crumbs of useful information”.
On Wednesday,
Dr. Bernard Spilsbury, who has assisted in the unravelling of many murders,
came to Folkestone at the request of the Chief Constable, and he, in company
with Dr. Barrett, the Police Surgeon, and the Chief Constable, conducted a
long examination of the body of the murdered woman at the mortuary. A large
number of exhibits which have been collected in the investigations have ai.so
been seat to London for examination by Dr. Roche Lynch, the Home Office expert.
It was at one
time thought that the theft of a Harley Davidson motor cycle from a Folkestone
garage during Tuesday night or Wednesday morning had some connection with the
crime, and the police of the whole of the country were asked to try and trace
it, but that has now been ruled out by the officers engaged in the case.
The cause of
Mrs. Spiers’ death was not by asphyxiation, but the scarf
having been tied so tightly the flow of blood through the carotid artery was
snapped, and so her death must have been instantaneous.
The inquest
was opened on Monday afternoon at the Folkestone Town Hall. Mr. G.W. Haines,
the Borough Coroner, sat with a jury of ten. There was a large attendance of the public. Only three witnesses gave
evidence, and the enquiry was then adjourned to July 8th.
The Chief
Constable (Mr. A.S. Beesley) was the first witness. He said at 7.15 p.m. on
Thursday he was called to a spot in a small coppice or wood, and was
accompanied by the Coroner’s Officer. At the foot of the hill to the north of Folkestone
between Caesar’s Camp and Sugar Loaf Hill he saw a woman lying on her back
covered pretty well from head to foot with a woman’s blue coat. The photograph
produced was as she was found.
This
photograph was handed to the members of the jury to examine.
The Chief
Constable, continuing, said the woman was lying on a slight decline with the
head downwards. The lower portions of both legs were exposed from a point about
half-way below the knee. She had no stockings, but she wore a pair of
low-heeled shoes. Her face and head were covered, but a portion of her back
hair, which was flaxen in colour, was exposed, and was lying straight out behind the body. “I moved the coat”, Mr. Beesley continued, “and
exposed the face and felt it. The face was quite cold, but soft to the touch.
It was of good colour and in fact quite natural. I formed the opinion she was
dead. Her nose was swollen and discoloured and blood was oozing from the left
nostril. I completely removed the coat and found she was she was lying on her
back with her arms and legs flexed, her knees drawn. She was wearing a pair of
panties, which just covered her thighs. They were in good condition, but badly
torn, especially at the back. Her green frock was pulled or dragged right up,
back and front, level to her breasts, leaving the whole of the breasts and body
bare. Very extensive bleeding scratches led from her legs right up to the
thighs. They were especially numerous on the front. There were deep
indentations on the lower part of the body made by pressure of the earth and
dry pieces of twig and briar upon which she was lying. All clothing was
saturated with rain, except the back of the dress, which was dry. The
photographs put in were taken at once”.
The jury were
also handed these photographs to examine.
Dr. W.C.P.
Barrett, the Police Surgeon, said he saw the body in the coppice where it was
found. The woman was dead. He had since made a post mortem examination. There
was a long bruise measuring four inches on the left arm. There were two large
spots, dark in colour, on the chest. There were scratches on the left collar
bone and there were multiple scratches on the lowerr limbs right up to the
groin, but mainly on the front, but with quite a few on the back. There was a
deep indentation right around the neck, front and back. The stomach contained
ten small lumps of potato and brownish fluid resembling soup. The bruises and
scratches were definitely ante-mortem. Death was due to strangulation caused by
pressure on the main arteries to the head. Rigor mortis had set in and the
limbs were rigid. The face was of a natural colour. His opinion was that she
had not been dead longer than two days. Death might have occurred under that
time. There was no sign of putrification.
The Coroner:
There must have been considerable pressure to stop the flow of blood?
Witness: No.
I tried it on myself last night and it is surprising how little pressure is
needed to make you feel faint.
Arthur
Charles Spiers, 29, Sidney Road. Bexhill-on-Sea, said he was 27 years of age
and was a milk roundsman. He was formerly in the Army, stationed at
Shorncliffe. When in the Army he became acquainted with the deceased and knew
her as Phyllis Minter. They were married on April 11th, 1932, at the
Folkestone Register Office. On January 25th, 1933, his wife gave
birth to a daughter, who was in his custody. He
returned to Bexhill and got work there. On April 13th, 1934, his
wife left him with the baby, following a quarrel over a letter she had
received. He tried to patch it up once or twice. He last saw her alive three
years and ten months ago at Hastings. In November last he applied for a Poor
Persons divorce. He did not know where she was living. His application for
divorce was based on desertion. She was 16 years and five months old when he
married her. He visited the Folkestone mortuary on Friday afternoon and
identified the body as that of his wife. He could not say whether she followed
any occupation.
The Coroner
said he did not propose to take any further evidence.
The Chief
Constable: My application is that you should adjourn the enquiry for at least a
month.
The Coroner:
I will adjourn the inquest until 8th July at 2.30 p.m. The police
have many enquiries to make, and the jury will have to come again.
 | ||||
| Photo from Folkestone Express |
Folkestone
Herald 4-6-1938
Local News
The inquest on Mrs. Phyllis M. Spiers, who was found strangled near
Caesar’s Camp last week, was opened at the Town Hall, Folkestone, on Monday
afternoon by the Borough Coroner (Mr. G.W. Haines) and after three witnesses
had been called, the enquiry was adjourned until Friday, July 8th.
There were a
number of members of the general public in the body of the court to listen to
the proceedings, which lasted less than an hour.
The Chief
Constable (Mr. A.S. Beesley) sat at a table with the Police Surgeon (Dr. W.C.P.
Barrett) and Det. Sergt. Skarsdon, one of the Scotland Yard officers assisting
the local police.
The Chief
Constable was the first witness. “At 7.15 p.m. on Thursday last”, he
said, “I was called by my chief Inspector to a small coppice or wood. I was
accompanied by the Coroner’s officer. At the foot of the hills to the north of Folkestone, between Caesar’s
Camp and Sugar Loaf Hill, I saw a woman lying on her back covered pretty well
from head to foot with a blue coat”.
The Chief Constable handed to the Coroner a
photograph showing the dead woman as she was found. The photograph was shown to the members of the
jury.
The Chief Constable, continuing, said “She was
lying on a slight incline with her head downwards, the lower portion of both
legs being exposed from a point about half way below the knee. She had no
stockings, but was wearing a pair of low-heeled shoes. Her face and head were
covered, but a portion of her back hair, which was flaxen in colour, was
exposed and lying straight out behind the body. I moved the coat and exposed the
face and felt it. The face was quite cold, but soft to the touch. It was a
very good colour and in fact quite natural. I formed the opinion that she was
dead. Her nose was swollen and discoloured, and blood was oozing from the
left nostril. I completely removed the coat and found that she was lying on her back
with her arms and legs flexed, her knees being drawn up, and the right ankle
crossed over the left ankle”.
Describing
the dead woman’s clothing, the Chief Constable said an undergarment was badly
torn. “She had on a green frock, pulled or dragged right up. There were very extensive bleeding scratches leading from her legs up to
the thighs. They were especially numerous on the front. There were deep indentations on the lower part of the back of the body,
made by pressure on the earth and dry pieces of twig and briar on which she was
lying. All the clothing was saturated i with
rain except the back of the dress, which was dry. Between
the back of the dress and the shoulders were maiiy pieces -of dry twig,
brambles, dry earth and grass”. “Around her
neck”, continued the Chief Constable, “was an old green spotted scarf. It was wound twice round and tied twice exceedingly tightly, so tight
that the whole of the scarf round the neck was sunk into the indentation made. I caused it to be cut with a penknife on the opposite side of the knot. There were no signs of a struggle at this spot. The grass was not
trampled, and the brambles were not broken”. The
Chief Constable added that the photographs which he had produced were taken at
the time of the finding of the body.
Dr. W.C.P. Barrett, the Police Surgeon, said he saw the body at the spot
where it was found. “I have since made a post mortem examination”,
added the doctor, “and I found the nose flattened and exuding blood. There was a long bruise measuring four inches on the inner side of the
left arm. There were two bruises on the chest. There were multiple bramble scratches on the lower limbs, these being
more on the front than the back, but there were quite a few on the back. There was a deep indentation right round the whole of the neck”.
The Coroner: Would you say the bramble scratches and bruises were
ante-mortem?
Witness: Definitely.
Continuing, Dr. Barrett said death was due to strangulation caused by
pressure on the main arteries to the head.
The Coroner: How long do you think deceased had been dead?
Dr. Barrett: Two days or under.
The Coroner: Not longer?
Witness: No, there was no sign of putrefaction.
The Coroner: Considerable
pressure would be necessary to stop the flow of blood, I suppose?
Witness: No, I tried last night in bed and was surprised how little
pressure was needed to make you feel faint. It was surprising.
Arthur Charles Spiers, 29, Sidney Street, Bexhill-on-Sea, who stated he
was 27 and a milk roundsman, said he was formerly in the Army and stationed at
Shorncliffe Camp. He said that he became acquainted with the
deceased and knew her as Phyllis Minter. They were subsequently married at the
Folkestone Registry Office on April 11th,
1932. On January 25th, 1933, his wife
gave birth to a daughter, who was now in his custody. He returned to Bexhill after the marriage and got work there. On April 13th, 1934, his wife left him, leaving the baby. They had
quarrelled before as a result of a letter she had received. Witness said they had tried to patch up the quarrel once or twice.
The Coroner: When did you last see her alive?
Witness: Three years and
ten months ago at Hastings.
The Coroner: You have never seen her since?
Witness: No, sir.
The Coroner: In November last you applied for a poor person’s divorce? –
Yes.
Did you know where she was living? – No.
A solicitor found it out for you? – That is so.
The Coroner: Your application for divorce was based on
desertion?
The husband: That`s right, sir.
The Coroner: How old was she when you married her?
The husband: Sixteen years and five months.
Witness said he visited the Folkestone mortuary on Friday afternoon and he there identified the body as that of his wife.
The Coroner: Do you know whether she followed any occupation after
leaving you?
Witness: I could not tell you.
At this stage the inquest was adjourned.
The Chief Constable said he would like an adjournment for at least a
month.
Adjourning the inquest until July 8th at 2.30 p.m., the
Coroner said the police had many enquiries to make and he was afraid the jury
would have to come again.
Local News
Sir Bernard Spilsbury, the eminent
pathologist, was called in by the Chief Constable of Folkestone (Mr.
A.S. Beesley) this week to assist in the investigations into the death of Mrs.
Phyllis Spiers, the 22 year old Folkestone woman who was found strangled
between Caesar’s Camp and Sugar Loaf Hill on Thursday last week. The inquest on the dead woman was opened at the Town Hall, Folkestone, on
Monday afternoon, and after three witnesses had been called, including the
husband of the deceased, the enquiry was adjourned until Friday, July 8th.
The Folkestone Police, assisted by Scotland Yard officers, have continued
their enquiries, working day and night during the past week, and a large number
of clues have been followed up and many persons questioned.
The steps taken by the police to trace the movements of the dead woman
during the last 48 hours of her life have included a door-to-door call at every
house in certain districts of the town, ten plain clothes officers under
Inspector Haestie having carried out this task.
A start was made at Cheriton and Morehall on Monday, followed by a comb
out in the Foord district.
The officers have shown a photograph of Mrs. Spiers to householders in
the hope of obtaining information which may give them an important clue.
During the weekend a young soldier in the 1st Royal Berkshire
Regiment, who had moved to Aldershot from Shorncliffe
earlier in the week, was among those questioned at police headquarters by the
Chief Constable and Chief Inspector W. Parker, of Scotland Yard. The soldier afterwards returned to Aldershot to rejoin other members of
his unit who had gone there to prepare for the Aldershot tattoo.
A report appeared on Saturday that an unclothed man had chased two young
Folkestone women on the hills near the spot where Mrs. Spiers’s body was found
and there was a suggestion that there might be some link with the crime, but
the Chief Constable informed the Folkestone Herald that there was no truth in
the report.
The exact place where the woman had been strangled has been established;
it was stated to be not more than 30 feet from the spot where the body was
found concealed by undergrowth. Further, the opinion was was formed that the
woman had met her death probably between noon and 3 p.m. on Wednesday of last
week. Statements had been made that between Monday and Wednesday Mrs. Spiers
had been seen in the town, one witness placing the time as late as 11.50 a.m.
on Wednesday.
Mrs. M. Wright, living in the Black Bull district, also gave valuable information
to the police, for she was able to show where Mrs. Soiers had spent the
previous weekend. Mrs. Wright stated that the woman had called
at her house on the Saturday morning and engaged a room. She described herself
as a waitress and gave her name as Miss Phyllis Minter, stating that she had
just arrived from Tooting. She said that she had come to take a job in
the town. Before leaving the house on Monday morning about 10.30 the woman arranged to meet Mrs. Wright in the evening to go with her to a
cinema, but that appointment was not kept.
By Sunday evening the Chief Constable stated that statements had been
taken from between 40 and 50 persons, and the work of questioning was continued
on the subsequent days.
Late on Saturday night a report was received that a man was detained at
Sandwich after making a statement confessing to the crime.
The Chief Constable and Chief Inspector Parker immediately went to
Sandwich, but after questioning the man they were satisfied that he knew
nothing of the murder. The man, who had been stopped by a police
constable on his beat, had said that he had come from Folkestone and was
responsible for the crime.
Another possible link was the disappearance of an old motor cycle combination
from a lock-up garage in the town. Messages were flashed to all police forces
asking for news of this machine, which had been stolen from the garage between
Tuesday night and early Wednesday afternoon of last week.
No line of enquiry has been overlooked by the police and in an effort to
establish where Mrs. Spiers ate a few
hours before she met her death calls were made at cafes and restaurants.
Sir Bernard Spilsbury was called in by the Chief Constable on Wednesday,
and he arrived at Folkestone later. Sir
Bernard went to the mortuary at the Cheriton Road cemetery where he carried out
a post-mortem examination on the dead woman. During
the examination, part of which was carried out during a violent thunderstorm,
the Chief Constable and Chief Inspector Parker were present. Later the eminent
pathologist returned to London. A large number of exhibits were also sent to
Dr. Roche Lynch, the Home Office expert, on Thursday.
Last night the Chief Constable stated that the line of enquiry had been
considerably narrowed down and was more pronounced.
With reference to his appeal the previous week for information as to
where Mrs. Spiers slept on the Monday and Tuesday, Mr. Beesley said a number of
people had made statements, but none as to where she had dept. Either this information is being withheld, or
Mrs. Spiers slept out on these two nights, possibly in one of the huts which
are being erected on the Kent Agricultural Show ground at the back of the golf
links.
The funeral of Mrs. Spiers took place quietly on Thursday morning at the
Folkestone Cemetery at Hawkinge. The Vicar of
Folkestone (Rev. Canon Hyla Holden) officiated. Only
near relatives of the deceased attended. Wreaths were received as follows: With
deepest sympathy, from your heartbroken Arthur; with deepest sympathy, “Mum”;
in fond remembrance of Phyllis, from Aunt Rose, Dorothy and Iris; in loving
memory, from all at Bexhill; with sincere sympathy, from her pals at the
Alexandra Hotel; with sincere sympathy, Mr. and Mrs. J. Mockridge and Johnny.
The Chief Constable`s Appeal
Do you know where Mrs. Spiers stayed on Monday and Tuesday nights of last
week? If you can help, communicate at once with the police.
The Chief Constable of Folkestone on Thursday evening said “It is of the
utmost importance that anyone who can tell us where the dead woman stayed on
the Monday or Tuesday nights before her death should communicate with me
without waiting to be called upon”.
Folkestone
Express 11-6-1938
Local News
The murder of Mrs. Phyllis May Spiers, aged 22, a
Folkestone woman living apart from her husband, is still unsolved, but the
police are not relaxing in their efforts to find the person responsible for her
death by strangulation on Wednesday, May 25th.
It will be remembered that her dead body was found not
far from Holy Well at the foot of Caesar`s Camp on the evening of Thursday, May
26th, and since then the police have prosecuted their enquiries
unceasingly and vigorously.
Mr. A.S. Beesley, the Chief Constable, from the time
the dead woman was found, took control immediately of the case, and Chief
Inspector Parker and Det. Sergt. Scarsdon from Scotland Yard arrived the
following day, and have had a big share of the investigations which have been
carried on since it was evident that Mrs. Spiers had been murdered.
The appeal made by the Chief Constable last week for
anyone who could give information concerning the dead woman resulted in a
number of people coming forward, and some of the details which they supplied
were undoubtedly of assistance to the officers engaged in the case. Chief
Inspector Parker and the C.I.D. staff of the Folkestone Police Force working
under him have interviewed quite a number of people every day. On Tuesday Chief
Inspector Parker visited Scotland Yard in order to report progress to
headquarters there, and he also saw Dr. Roche Lynch, the Home Office expert,
with whom he conferred as to the result of his analysis of certain exhibits
forwarded to him last week.
Mr. A.S. Beesley, the Chief Constable, has issued the following appeal to
people to assist the Police: At about 6.10
p.m. on 26th May, 1938, a girl known as Phyllis Spiers, alias
Butcher, Osborn and Wall, aged 22 years, 5ft. 5ins., eyes blue, hair bleached,
medium build; Dress: full length belted blue overcoat, green frock, blue
leather shoes, no hat or stockings, was found murdered at a spot known as Caesar’s
Camp, Hill Road, Folkestone. It is earnestly desired to trace a woman who was in her company shortly before 12 noon on Wednesday, 25th
May, 1938, at Woolworth’s Stores, Sandgate Road, Folkestone. The woman is known
to have purchased a packet of grease-proof paper. It is of the utmost
importance that this woman should communicate with the Chief Constable, the
Town Hall, Folkestone, or with any Police Station at the earliest possible
moment.
It is clear that the movements of the dead woman prior to noon on the day
she met her death should be known as fully as possible, and if it is possible
for any person to shed any light upon them it is their duty to get into
communications with the police at once. Another direction in which great
assistance can be rendered to the police is in supplying any information
regarding Mrs. Spiers` whereabouts on the Monday and Tuesday nights before the
day on which she was murdered. That she was in Folkestone on those two nights
is known, and it is hoped that information as to where she slept then will be
forthcoming.
The police, it is thought, have now decided that the theft of the Harley
Davidson motorcycle from a Folkestone garage, and which they asked the police
in all parts of the country to assist them tracing, had no connection with the
crime.
The appeal of the Chief Constable published on Wednesday resulted in some
people coming forward, as a result of which a few fresh facts came to the
knowledge of the police.
Folkestone
Herald 11-6-1938
Local News
During the
week the Chief Constable (Mr A.S. Beesley) made a further appeal in connection
with the murder of Mrs. Phyllis Spiers, who was found strangled with her own
green scarf near Caesar’s Camp on Thursday, May 26th.
The police
announced that it was important that they should get into touch with a woman
who was seen in Mrs. Spiers’s company in Woolworth’s Stores, Sandgate Road,
Folkestone, on Wednesday, May 25th, probably only a few hours before
she met her death.
The
statement as issued by the Chief Constable was as follows: At about 6.10 p.m. on May 26th, 1938, a girl known as Phyllis
Spiers, alias Butcher, Osborn and Wall, aged 22 years, 5 feet 5 inches,
eyes blue, hair bleached, medium build; dressed in full length belted blue
overcoat, green frock and blue leather shoes, no hat or stockings, was found
murdered at a spot known as Caesar’s Camp, Hill Road, Folkestone.
It is earnestly desired to trace a woman who was in her company shortly
before 12 noon on Wednesday, May 25th, 1938, at Woolworth’s Stores,
Sandgate Road, Folkestone. The woman is known to have purchased a packet of
greaseproof paper. It is of the utmost importance that this woman should
communicate with the Chief Constable, the Town Hall, Folkestone, or any police
.station at the earliest possible moment.
This statement was issued on Tuesday night following a visit to London
by Chief Inspector W. Parker, of Scotland Yard, who with Det. Sergt. Skarsdon,
also of Scotland Yard, are assisting the Folkestone police in their enquiries. Inspector Parker had a consultation in London with Dr. Roche Lynch, the
Home Office analyst, to whom a number of exhibits had been forwarded the week
before for examination. During the past week statements have been
taken from further people at Folkestone police headquarters and every line of
enquiry has been carefully followed up.
Wednesday’s appeal brought to the Police Station several persons who were
able to give information to the police, but where the dead woman slept on the
Monday and Tuesday nights before her death still remains a mystery.
The police regard every piece of information as useful and any
assistance that can be given should be offered without delay.
Folkestone
Express 18-6-1938
Local News
The Folkestone Police, assisted by Chief Inspector
Parker and Det. Sergt. Scarsdon, of Scotland Yard, are actively pursuing
enquiries concerning the murder of Mrs. Phyllis May Spiers, aged 22, the
Folkestone woman who was found strangled at the foot of Caesar`s Camp on the
evening of May 26th. They have interviewed a number of people who
came forward as a result of the appeal made by Mr. A.S. Beesley, the Chief
Constable, last week, and several fresh facts regarding the mystery have come
to light.
Folkestone
Herald 18-6-1938
Local News
Following a
further week of investigations, Chief Inspector W. Parker and Detective
Sergeant Skarsdon, of Scotland Yard, who have been working on the Folkestone
strangled woman case with the Folkestone Police, visited Scotland Yard on
Thursday. After consultations there, the Yard officers returned to Folkestone last
night. During their visit to London they were also in conference with Dr. Roche
Lynch, the Home Office analyst.
The
Folkestone Herald understands that the police enquiries have not yet been
completed in connection with the death of Mrs. Phyllis Spiers.
During the
week further persons have made statements and have been questioned at the
Folkestone Police headquarters by the Chief Constable (Mr. A.S. Beesley) and
other officers assisting him.
Folkestone
Express 25-6-1938
Local News
The Folkestone Police, with the assistance of Chief
Inspector Parker and Det. Sergt. Scardon, of Scotland Yard, are still
proceeding with their enquiries concerning the murder of Mrs. Phyllis May
Spiers, the 22 year old Folkestone married woman found strangled on May 26th
near Caesar`s Camp.
On Friday in last week Chief Inspector Parker and Det.
Sergt. Scardon were at Scotland Yard, where they were in consultation with Dr.
Roche Lynch, the Home Office expert, and other officers at the Yard. Returning
to Folkestone, they have since been actively engaged on the case, and no
efforts are being spared by the Chief Constable (Mr. A.S. Beesley), the
Scotland Yard officers, and the C.I.D. staff of the Folkestone Police to solve
the mystery of Mrs. Spiers` death.
Folkestone
Herald 25-6-1938
Local News
After
continuing their investigations during the past week into the death of Mrs.
Phyllis Spiers, the 22 year old Folkestone woman, who was found strangled near
Caesar’s Camp on Thursday, May 26th last, the two Scotland Yard
officers who were called in the day after the discovery of the crime again
visited London on Thursday.
There is good reason to believe
that the police enquiries will be brought to a conclusion within the next few
days.
Folkestone
Express 2-7-1938
Local News
On Saturday, just over a month after the
body of Mrs. Phyllis May Spiers, aged 22, a Folkestone woman, had been found at
the foot of Caesar’s Camp, to the north of Folkestone, Mr. A. S. Beesley, the
Chief Constable, charged a Folkestone labourer, William Whiting, aged 38,
giving as his address a lodging-house in Dover Street, with the wilful murder
of the woman.
The
dead woman was found amongst some bushes, and she had a green scarf tied round
her neck, on the evening of May 26th. Since
that day the Chief Constable, Chief Inspector Parker, and Det.Sergt. Skardon,
of Scotland Yard, and the Folkestone Police, have been carrying out
Investigations concerning the woman’s death. The accused man is a widower, and has three
children. He is particularly well known in the east area of Folkestone. The
Chief Constable saw him in his office on Saturday and charged him. Later he was
again charged in the Police Station and then placed in the cells.
Whiting
was placed in the dock at the Police Court on Monday. He was charged that on or
about 23rd May of this year at Folkestone he feloniously and with
malice aforethought wilfully murdered Phyllis May Spiers.
The
Court was crowded to its utmost extent, and the doors had to be closed, many
people being unable to gain admission.
The
magistrates were Councillor R.G. Wood, Alderman G. Spurgen, Mr. L.G.A. Collins,
Judge H. Terrell, K.C., Mrs. A.M. Saunders and Alderman J.W. Stainer.
At
the Court officials’ table, in addition to the Clerk (Mr. C. Rootes) and the
Chief Constable (Mr. A.S. Beesley), there were also seated Chief Inspector
Parker and Det.-Sergt. Skardon, of Scotland Yard, who had been conducting
investigations into the case.
The
Chief Constable said it was a case in which, as the magistrates were aware, the
assistance of the Director of Public Prosecutions was to be sought, therefore
that morning he proposed only to give evidence of arrest, and then ask for a
remand until Tuesday. It was a formal remand, because he was sure that the Director
would not be ready by that time. They would need, he was afraid, a further
remand.
The
Magistrates’ Clerk (Mr. C. Rootes): You have, of course, made many enquiries?
The
Chief Constable: There are a very large number of witnesses to be called before
you.
The Chief Constable, giving evidence, said at 12.34
p.m. on June 25th he saw the prisoner in his office. He said to him
“You know who I am? I am the Chief Constable of Folkestone”. Whiting replied
“Yes, sir”. Proceeding, he said: “I said ‘William Whiting, I am going to arrest and
formally charge you with the murder
of Phyllis May Spiers on or about
Monday, 23rd May, 1938, and you will be taken before the Court on
that charge. I must caution you that you need not say anything unless you
wish, but whatever you say will
be taken down in writing and may be
given in evidence. Have you anything to say?’ Whiting replied `I do not wish to
say anything. I am not guilty’”. At 1.20 p.m. the same day, continued Mr. Beesley, Whiting was formally
charged by the Station officer, P.S. Butcher, with the offence. He was
cautioned, and replied “I have nothing to say”. Whiting was then searched and
taken to the cells.
The
Clerk: Nothing was found upon him to which you wish to refer?
The
Chief Constable: No.
Whiting
said he did not wish to ask the Chief Constable any questions.
The
Chairman said they would appoint somebody to conduct Whiting’s defence.
The
Clerk: A solicitor will be assigned to conduct your defence.
The
Chairman (to Whiting): You are remanded in custody until tomorrow week
(Tuesday).
The
prisoner was then hurried out of the dock, and without looking at the people in
the Court Whiting proceeded to the Police Station below.
Folkestone
Herald 2-7-1938
Local News
William
Whiting, 38, a labourer, of Dover Street, Folkestone, was detained and
charged on Saturday with the murder of Mrs. Phyllis May Spiers, 22 year old
Folkestone woman, who was found dead in a coppice near the foot of Caesar’s
Camp, Folkestone, on the evening of Thursday, May 26th. A green
scarf was tied tightly round the dead woman’s neck and at the inquest death was
stated to have been caused by strangulation. Whiting
was brought before the Magistrates on Monday morning and after evidence of
arrest had been given he was remanded until next Tuesday.
The Magistrates: Councillor R.G. Wood presided and there were
also sitting Alderman G. Spurgen, Mr. L.G.A. Collins, Alderman J.W. Stainer,
Mrs. R.L.T. Saunders and Judge H. Terrell, K.C.
The charge read over to Whiting was that “on or about 23rd May
of this year at Folkestone feloniously with malice aforethought he murdered
Phyllis May Spiers”. Chief Inspector W. Parker and Det. Sergt. Skardon, of
Scotland Yard, who had assisted the local police with the enquiries since the
day following the finding of Mrs. Spiers’s body, were both present in court. A
large crowd which had gathered outside rushed into the court room when the
public part of the court was opened. Many were unable to gain admittance.
The Chief Constable of Folkestone (Mr. A.S. Beesley) said, as the
Magistrates were aware, the assistance of the Director of Public Prosecutions
would have to be sought and therefore he only proposed to offer evidence of
arrest that morning and then ask for a remand until Tuesday of next week. It
would be a formal remand because he was quite sure the Director of Public
Prosecutions would not be ready by that time to proceed with the case.
The Clerk
(Mr. C. Rootes): You have made many enquiries and taken many statements?
The Chief
Constable: Yes, and there are a large number of witnesses to be called.
The Chief
Constable then gave evidence. He said that on Saturday he saw Whiting in his
office and said to him “You know who I am; I am the Chief Constable of
Folkestone”. Whiting replied “Yes, sir”. He then said: “William Whiting, I
am going to arrest and formally charge you with the murder of Phyllis May
Spiers on or about Monday, 23rd May, 1938, and you will be taken
before the Court on that charge. I must caution you that you need not say anything
unless you wish, but whatever you say will be taken down in writing and may be
given in evidence. Have you anything to say?” Witness said Whiting replied “I do not wish to say anything. I am not
guilty”. Later Whiting was formally charged in his presence by the station
sergeant and he then replied “I have nothing to say”.He was then searched in
witness’s presence and taken to the cells.
The Clerk: Was anything found on him to which you wish to refer? – No.
Whiting said he had no questions to put to the Chief Constable.
Remanding Whiting until Tuesday of next week, the Chairman said they
would appoint somebody to defend him.
The Clerk (to Whiting): a
solicitor will be assigned to conduct your defence.
Whiting was then taken below.
Folkestone
Express 9-7-1938
Local News
When
William Whiting (38), a labours, of Dover Street, Folkestone. charged with the
wilful murder of Mrs. Phyllis May Spiers, appeared before the Folkestone
magistrates on Tuesday, he was represented by Mr. Lloyd Bunco, a Folkestone
solicitor. Whiting had been remanded eight days before, and
the short time he was before the magistrates on Tuesday was taken up with
formalities. He was ultimately remanded in custody until next Monday, when it
is possible that the case might be opened and some evidence taken.
The
public portion of the Court was crowded, many people having waited since 9 a.m.
in the rain. There was a large crowd outside the Town Hall half- an-hour before
the case was due to commence. One of the women who occupied leading places in
the queue fainted, and was taken into the Town Hall, where she received
attention.
The
Magistrates were Courcillor R.G. Wood, Alderman G. Spurgen, Mr. L.G. . Collins,
Mrs. Saunders and Alderman J.W. Stainer.
The
Chief Constable (Mr. A.S. Beesley) said he was asking for another remand. He
understood the Director of Public Prosecutions would be ready on Wednesday in
next week.
The
Magistrates’ Clerk (Mr. C. Rootes) said he did not think that was the most
convenient day. He thought it would be bettor perhaps to remand the prisoner
until Tuesday, unless the Director could commence on Monday. Continuing,
he said he thought it would be better perhaps to commence the case the week
commencing 18th July, and then it could be taken from day to day if
so desired. They had to consider the justices available - the justices who
started the case had to be available.
The
Chairman, in reply to a query by Mr. Bunce, said the justices had decided that
counsel should defend the prisoner.
The Chairman said
Whiting would be
The
Chairman, in reply to a query by Mr. Bunce, said the Justices had decided that
counsel should defend the prisoner.
The
Chairman said Whiting would be remanded until Monday.
Whiting:
I have an application to make. Can I have my letters and photos in possession
of the police?
The
Clerk: I do not think the magistrates have any power over that.
The
Chief Constable said they were personal to Whiting, and he thought he would
have no difficulty in complying with the request.
Folkestone
Herald 9-7-1938
Local News
The inquest
of Mrs. Phyllis May Spiers, who was found dead near Caesar’s Camp, Folkestone,
on May 26th with a green scarf tied tightly round her neck, was
further adjourned at the resumed inquest at the Town Hall, Folkestone,
yesterday.
The Coroner
(Mr. G. W. Haines) told the jury that under section 20 of the Coroners'
Amendment Act, 1927, where a person was charged with murder they had to adjourn
the inquest until the completion of the criminal proceedings. He therefore
proposed further to adjourn the inquest until October 31st. It might
be that the jury might not have to come again. The Coroner mentioned that a man
had been charged before the police court with murder. Mr. Lloyd
Bunce, solicitor, was present during the brief proceedings.
Local News
William
Whiting, 38, a labourer, of Dover Street, Folkestone, was again remanded, when
he appeared ai the Folkestone Police Court on Tuesday charged with the murder,
on or about May 23rd last, of Phyllis May Spiers. Mrs. Spiers,
a 22 year old Folkestone woman, was found dead at the foot of the hills near
Caesar’s Camp on the evening of May 26th.
Councillor
R.G. Wood again presided on the Bench, and sitting with him were Alderman G.
Spurgen, Mr. L.G.A. Collins, Alderman J.W. Stainer and Mrs. R.L.T. Saunders.
When the
case was called Whiting did not appear immediately from the cells and the Clerk
(Mr. C. Rootes) said prisoner was now represented by Mr. Lloyd Bunce and no
doubt the delay was caused by Mr. Bunce interviewing him.
After
Whiting had been brought into the court, the Chief Constable (Mr. A.S. Beesley)
said as he told the Magistrates last week be would ask for a further remand
that day. He understood that the Director of Public Prosecutions would be
ready by Wednesday of next week to proceed with the case.
The Clerk
said he did not think that was the most convenient date for the Magistrates.
The Chief
Constable said it might be possible to start the case on the Tuesday and then
remand for a further week.
The Clerk:
To the week beginning July 18th and then take the case during the
week from day to day. The Clerk added that they had to consider the question of the Justices
being available.
Mr. Bunce
said he gathered the Justices were agreeable to Whiting being represented by
counsel in that court.
The Chairman
said they had given a certificate to that effect.
Whiting was
then remanded until Monday next.
Prisoner
asked if he could have his letters and photos which were in the possession of
the police.
The Clerk: I
am afraid that is not a matter for the Justices to decide.
The Chief
Constable said they were personal and he did not think he would have any
difficulty in complying with the request.
Folkestone
Express 16-7-1938
Local News
When the case against William
Whiting, aged
38, a labourer, of Dover Street, charged with the wilful murder on or about May
23rd of Mrs. Phyllis May Spiers, a Folkestone, woman, was opened the
Folkestone Police Court on Monday, Mr. B.H. Waddy prosecuting on behalf of
the Director of Public Prosecutions, said “The motive, to put it in one word,
was revenge”. Mrs. Spiers was found strangled at the foot of Caesar’s Camp on
the 26th May, her body being almost completely covered by her coat.
Whiting had been twice formally
remanded, and the whole of Monday was occupied in hearing Mr. Waddy’s opening, and five witnesses, two of whom
were Sir Bernard Spilsbury and Dr. Roche Lynch. The Magistrates, after a
sitting of close upon five hours, again remanded Whiting until Monday next when
the case will be continued on the following days until all the evidence is
heard.
There was a large number of
exhibits in connection with the case, and they included framed portions of a
tree and a rough fence which had attached to it barbed wire. The large framed
exhibit was placed on the side of the magisterial bench.
The Magistrates were Mr. R.G.
Wood, Alderman G. Spurgen, Mr. L.G.A. Collins, Alderman J.W. Stainer and Mrs.
A.M. Saunders.
Mr. B. H. Waddy and Mr. F.
Donal-Barry, barristers, appeared to prosecute on behalf of the Director of Public Prosecutions, and
Mr. J. Stuart Daniel (instructed by Mr. Lloyd Bunce) represented Whiting. Seated at
the table with the officials were Chief
Inspector Parker, and Det. Sergt. Skardon,
of Scotland Yard, who have been engaged with the Chief Constable (Mr. A.S.
Beesley) and the Folkestone Police in the inquiries in connection with the
case.
There was another large
attendance of the public in the Court, but not so large as on Whiting’s two
previous appearances.
Whiting was provided with a
chair in the dock, but at first he said he did not require it, and stood during
the opening statement by the prosecuting counsel and the hearing of the earlier
evidence
Mr. Waddy said he was instructed
to prosecute. Before he opened the facts of the case he wanted to say he had in
Court two gentlemen who would be witnesses, Chief Inspector Parker and Det.
Sergt. Skardon. Chief Inspector Parker was in charge of the case, and it was absolutely
necessary that he should be there to instruct him. With regard to Det. Sergt.
Skardon he would be most useful to him in handling and producing the numerous
exhibits he would have to put in. He suggested that he should remain in Court
except when Chief Inspector Parker was giving evidence. No other witnesses were
in Court.
Mr. Stuart Daniel said he did
not object to that.
Mr. Waddy said on Thursday, the
26th May, somewhere about six o'clock in the afternoon, a Folkestone
youth was birds’ nesting in a coppice at the foot of Castle Hill near Caesar’s
Camp. Hidden in the undergrowth in that coppice he found the dead body of
Phyllis May Spiers. He would call before them a body of medical evidence and
other witnesses, who would tell them what was the condition and what was found
in the immediate locality, and the evidence would, he thought, lead them to the
conclusion that this girl met her death on May 23rd, which was a
Monday, and that she met her death in this wav. She was rendered unconscious by
blows in the fact and she was strangled bv hands, manual strangulation, that
after her death there was put round her throat and tied tightly a green scarf
with white spots on it twice round her neck, pulled tight and knotted. There
were one or two possible reasons for tying that green scarf round the girl’s
throat. One possibly was that the person who did it desired to make assurance
doubly sure and make quite sure she died. The other possibility, which was
one which would have to be considered, was that that scarf was put round her throat in the hopes that it might
lead to the belief that the girl committed suicide by tying it round her throat
herself. If the girl’s death, which in the view of the prosecution, took place
in a little clearing in the coppice, which was visible up the hill, her body
was dragged by the feet for some thirty feet or ten yards to the place where it
was ultimately found. It was dragged down hill; it is quite steep, and through
a barrier or an obstruction which existed between the place between the
little clearing where, in the view of the prosecution, she died and the place
where the body was found, that obstruction was a very rough
obstruction and consisted of dead branches which were roughly fastened to a
leaning post by means of barbed wire. Eventually it would appear that it was
probably there to guard a bog which was at the foot of the hill to which cattle
might possibly get. A great deal of importance might attach to that
obstruction. That barrier had a gap in it through which it was possible for
anyone to go. The
obstruction was by the side of the side of the Court, and the Magistrates would
see it had been framed. “You
will see”,-Mr. Waddy proceeded, “there is a stout post leaning to
the left and there are a number of branches, and you can see upon them some pieces
of rusted barbed wire. As you look at that you will imagine that the ground you
are on is a little higher and that from the other side it goes down hill.
Again, the case for the prosecution is that the body of this girl was dragged
by the murderer
feet first through the gap, the murderer coming backwards on hands and knees. There will
be given in evidence, certain evidence of a comb, certain hairs, and so on,
but what is of great importance as far as that gap is concerned is that there
is a piece of barbed wire to the right-hand side, which, if you were coming
through the gap backwards on your hands and knees, would be about where your
left shoulder would come. We are right in thinking that, if the murderer dragged the
body through on his hands and knees there would be every likelihood that the
point of that barbed wire would probably catch in the clothing which covered
his left shoulder. Some ten yards below that point where the body was found,
and opposite the body, was the girl’s handbag. In the girl’s handbag was a torn
piece of a black and white scarf, quite different to the scarf knotted round
her neck. The rest of that scarf had vanished. That piece of scarf was a
portion of the scarf which we shall prove was given to her by a man
friend, and she was wearing it on the morning she met her death. It would
appear probable after her death her assailant tied her own scarf round her
neck and in pulling it tight possibly ripped the end off. He then probably put
the green scarf round her neck and put her own scarf in her handbag. Having put
it in position he was minded to get rid of the torn scarf and took it out of
the handbag again, but left behind the little bit, which he may not have
noticed. Another feature of the handbag was that there was riot found in it a
little green purse which,
it would be proved to the magistrates, was owned and carried by her. It would
appear probable the assailant, in taking out the major portion of the torn
scarf, took out the green purse as well, and might have put them in his
pocket”. Those were the deductions that he (Mr. Waddy) thought might be drawn
from the evidence which would be called before them.
As to what was found at the site
of the murder one had got to see in what way that evidence pointed to the
accused as being the man who commuted the murder. “The first pointer”, he
continued, “which points to the accused as having committed the murder is the
evidence that on the afternoon of May 23rd he walked with this girl
from somewhere in the centre of the town up over the golf links and right
across it. There is a road from the right leading to the scene of the crime. So
far I am in a position to say that the accused has made a statement in which
his own story is that on the afternoon of May 23rd he walked with this
girl over the golf course.The next pointer is that on May 31st they
came into possession of everything he had on him. He was wearing a jacket. That
jacket just over the left shoulder has a right angle tear, torn upwards. The
evidence will be that the tear is exactly the type of tear that would he made
by the barbed wire in that obstruction if he were going through the obstruction
backwards. A police officer went through that gap later, and his jacket was
torn in exactly the same spot. In one of the accused’s jacket pockets there
were certain hairs, and I am calling evidence to show that those hairs were
exactly the same as those which came from the head of the dead girl. In
addition to a comb there was found in his possession a lady’s little green zip-fastener
purse which was similar to one the dead girl carried in her bag. That is
really another pointer. The third pointer which is perhaps more important than
any of the others is the scarf which was tied round the girl’s neck. It is a
very distinctive scarf. It is a green one with white spots upon it. According
to what the prisoner told the police he has never had one like it and that it
is not his”.
He (Mr. Waddy) thought he might
call before them a host of witnesses of every kind who would tell them that
they had seen Whiting wearing this green scarf with the white spots, and that
he was wearing it as recently as May 20th. If that scarf is his, how
came it tied tightly round the neck of the dead girl? In public houses the
accused, in unguarded moments, had made remarks which were only consistent
with an admission that he had strangled a blonde girl, and that the dead girl
was a girl who had had her hair bleached. They would hear not one, hut several
witnesses, who would speak to similar remarks. As the Bench were aware, there
was no burden upon the Crown to prove motive for a crime like this, but, of
course, if the Crown is in possession of evidence which points to a motive for
such a crime the Crown lays such evidence before the Court. In this case they
are in possession of evidence which would be laid before the Court pointing to
the motive for this man murdering this girl. The motive, in a word, is revenge.
Whiting knew and was for some time associated with a young woman named Rose
Woodbridge. They lived together for a period, and parted shortly before Christmas last. She
left him. There could be no doubt that he was not only, and was still,
infatuated with Rose Woodbridge, but his mind was filled with an obsession of
resentment against the person who came between him and Rose Woodbridge and
caused that separation. Evidence will be called before the Court to show what
his feelings were with regard to Rose Woodbridge arid what his feelings were
towards the person, whoever it might have been, who caused him to lose Rose
Woodbridge”. There would also be evidence
before them, both from witnesses, and again on his own statement, to show that
he firmly believed that Phyllis May Spiers, the girl who was murdered, was the
person who had caused his separation from Rose Woodbridge.“The prosecution
say”, Mr. Wadcly, continuing, said “that here is a man who hated Phyllis for
what she had done, or what he thought she had done, in parting him from the
woman with whom he was in love”. The only other matter he had to mention was
that the accused was arrested on June
26th, and that when he was arrested and charged he said “I am not
guilty”.
Arthur Charles Spiers, 29,
Sidney Street, Bexhill-on-Sea, a milk roundsman, said he was shown the dead
body of a woman at the mortuary. That woman was his wife, Mrs. Phyllis May
Spiers, aged 22 years. His wife was the woman on the left of the photograph
produced. He also recognised his wife in the second and third photographs
produced. He was married to his wife on the 11th April, 1932. Her
name then was Phyllis May Minter. They lived together for some time, parting on
the 13th April, 1934. He last saw her alive about four years ago at Hastings,
after she had left him. He had recently commenced divorce proceedings against
her.
Kenneth George Andrews, 23,
Ethelbert Road. Folkestone, a roundsman said on Thursday, 26th May,
after he had finished work he went up to Caesar’s Camp and into a coppice at
the foot of the hill to get birds’ eggs. He started hunting for eggs and while
there he saw something that looked like a bundle. He thought that that was
approximately about six o’clock in the evening. He looked at the bundle and saw
that it was a woman laying there, covered over with what looked like a dark
green coat. He could just see the hair and part of the naked leg sticking out.
He shouted, thinking there might be someone asleep, and touched the bundle with
a stick. He then realised that it was riot a sleeping person. He went, away
from the place and a little later spoke to a police officer. Some little time
after tie was taken in a car back to the place with Chief Inspector Hollands
and Det. Con. Bates and took them to the spot. The body was in the same
position.
Chief Inspector Hollands said at
about 6.20 p.m. on the 26th May he received a telephone message and
in consequence went with the last witness and Det. Con. Bates to the foot of
the hills between Caesar’s Camp and Sugar Loaf Hill. The lad took them to a spot where a
body was lying. The first photograph in
the book showed a view of the coppice looking towards Sugar Loaf Hill. The
second showed a view of the coppice from the hill above. About the centre of
the picture there was a clearing. He found the body near the foot of a big tree
shown in the picture. Picture No 12 in the book showed the body as he first saw
it. The last photograph in the book showed where the body was found after it ha
been removed. The branches-of trees ear the spot to some extent overhung, but
did not completely cover it overhead. Later on the same evening the coat
was removed from the body and photograph No. 13 showed the position of the body
with the coat off. The next photograph showed the appearance of the body from
the other side after the coat had been removed. Photograph 14 also showed a
lady’s handbag. When he first went there he lifted the coat from off the face
and smelt putrifaction. She was quite cold, her arms were stiff, slightly bent,
her fingers were half clenched; nothing in the hands and they were stiff. The
legs were covered in scratches going in all directions, and these were fresh
and unhealed. He noticed her hair was drawn out straight from beyond the head.
Her head was pointing towards the field and was slightly downhill. Her face was
quite a normal colour and her tongue was slightly protruding between her
teeth. Blood issued from the left nostril when he moved her head. The coat that
was over the body was sodden wet. There was heavy rain on Wednesday, 25th,
and on Tuesday it rained a little between 1.30 and 2.30 p.m. It was fine in the
morning on Wednesday, the rain being in the afternoon, and Monday was fine. He
noticed that there was a little dirt splashed on the hands of the body, as
though from heavy rain. The handbag showed rain, marks and the ground all round
showed signs of heavy rain. Her frock was pulled up above the level of the
breasts in front and right up to the shoulder blades at the back. Dry brumbies
and leaves were in the clothing at the back and they were quite dry. She was
wearing a pair of knickers, which were torn badly, and appeared to be a new
pair. In all the clothing were brambles and leaves, which were also dry. He
noticed the girl’s shoes, which were damp, but had no mud on them, and there
was not any mud on her clothing. The body and clothing gave every appearance of
the body having been dragged along by the feet while lying on the back. The
ground underneath the body was dry when it was turned over. In the glade where
she was lying there was no sign of a struggle and near where she was lying
there was a rough footpath, rising sharply from her head towards Caesar’s Camp.
The ground of the path was chalky and it was slightly damp. At the top of the
footpath there was a barrier across it. The branches (produced) was the
barrier. Round the neck of the body was a green spotted scarf (produced). The
scarf was twisted round the neck twice and knotted as in the exhibit. The knot
was on the right of the windpipe and was very tight indeed.
At this stage the Court
adjourned for lunch.
Mr. Waddy, on resuming, said he
wished to ask that Dr. Barrett, the Police Surgeon, should be present in Court
when Sir Bernard Spilsbury and Dr. Roche Lynch gave evidence.
Mr. Stuart Daniel said he
objected to that. Dr. Barrett made the first examination and it seemed that the
opinion of the cause of death might have been changed since then.
The Chairman said the
magistrates did not see why Dr. Barrett should not remain in Court.
Sir Bernard Henry Spilsbury.
hon. pathologist to the Home Office, said that on the afternoon of Wednesday, 1st
June, he made a post mortem examination at tie Folkestone mortuary on the body
of a woman. She was a well nourished woman, about 5ft. 4½ins. in height. Death stiffening was
absent. There was no lividity in the face or lips and no tiny haemmorhages on
the eyes or the skin of the face. He saw the mark of the ligature which
encircled the neck at the level of the larynx. It was pale and there was no
injury of the skin beneath it. It was about one and a quarter inches broad in
front, three quarters of an inch broad at the side and slightly more than an
inch broad at the back. Sir Bernard Spilsbury then described a number of
external bruises he found on the face, including the jaw. Along the left collar
bone, immediately above the inner end of the right collar bone, on the
outer side of the right upper arm, on the inner side of the same limb, on the
inner side of the right forearm, on the front of the left shoulder, on the
upper part of the front of the arm, on the outer side of the right hip and on
the thigh.
There were many scratches in the
skin, distributed widely, through the right hip and on both thighs and legs,
and others on the back of the trunk up to the lower part of the shoulders.
There were also scratches on the back of the right forearm, one on the front of
the left forearm one across the knuckles of the left hand. In addition he also found the following
bruises, which were not visible on the surface, but were visible on cutting
through the skin. There was considerable area of bruising of the spine in the
lower dorsal region and a bruise one inch in diameter at the same level and one
and a half inches to the right. There was a bruise one inch in diameter to the
right of the spine in the upper dorsal region. On internal examination there was a small bruise on the upper part of the
back of the neck and another on the left side of the forehead. The skull and
the brain, with its covering and blood vessels, were healthy and free from
injury. On dissecting the neck there was bruising of the left sterno mastoid
muscle at its lower end. There was also slight bruising of the corresponding
muscle on the right side at the lower end and bruising of the left muscle
higher up at the level of the lower jaw. There was a bruise at the upper side
of the left main cartilage of the larynx and bruising on either side of that
cartilage at the same level. There was slight bruising behind the larynx and
there was bruising along the upper edge of the same cartilage which extended
upwards. The bone was free from injury. The inner surface of the larynx and
trachea was reddened. The tonsils and the glands in the upper part of the neck
were very congested, and other organs in the body generally were congested but
healthy, and the blood throughout the body was fluid and dark in colour. The
mark of the ligature which he found was consistent with the scarf (produced)
having been tied tightly round the neck. The deceased was a perfectly healthy
woman. The general changes of death from asphyxia were present, namely, the
congested organs and the dark fluid condition of the blood. The asphyxia was
not produced by the scarf which was found tied tightly round the neck when the
body was found.
Mr.
Waddy: If it had been tied tightly round the neck during life what would have
been the condition?
Sir Bernard Spilsbury: The face would have
been very livid and there would have been tiny haemorrhages in the whites of
the eyes and the skin of the face. The face must have been livid after death as
long as the ligature remained in position.
What conclusion do you come to
as to when the ligature was applied? - It was applied after death.
The bruising, he continued, on
the left side at the back of the larynx indicated that death was due to
strangulation by the hand. The absence of bruising and abrasions
on the skin of the neck suggested that deceased had been rendered unconscious
before she was strangled. If a woman was conscious while being strangled she
would be likely to struggle violently. The number and distribution of the
bruises over the body indicated that the deceased received a number of blows
and some of these bruises, and especially those on the face, might have
rendered her unconscious. Some of the smaller bruises on the arms might have
been produced by forcible restraint and others on the back of the neck and
front by her being pressed firmly on rough ground during the course of the
struggle. The bruises were all recent and of the same age and were produced
shortly before death.
Mr. Waddy: Will you speak as to
the possibility of death having been produced by suicide?
Sir Bernard Spilsbury: It is
quite out of the question. Proceeding, he said with regard to the scratches on
the body they were consistent with the body having been dragged over and
through brambles. Assuming that the body was found in a coppice on May 26th
and which was not fully exposed to the sun and assuming that there was an odour
of putrifaction when the body was found and that rigor mortis was passing off,
it was a strong presumption that death occurred not less than three days before
she was found. It would be consistent with her meeting her death on the
afternoon of May 23rd.
Cross-examined by Mr. Stuart
Daniel, Sir Bernard Spilsbury said the absence of putrifaction might mean that
the woman had been dead anything short of three or four days. The death
from the stopping of an artery would not account for all the signs he
found.
Dr. G. Roche Lynch, official
analyst to the Home Office, said that he received the jacket (produced) from
Chief Inspector Parker and examined it. At the back of the garment, eight
inches from the top seam and three inches from the left side seam, then was a
tear. The two parts of the tear formed a right angle, the point of which was
directed down and towards the right. The fabric of the garment had been torn
and not cut. In his opinion, the tear had been produced by some rigid, round,
sharp-pointed article perforating the fabric and whilst in that position the
jacket had been moved obliquely downward and to the right, so that one part of
the tear was directed upwards and the other to the left away from the point of
entrance. The tear was in the cloth of the jacket only, the lining being
undamaged. A tear of that type was almost invariably produced when such a
garment was caught in barbed wire, but, of course, a similar sharp-pointed
article, if firmly pressed, could cause similar damage. In the photograph
(produced) of a man with a coat which was torn, the coat was torn in the same
position as the enlarged photograph of the tear (produced). Looking at the
point of the barbed wire in the lower part of the exhibit (produced), if a man
went through the gap backwards the point of the barb could produce the tear
which he found. He received from Chief Inspector Parker two tubes of
semi-liquid material, which appeared to be the stomach contents, which, with
the exception of small lumps of fat, showed almost complete digestion. Assuming
that those stomach contents were taken from the deceased the condition of them
would indicate that some hours had elapsed since the taking of the last meal.
On the 8th July he received from Det. Sergt. Skardon a packet of a
certain butter. The tow kinds of fat that were found in the stomach and the
butter showed a general similarity. He had examined the green spotted scarf (produced)
and observed from one end of the scarf signs of wear. At one end, in places,
there appeared to be impressions in the fabric. There was a very slight sign of
wear in the other side and three small holes. He saw the pair of braces
(produced) and the marks on one end of the scarf could have been made by the
teeth of the clip of the braces if the end of the scarf had been pushed in
between the clip and the brace material. If a man wore the scarf round his neck
the tails of the scarf would have reached to the clip of the braces. The marks
could not have been caused by a second pair of braces (produced), which also
belonged to the prisoner. He had received some hairs from Chief Inspector
Parker. The hairs bearing certain numbers closely resembled the hairs in slide
No. 124. He thought that they were probably from the same head. Two of the
hairs came from the inside pocket of the jacket and closely resembled those in
the slide, No. 124.
The Chairman announced that
Whiting would be remanded until Monday.
Folkestone
Herald 16-7-1938
Local News
The case against William Whiting, 38 years old Folkestone labourer, who
is charged with the murder of Phyllis May Spiers, aged 22, of Folkestone, who
was found dead at the foot of the hills near Caesar’s Camp on Thursday, May 26th,
was opened by the Crown at the Folkestone Police Court on Monday.
Whiting was making his third appearance before the Magistrates, and after
an all-day sitting the hearing was adjourned until next Monday, when further
evidence will be taken.
Prosecuting for the Director of Public
Prosecutions, Mr. B. H. Waddy, in his opening, suggested revenge as a motive.
Among the witnesses called last Monday were Sir Bernard Spilsbury and Dr. Roche
Lynch.
Mr. B. H. Waddy prosecuted for the Director of Public Prosecutions with
Mr. F. Donal-Barry, of the Director’s department, while Mr. J. Stuart Daniel,
instructed by Mr. H. Lloyd Bunce, representing Whiting.
The case was heard by Councillor R.G. Wood (presiding), Alderman G.
Spurgen, Mr. L.G.A. Collins, Alderman J.W. Stainer and Mrs. R.L.T. Saunders.
A large
number of exhibits were in court. The public part of the court was
again crowded, some of those present having waited over two hours to obtain
admittance.
Opening the
case, Mr. Waddy said he was instructed by the Director of Public Prosecutions
to prosecute Whiting, who was charged with having murdered a young woman named
Phyllis May Spiers on or about May 23rd last. At the
present moment he had m court two gentlemen who would be witnesses, Chief Inspector
Parker and Det. Sergt. Skardon. Chief Inspector Parker was in charge of the
case and he thought it was absolutely necessary that he should be present in
court. With regard to Det. Sergt. Skardon, he would be most useful to him (Mr.
Waddy) in handling and producing numerous exhibits and he would suggest that he
also remained in court.
Mr. Daniel
said he did not object.
Mr. Waddy
said on Thursday, May 26th, somewhere about 6 o’clock in the evening
a Folkestone youth was birds’ nesting in a coppice at the foot of Castle Hill
near Caesar’s Camp, when hidden in the undergrowth of the coppice he found the
dead body of Phyllis May Spiers. “I shall call before you a body of
medical evidence and other witnesses who will tell you what was the condition
of that body”, continued Mr. Waddy, “and what was found in the immediate
locality of the body. That evidence should, I think, lead you to this conclusion - that the
girl met her death on May 23rd which was a Monday; that she met her
death in this way - she was rendered unconscious by blows in the face and she
was then strangled by hand, manual strangulation. Then, after her death, there
was put round her throat and tied tightly a green scarf with white spots on it.
It was put twice round her neck, pulled and knotted, but that was done after
death. There are one or two possible reasons for tying the green scarf round
the girl’s throat. One possibility is that the person who did it desired to
make assurance doubly sure and make sure that she died. The other
possibility, one which will have to be considered, is that it was put round her
throat in the hope that it might lead to the belief that the girl had committed
suicide by tying it round her throat herself”. Mr. Waddy, continuing, said after
the girl’s death, which, in the view of the prosecution, took place in a little
clearing in this coppice which was visible to anyone up the hill, her body was
dragged by the feet some 30 feet to the place where it was ultimately found. It was
dragged down quite a steep hill and through a barrier or obstruction which
existed between the place where they said she died and the place her body was
found. That obstruction was a very rough obstruction and consisted of dead
branches which were roughly fastened to a leaning post by pieces of barbed
wire. Mr. Waddy said that he would show photographs and a plan of the place.
The obstruction, he added, was probably put there to guard a bog which was at
the foot of the hill and to which cattle might get. A great deal of importance
might attach to the obstruction. Mr. Waddy said on one side of the court
the Magistrates would see the obstruction referred to framed. There was a stout
post and to the left there was a number of branches and they could see upon
them some pieces of old rusted barbed wire. As they looked at it, and if they
imagined the ground they were on was higher and that from the other side it
went downhill again, the case for the prosecution was that this girl was
dragged feet first through the gap, the murderer going backwards on his hands
and knees. There would be given in evidence certain finds which were made in
the locality. For instance there was a comb, certain hairs, and so on. What was of
great importance so far as the gap he had mentioned was concerned was that
there was a piece of barbed wire on the right hand side which if a person were
going through backwards on their hands and knees would be just about where
one’s left shoulder would come. If prosecution were right in thinking
that the murderer dragged the body through the gap, there would be every
likelihood of a part of that barbed wire catching in the clothing which covered
his left shoulder. Some ten yards below the opening the body was found. Beside the body was
a girl’s handbag and in it was a torn piece of a black and white scarf, quite
different from the one found knotted round her neck. The rest of
the scarf had vanished. It was a scarf which had been given to her by a man
friend and she was wearing it on the very morning that she met her death. It
was a comparatively flimsy thing and it would appear probable that after her
death her assailant tied the dead woman’s own scarf round her neck and in pulling
it tight possibly ripped the end off. The suggestion was that he then put the green scarf round her neck and
stuffed the torn scarf into her handbag, but after placing the handbag by the
body he was minded to get rid of the tom scarf and took it out of the handbag
again, leaving behind the little piece which he might not have noticed. Another important feature of the handbag was that there was not found in
it a little green purse which this girl owned and carried, continued Mr.
Waddy. It would appear probable that the assailant in taking out the major
portion of the torn scarf possibly took out the green purse as well and may
have put both in his pocket. Those were deductions which he thought
might be drawn from the evidence which would be called before them as to what
was found on the scene of the murder. One had then got to see in what
way that evidence pointed to the accused as being the man who committed the
murder. Witnesses would fall into groups and he would try as far as he could to
call them according to the groups they fell into. The first pointer, which pointed
to the accused as having been the man who committed the murder, was evidence
that on May 23rd Whiting walked with this girl from somewhere in the
centre of the town to the golf links and across those links. Not only would he be in a position to call witnesses to say that they saw
Whiting on that part of the walk, but Whiting himself had made a statement in
which he said that on that afternoon he walked with the dead girl to and over
the golf course. When he got to the end of the golf links, if he and the girl turned
right it would lead them to the foot of the other hill (Caesar’s Camp) where
there was a stile. If one got over the stile and walked 200 or 300 yards along
the foot of the hill they came to the coppice where the body was found. Mr. Waddy
said he would call a witness who would say that he saw these two go up that
road, losing them to view just by the bend where the stile was. The next pointer which pointed to Whiting was a body of evidence which
would deal with his clothing. On May 31st
the police came into possession of everything Whiting had on him. Included in
the clothing was a jacket, and just over the left shoulder blade of that jacket
was a right-angled tear tom upwards, and the evidence would be that the tear
was exactly the type of tear which would be made on the barb of the wire in the
obstruction if he were going through it backwards. One
interesting piece of evidence which corroborated that view would be this.
During the course of the investigations a police officer went through the gap
backwards and his jacket was tom open by the barbed wire. They would see both
jackets and see that the tears were similar and in similar places. The case for
the prosecution would be that the tear which was found on prisoner’s jacket on
May 31st was exactly consistent with it having been made by the
point of that barbed wire. Further, a more detailed examination of the coat showed that in one of
the jacket pockets there were certain hairs. He was calling evidence to say
that those hairs were exactly the same as the hairs from the head of the dead
girl. The significance of that was in connection with what he had already
told them about the tom scarf, the portion of which was found in the handbag. If they were
right in thinking the dead woman’s own scarf was used and torn, and then placed
in her handbag afterwards to be removed in order to get rid of it and stuffed
in the man’s pocket, they would be likely to find in the man’s pocket some of
the girl’s hairs. There was also found in Whiting’s possession what was odd for a man to
carry - a lady’s small green zip fastened purse which a witness would say was
exactly the same as the dead girl used to own and carry. The
suggestion was that possibly it came out of her handbag at the same time as the
piece of her own scarf and got into the murderer’s possession. The third pointer, which was perhaps more important than any of the
others, was the scarf which was round the dead girl’s neck. It was a
very distinctive scarf, a green one with white spots on it, and according to what prisoner told the police he had never had it. Further,
he said that he had never had one like it and it was not his. But he (Mr.
Waddy) would be calling before them, he thought he might describe them as a
host of witnesses, who would tell them that they had seen Whiting frequently
wearing the green scarf with the white spots and that he was seen wearing it as
recently as May 20th, three days before he was seen in the company
of this girl. If that scarf were his, how came it to be tied tightly round the neck of
the dead girl?
Mr. Waddy
said so far he had been telling them of those things which had been found which
pointed to Whiting being the murderer. There was another branch of evidence in
respect of which he would call witnesses and they would say that after the body
had been found the accused, in unguarded moments in public houses, had made remarks to them which were only consistent
with an admission that he had strangled a blonde girl. The dead girl had had
her hair bleached. They were remarks made in unguarded moments. That was the major point of the evidence. As they knew, there was no
burden on the Crown to prove a motive in a crime like that, but in that case
they were in possession of evidence pointing to a motive for Whiting murdering
this girl. This motive, to put it in one word, was
revenge. The accused knew and was for some time
associating with a young woman named Rose Woodridge. They lived together for a
period but parted shortly before last Christmas. The girl left Whiting. There could be no doubt that he was, and still was, infatuated with Rose
Woodridge and his mind was filled with an obsession of resentment against the
person who came between him and this woman and caused that separation.
Evidence would be called to show quite clearly what accused’s feelings
were with regard to Rose Woodridge and what his feelings were to the person who
caused him to lose her. There would also be evidence before them both from
witnesses and Whiting’s own statement to show that he firmly believed Mrs.
Spiers was the person who had caused his separation from Rose Woodridge. The
prosecution said here was a man who hated Phyllis May Spiers for what she had
done, or he thought she had done, in parting him from the woman with whom he
was in love. It only remained for him to say that
after Whiting had been arrested on June 25th and charged he said “I
am not guilty”.
The first
witness was Arthur Charles Spiers, 29, Sydney Street, Bexhill-on-Sea, a milk
roundsman, who said that on May 27th he went to the mortuary at
Folkestone and there saw the body of a woman whom he identified as his wife.
She was 22 years old. Witness then identified his wife in three photographs. Two were of his
wife with another woman and one with a man. He added that they were married on
April 11th, 1932 and his wife’s name was then Phyllis May Minter.
They lived together for some time, but parted on April 13th, 1934. He last saw
her alive about four years ago at Hastings by an appointment. That was after she had left
him. He had recently commenced divorce proceedings against her.
Mr. Daniel
reserved his cross-examination.
Kenneth
George Andrews, 23, Ethelbert Read, Folkestone, said on Thursday, May 26th,
after he had finished work he went to Caesar’s Camp and entered a coppice at
the foot of the hill. He was looking for birds’ eggs. “I was
looking for eggs in the coppice and while I was there I saw something that
looked like a bundle”, continued witness. “It must have been 6 p.m. I went to
look at the bundle and after I had had a good look I saw it was a woman. The body
was covered over with a dark green coat. I could see the hair and a leg sticking out from underneath the coat. I shouted as I thought it might be somebody asleep, and touched it with a
stick, but did not interfere with the position of the body. I then realised
it was not a sleeping person and went away from the place. A little later that
evening I spoke to a police officer. I was taken in a car back to the place
with Inspector Hollands and Det. Constable Bates, and took them to the spot
where I had found the woman”.
Mr. Daniel
again reserved his cross- examination.
Chief
Inspector W. Hollands said at about 6.30 p.m. on May 26th he received
a telephone message. In consequence he went in a car and picked up the last
witness and Det. Constable Bates, the Coroner’s Officer. He then went to a
coppice at the foot of the hills between Caesar’s Camp and Sugar Loaf Hill. After
entering the coppice Andrews took him to the spot where there was a body lying. Witness then examined a series of photographs of the place where the body
was found. The first was a view of the coppice looking towards Sugar Loaf Hill,
the next a view of the coppice from the hill above. About the centre of the coppice, said witness, there was a clearing where
a figure could be seen lying. He found the body in line with a tree shown on
the left but further down the bank. Witness
said photograph No. 12 showed the appearance of the body as he first found it
and was taken a little later the same evening. Photograph No. 15 showed the
place where the body was found after it had been removed. Overhead the branches to some extent overhung the glade but did not completely
cover it. Witness said later that same evening the coat
was removed from the body and photograph No. 13 showed the appearance of the
body with the coat off. The next photograph showed the appearance of the body
from the other side after the coat had been removed. It also showed lying near
the girl`s right hand a lady`s handbag which he found there. “When I first went
there I lifted the coat off the face and immediately smelt that the body was
putrefying”, witness continued. “She weas quite cold, her arms were quite stiff
and slightly bent and her fingers were half clenched and there was nothing in
the hands. The legs were covered in scratches going in all directions. The scratches were fresh and unhealed. The hair was dragged down beyond
the head. If the body had been in an upright position the hair would have been
above her head. The head was pointing towards the fields and slightly downhill. Her face was a normal colour and was turned to the right. The tongue was
slightly protruding and just showing between the teeth”. Witness said the condition of the coat was sodden and wet. There had been
some heavy rain on Wednesday, May 21st and it rained a little on
Tuesday between 1.30 and 2.30 p.m. On the Monday (May 23rd) the
weather had been fine. He noticed that there was a little dirt splashed up on the hands as if
from heavy rain. There were also rain marks on the handbag. The ground all
round the body showed signs of heavy rain. Dry bramble and leaves were in the
clothing at the back. The shoes were damp, but there was no mud on them. Nor was there any mud
on her clothing. The condition of the body and clothing gave the appearance that it had
been dragged along by the feet while lying on the back. The ground
underneath the body was dry. There was no sign of a struggle in the glade where
she had been lying. Near where she was lying there was a rough footpath rising
from the spot towards Caesar`s Camp. The ground of the footpath was a chalky
clay and when they found the body it was damp. Towards th top of the footpath
there was a barrier of branches and barbed wire as produced in Court. A green
spotted scarf (produced) was found around the neck. The scarf was twisted twice
round the neck and knotted twice. The knot was on the right of the wind pipe.
The scarf was tied very tightly.
Mr. Waddy
said he proposed calling Sir Bernard Spilsbury and Dr. Roche Lynch, and he
would like Dr. Barrett, the local Police Surgeon, to be present in court while
they were giving their evidence.
Mr. Daniel
said he objected. Dr. Barrett made the first examination and it seemed that the
opinion as to the cause of death might have been slightly changed since then.
The Clerk
(Mr. C. Rootes) said it was very difficult to come to any decision without
knowing what any of the witnesses were going to say. The Bench were in the
dark.
The Chairman
(Councillor R.G. Wood) said the Magistrates saw no reason for excluding Dr.
Barrett from the Court during the hearing of the evidence.
Sir Bernard
Spilsbury, Honorary Pathologist to the Home Office, who then went into the
witness box, said on June 1st he made a post mortem examination at
the borough mortuary on the body of a oman pointed out to him by Dr. Barrett. He saw the
marks of a ligature which encircled the neck at the level of the larynx. It was
pale and there was no injury of the skin beneath it. It was about one and a
quarter inches broad at the front, three-quarters of an inch broad at the side
and slightly more than an inch broad at the back. Sir Bernard then gave evidence of
external injuries, which included a bruise across the bridge of the nose, two
bruises on the right side of the forehead close to the scalp, a bruise one and
a half inches long over the right low7er jaw, midway between the
point of the chin and the angle of the jaw. He said there were also two bruises
each about one and a quarter inches long and a third of an inch apart along the
left collar bone. On dissection those bruises were more extensive than was
apparent on the surface and involved the muscles immediately above and below
the collar bone. Another bruise was also found immediately above the inner end
of the right collar bone. There was a bruise half an inch in diameter on the
outer side of the right upper arm, and two similar bruises on the inner side.
There was a long bruise on the inner side of the right forearm about halfway
down. Witness gave evidence of other bruises and scratches, which Sir Bernard
said were distributed widely over the right hip and both sides and legs; also
others on the back of the trunk up to the lower part of the shoulders. There
were also scratches on the back of the right forearm, and one across the
knuckles of the left hand. He added that he found other bruises which were not
visible on the surface. The green scarf was produced and Sir Bernard said the
mark of the ligature he found was consistent with the scarf produced having
been tied tightly round the neck. Sir Bernard said the deceased was a perfectly
healthy woman. The general changes of death from asphyxia were present, mainly
the congested condition of the organs and the dark and fluid condition of the
blood. The asphyxia was not produced by the scarf which was tied tightly round
the neck when the body was found.
Mr. Waddy:
If it had been tied round the neck during life what would have been the
condition of the face?
Sir Bernard:
The face would have been livid and there would have been tiny haemorrhages in
the whites of the eyes and the skin of the face. The face must have been livid
after death as long as the ligature remained in position.
Mr. Waddy:
What conclusions do you draw as to when the ligature was applied?
Sir Bernard:
It was applied after death. Continuing, witness said the bruising
on the left side at the back of the larynx indicated that death was due to
strangulation by the hand. The absence of bruising and abrasions on the
skin of the neck suggested that deceased had been rendered unconscious before
she was strangled.
Mr. Waddy:
If a woman were conscious when she was being strangled by hand would she be likely to
struggle violently? - Yes.
Sir Bernard
said the number and distribution of bruises over the body indicated that
deceased received a number of blows and some of these, especially those on the
face, might have rendered her unconscious. Some of the smaller bruises on
the arm, added witness, might have been produced by forcible restraint and
others on the back of the neck and trunk by having been pressed firmly on a rough ground in the course of a struggle. The bruises were all
recent and of a same age, and were produced shortly before death.
Mr. Waddy: Can you speak as to the possibility of death having been produced
by suicide?
Sir Bernard: It is quite out of the question.
Continuing,
witness said the scratches could be accounted for if the body were dragged
through and over brambles to the place where it was found. It was a
strong presumption that death occurred not fewer than three days before the
body was found: it might have been longer. Assuming certain facts, it would
be consistent to presume that death took place on the afternoon of May 23rd.
Cross-examined by Mr. Stuart Daniel, Sir Bernard said the absence of
purification might mean that deceased had been dead anything short of three or
four days. Death by the stopping of an artery would not account for all the
signs that he found.
Dr. Roche
Lynch, official analyst to the Home Office, said the jacket produced he
received from Chief Inspector Parker. At the back of it eight inches
from the left side seam there was a tear. The two points of the tear formed a
right angle, the point of which was directed downwards and towards the right.
The fabric had been torn and not cut. In his opinion the tear had been
produced by some rigid, rounded and sharp pointed article, perforating the
fabric, and whilst in that position the jacket had been moved downwards and to
the right, so that one point of the tear was directed upwards and the other to the
left away from the point of entrance. The tear was in the cloth of the
jacket only, the lining being undamaged. A tear of that type was almost invariably
produced when such a garment was caught in barbed wire, but of course any
similar sharp-pointed article, if firmly fixed, could cause similar damage.
A photograph
of a man wearing a coat was put in.
Dr. Roche
Lynch said there was a tear in the coat of the man in a similar position to the
one in the jacket produced. Dr. Lynch next examined the exhibit in court
consisting of branches of a dead tree, a post and barbed wire, referred to as
“The obstruction” in counsel’s opening speech. Witness said looking at the
front of the exhibit he saw towards the right-hand side a piece of barbed wire
going round a bough and at the lowest point there was a barb. If a man wearing
the jacket he had seen were to go through the gap backwards the point of the
barb could cause the tear that he found. Continuing, Dr. Roche Lynch said he
received from Inspector Parker two tubes of semi-liquid material, which
appeared to be stomach contents. With the exception of small lumps of fat they
showed almost complete digestion.
Assuming the
stomach contents were taken from the deceased the condition would show that
some hours had elapsed since the last meal had been taken. The lumps of
fat were butter fat. On July 8th he received from Det. Sergt.
Skardon a packet of Blue Label butter. The lumps of fat and the butter
showed a general similarity. On one end of the green spotted scarf
there were some signs of wear and in places there appeared to be impressions in
the fabric. There was a slight sign of wear on the other side and three small holes. A pair of
braces were produced and Dr. Roche Lynch said the marks on the bottom of one
end of the scarf could have been produced by the teeth of the clip of the
braces.
Mr. Waddy
said that point of evidence indicated that the green scarf was a scarf
probably worn by a man, who tucked the ends of it through his brace buckle. He
was going to prove that those braces belonged to Whiting. He would also produce
another pair of braces belonging to the prisoner which could not have made
those marks.
Dr. Roche
Lynch said the pair of braces attached to the trousers produced could not have
made the marks on the scarf. Dr. Roche Lynch gave evidence of
receiving from Chief Inspector Parker on two different occasions envelopes
containing hairs. One contained some hairs which had been subjected to some
sort of bleaching process, and the other envelope contained three hairs. Witness said
there was also a number of hairs which he himself took off the jacket which
was sent to him for examination. Two of the hairs came from inside the
left hand pocket of the jacket and they had certain characteristics which were
observed in the bleached hair.
At this
stage the hearing was adjourned until next Monday.
Folkestone
Express 23-7-1938
Local News
Two days of this week, so far, have
been occupied at the Folkestone Police Court in hearing the evidence against William
Whiting, 38, a Folkestone labourer, charged with the wilful murder of Mrs. Phyllis May Spiers, aged 22, the
Folkestone woman, on or about May 23rd last.
Last week, when Whiting appeared before
the Court, Mr. B.H. Waddy, who appeared together with Mr. J. Donal-Barry, for
the Director of Public Prosecutions, opened the case, a number of witnesses,
including Sir Bernard Spilsburv and Dr. Roche Lynch, were called.
Whiting appeared in the dock on Monday,
and the chief evidence was that given by Chief Inspector Parker, who presented
two statements alleged to have been made by the accused. One was of exceptional
length, and it was stated that it occupied 2¾ hours to make. The second was
only very short, and in the course of it Whiting was alleged to have said that
Mrs Sniers had told him that she was going to do herself in, and when he asked her how she was going to do it said “Strangle myself with a scarf
round my neck”. The statement
also mentioned that she was
wearing a green scarf round her
neck. The hearing proceeded on Tuesday, and when the case was re-opened, Mr.
Waddy first told the Court that one of the witnesses he proposed to call was in
Hospital, unconscious and dangerously ill. When
all the other witnesses had been heard, Mr. Waddy said that he understood the
witness, whose name was Wanstall, would be well enough to attend the Court on
Friday, when the case for the prosecution could be concluded. The magistrates
thereupon remanded Whiting until to-day (Friday).
The Magistrates were Councillor R.G.
Wood, Alderman G. Spurgen, Mr. L.G.A. Collins, Alderman J.W. Stainer and Mrs.
A.M. Saunders.
The Court was held in the large hall of
the Town Hall, and when the hearing of the evidence was resumed on Monday the
balcony was crowded with the general public.
Whiting was provided with a chair in
the dock, but for the major portion of the clay be remained standing, and it
was very rare that he spoke to his counsel, Mr. J. Stuart Daniel, who was
instructed by Mr. Lloyd Bunce.
Dr. William Claude Percy Barrett,
Police Surgeon, said on Thursday, 26th May, he went to the coppice
near the foot of Caesar’s Camp, where he saw the dead body of a woman. He saw a
green scarf with white spots (produced) around the woman’s neck. It was round
the neck twice and tied tightly with the knot pressing on the right side of the
neck. It was close under the chin and above the larynx. He saw
it cut and removed from the neck. The colour
of the woman's face was natural, and the expression on it was peaceful. There
was no blueness of the face, and the tongue was just between the teeth. It was
not injured. The nose was bruised and there was blood exuding from both
nostrils. It was consistent with a blow on the nose shortly before death. Rigor
mortis was definitely present. He did not make a thorough examination in the
coppice. The lower jaw and the fingers were stiff. When they turned the body over there were scratches on the
left shoulder blade, and the position of the hair and clothing gave the
impression that the body bad be on dragged by the feet. Dr. Barrett, proceeding, said later in the evening he
conducted a post-mortem examination in the Folkestone mortuary. On examining
the body he noticed a smell of putrifaction. All the joints were affected by
rigor mortis. The head, shoulders and the hips were stiff, but they were
movable. This he attributed to the body having been moved to the glade. Rigor
mortis was usually complete in from ten to eighteen hours after death. The
usual time was ten to twelve hours. Rigor mortis usually lasted for 48 to 72
hours. The length of rigor mortis depended on climatic conditions. Under cool
conditions it lasted longer and was slower in its onset. Continuing, Dr.
Barrett said there was a bruise on the lower jaw, three on the forehead, three
on the inside of the right arm, one three inches in length on the inner side of
the left arm, and two immediately below the collar bone. There were other
bruises not evident at the time. During the post-mortem examination he found
two collections of fly eggs on the body. Fly eggs were laid as soon as the body
putrified. At a temperature of about 50 degrees Fahr. such eggs would take
about three days to hatch. At about 8 p.m. on May 27th he saw the
body again. He found, by testing, that rigor mortis had disappeared, and the
body was limp. He also took the contents of the stomach at that examination.
Witness said he showed the body to Sir Bernard Spilsbury on June 1st,
and was present when he made his examination.
Mr. Waddy: What is your opinion as to
the cause of death?
Dr. Barrett: Strangulation caused by
compression of the carotid arteries, causing immediate death.
Having regard to the dissection of the
neck, what is your present opinion? -
Having regard to what I have seen since I think death was due to pressure
on the arteries rather than obstruction of the air passages.
In all the circumstances, what do you
say about how long before the time that you saw the body on the evening of May
26th do you think death took place? - At least two, or probably three, days.
Witness was cross-examined about the
evidence he gave at the inquest and the opinion he expressed then as to the
length of time the woman had been dead.
Mr. Stuart Daniel, referring to the evidence
given at the inquest, read: "The deceased had, in my opinion, been dead
not longer than two days” - you said that on oath?
Witness: Yes.
Later, witness said he could not remember
what he said, but if counsel had it in writing he would admit it. Continuing,
witness said the scratch on the left shoulder blade was caused after death.
Mr. Daniel: Were all the others, in
your opinion, incurred before death?
Witness: Quite definitely.
As to the cause of death, do you disagree
with Sir Bernard Spilsbury? - I do disagree with Bernard Spilsbury. In my opinion
it was caused by the tightening of the ligature.
Mr. Stanley Seymour Harrison, a
photographer, of Tontine Street, Folkestone, gave evidence of the photographs
he had taken of the body in the coppice and also of others taken when a
tailor’s dummy was used in connection with the obstruction, consisting of
branches of trees and a portion of the fence.
Mr. Bertram Harry Bonniface, Deputy
Borough Coroner, said he had in his possession a report made by Dr. Barrett to
the Coroner of the post-mortem examination on a woman unknown and put in at
the inquest.
Dr. Barrett, re-called by Mr. Waddy for
re-examination, said the report produced was the report he made to the Coroner.
Det. Inspector James O’Brien, of New
Scotland Yard, gave evidence of taking photographs of a green scarf, a pair of
braces, and a handkerchief. One of the photographs showed holes in the green
scarf made by the clip of the braces.
Mr. Robert Henry Bird, a photographer
employed by a firm known as Holiday Snaps, said the photograph of Mrs. Spiers
produced was taken on the promenade near the Royal Victoria Pier at
approximately 11 a.m. on Saturday, May 21st.
Mr. Alfred James Carter, of Ramsgate, a
photographer employed by the same firm, said lie took the photographs produced
near the Zig-Zag Cafe on Saturday, 21st May. It was a photograph of
Mrs. Spiers. The other photograph of Mrs. Spiers was taken on
Monday, 23rd May, at about 11.30 to 12 a.m., judging by the shadows.
He noticed that she was wearing a scarf - it might have been a lined or spotted
scarf.
Mr. Geoffrey Poole, Borough Surveyor’s
assistant at Folkestone, produced a plan of the coppice where the body of Mrs.
Spiers was found.
Mr. Douglas S. Moncrieff, 23, Guildhall
Street, Folkestone, in charge of the meteorological department of Folkestone,
said on 23rd May the maximum temperature was 64 degrees Fahr. and
the minimum 42 degrees Fahr. The minimum grass temperature was 36 degrees.
There was no rainfall. On Tuesday, 24th May, the
maximum temperature was 63 degrees, and the minimum 44. There was no rainfall
recorded at 10 a.m., but at 6 p.m. there was 0.01 inches recorded. On Wednesday, 25th May, the maximum temperature
was 59 degrees Fahr. and the minimum 48 degrees. There was a fall of rain of
less than .005 inches at 10 a.m., and at 6 p.m. .3 inches of rain. On Thursday,
May 26th, the maximum ternoerature was 61 degrees, and the minimum 46 degrees. The rainfall at 10 a.m. was .02 inches,
and at 6 p.m. nil.
Cross-examined by Mr. Stuart Daniel,
witness said there was no rainfall on Sunday, May 22nd.
At this stage the Court adjourned for
lunch.
When the case was resumed, Mr. Stuart
Daniel said he had a short application to make on behalf of the prisoner, who
complained that he had not been given anything to drink since breakfast time.
The Chief Constable (Mr. A.S. Beesley)
said he did not know whether it was intoxicating liquor, but if it was
anything else it could be prepared for him.
Mr. Stuart Daniel: He is asking for a pint
of beer.
The Clerk said that was not possible as
it was intoxicating drink.
The Chairman said it was not really a
matter for them to deal with
Det. Con. Bates, the Coroner’s Officer,
said he went to the coppice at the foot of Caesar’s Camp, where be saw the body
of the dead woman. There was a smell of putrifaction. He saw the fly eggs, and
collected them in a glass tube, which be placed in a drawer at the Police
Station. He examined it from time to time, and on Sunday, 29th, at
9.30 a.m. be found that the eggs had hatched, and the grubs were crawling. The
approximate temperature of the office was 50 degrees Fahr. Continuing,
witness said he showed the body of the woman to Mr. Spiers, to a Mr. Santer and
Mr. Wanstall. On 31st May, in the evening, he
took the prisoner to an outfitter in Folkestone and purchased him a complete
change of clothing. He changed into the new clothing
at the Police Station, and witness took possession of all the clothing he had
been wearing.
He was wearing a trilby hat, trousers
and braces, and a jacket with a tear. These he produced. The
green zip-fastener purse (produced) was found in the left-hand pocket of the
jacket.
Mr. Waddy pointed out that was the
pocket from which Dr. Roche Lynch had said he had taken certain hairs.
Mrs. Bernice Katherine Hegarty, 18,
Mead Road, Folkestone, said she had known Mrs. Spiers as “Phyllis Minter” for
about 3½ years. She recognised the handbag which she knew belonged to the
murdered woman. She had a green purse which was something like the one
produced. Witness could not say whether it was the same one. She
remembered the murdered woman wearing a scarf, a plaid sort of thing with a
white and black fringe. The piece of material produced was exactly like the
scarf the murdered woman used to wear. She had
never seen Phyllis wearing a green spotted scarf like the one produced.
Mr. Daniel: When was the last time you
saw Phyllis?
Witness: On the Saturday before she was
found.
Det. Sergt. Johnson said that on the
evening of the 26th May he went to the coppice at the base of
Caesar’s Camp. He took possession of the handbag (produced). He examined the contents of the bag, and
found the piece of scarf (produced) in the bag. On the 27th May he
made a search round the site and found a comb with one end broken off. He
examined the ground between the spot where he found the comb and the barrier.
The ground had the appearance of having had a heavy object dragged over it in
the direction of the barrier. Near the spot where he found the comb he found a
long hair, which he put in an envelope. One hair was taken from inside the
collar of the
coat covering the body. Another hair was taken from under the left lapel of the coat, and
another from the right lapel of the coat. He also found a hair on the bramble
over the body. He took a hair off the fence post which formed part of an
exhibit. In another envelope he placed three hairs from the prisoner’s hat. He
took some hairs from the head of the deceased woman at the mortuary and placed
them in an envelope. On the 11th July last, in the presence of
prisoner’s solicitor, he took four hairs from the prisoner’s head. On the 31st
May he went to the common lodging-house at 50, Dover Street. He then obtained
from the deputy a suitcase full of property. He showed them to the prisoner.
Amongst the things were some photographs which prisoner intimated he would
like. He found a blue and white pair of braces in the case. There was no scarf
at all. He handed all the property to Chief Inspector Parker. On the 7th
July he purchased half a pound of a certain make of butter and sent it to
Chief Inspector Parker.
Robert John Read, 50, Dover Street,
Folkestone, said he was the deputy of the lodging-house in Dover Street. He had
known Whiting well for six to eight years. Prisoner had stayed at the house and
was in and out of the house about two months ago. He kept a daily record of the
men who stayed in the lodging- house. On the 23rd, 24th,
25th and 26th of May Whiting was booked to stay the
night. He was occupying bed No. 25. He had a suitcase under his bed, which he handed
to a police officer. He could not remember the date, but it was about the end
of the week. There was an old bus driver’s coat over the bed.
Mr. Stuart Daniel: Were there any
braces lying about?
Witness: I don’t remember any.
There was a certain amount of stuff
lying about belonging to various people? - Yes, various articles.
If you find things lying about, and you
do not know to whom they belong, do you put them in his suitcase? - Yes, I do
if the man has one.
I suppose things sometimes get into a
muddle? Yes, they pretty often get into
a muddle.
Chief Inspector W. Parker, New Scotland
Yard, said on May 27th he went to the coppice with Det. Sergt.
Skardon. They went again the following morning and examined the clearing. From
the state of the ground it was quite clear that some heavy object had been
dragged to the obstruction in the pathway. He saw the prisoner at the Folkestone Police Station on May
30th. He was accompanied by Det. Sergt. Skardon. He said “We are
police officers from London making enquiries concerning Phyllis May Spiers who
was found dead on May 26th at Caesar’s Camp. I believe you knew
her.” He replied “Yes.” Witness then said “I
desire you to tell me all you know about this woman and your association with
her”. Whiting replied “I will tell you what I know”.
Mr. Daniel questioned Det. Inspector
Parker about the circumstances and the conditions when a statement was taken
from Whiting.
Mr. Daniel: What was the time when you
first came in contact with him?
Det.-Inspector Parker: About ten o’clock
at night.
Do you know how long he had been in the
Police Station then? - No, I do not.
Would you be surprised to know that he
had been there since 7.30? - No, I should not be surprised.
What time did he leave that evening? -
I finished with him somewhere about two o’clock in the morning, but, of course,
there were interruptions in between. I had to see other people, and he had his
storv to tell me, and his statement was taken after.
Are you sure it was not later than
that? - No.
It was exactly two o’clock? - Yes.
Did you make him strip at this interview?
The Magistrates’ Clerk: At what stage,
in the course of making the statement?
Witness: After the statement had been
taken from him in writing.
Mr. Daniel: At what time between ten
and two was the statement taken?
Det.-Inspector Parker: He commenced to
tell me his story about ten o’clock or shortly after, and I should think the
statement was commenced round about eleven o’clock.
How long did it take to get it down? -
About 2¾ hours. It was
written down carefully and very slowly.
Did he sign it immediately? -After the
statement had been read over to him.
Whiting: You never read it over to me.
Mr. Daniel: Are you sure it was read
over to him?
Det. Inspector Parker: I am positive.
Did you say “Now sign here and walk out
a free man.”? - No, I certainly did not.
Did you say anything of that sort?
- No.
Was anything of that sort said to the
prisoner in your presence? - No.
Did he have anything to drink during
this time? - Whilst I was there, no.
You were there all the time? - During
the time I have mentioned
Whiting, in his statement, said: “I am
a widower, my wife died on 3rd May, 1936. She was strangled by
George Arthur Bryant, who was afterwards executed at Wandsworth. I was at the
time of her death living apart from my wife. I had three children by her. My
wife left me in 1935.” Later, went on the statement, he lived in Dover with a Mrs.
Woodbridge. She left him in November, 1937,
after her mother received a letter from a landlord
in Folkestone saying that her daughter
was drinking in public houses. While he was living with Mrs. Woodbridge a
young girl, who Mrs. Woodbridge said was named Phyllis Minter, came to see
her. In his statement Whiting said he met the
murdered woman on Monday, May 23rd at about 12.30 p.m., and they
went to the Globe public house on The Bayle. They stayed for about ten minutes.
While they were there she said she could get married again. “I said ‘Can you?’” continued Whiting’s statement, “and
read the divorce papers. She said ‘Why don’t
you marry me and let’s go back to Dover?’” The statement then went on to describe how Whiting
and the girl went to the golf links. “We sat down on the grass”, it continued,
“when she pulled out something wrapped in brown paper. Some stitches and a
ring, a little bone ring. She said they were stitches which had been taken out
of her operation. We were both thinking. I don`t know what was the matter with
her that day. She was not cheerful. She did not speak much. I believe there was
something worrying her. I have seen her like it at Dover when she came in
staring at me. I cannot say what was on her mind. Perhaps it was because she
was down and out. I said nothing to upset her”. Continuing, the statement
described how they made their way to Cherry Garden Lane and into Cheriton Road,
after crossing the golf links. “I told her that I worshipped Rose”, it
continued. “I said `If Rose does not come back I shall never settle down
again`. I did not see Phyllis at all on Tuesday. Phyllis and I did not discuss
living together before last Monday”.
Continuing his evidence, Chief Inspector Parker
said he examined the prisoner`s body, and there were no scratches on it. He was
wearing a blue cloth jacket. At the back of the jacket, at the point of the
left shoulder blade, there was a right angle tear. Witness asked him where he
tore his jacket, and he replied “I don`t know where or when I did it”. He showed him the green scarf and asked him if he
recognised it. He replied “I have never seen it before. I have not worn a scarf
myself for a long while, and I have never had one like that”. At about 11.15 p.m. on June 1st he, together
with Det. Sergt. Skardon. saw ihe prisoner and went through the statement up
to the point where he referred to sitting on the grass on the golf course on
May 23rd. Whiting then made a statement which witness immediately
instructed Sergt. Skardon to write down. Witness said to the prisoner after the
statement had been taken “Would you care for this statement which you have
just made to be taken down in writing?” He replied “Yes, it is quite true”.
The prisoner was taken to the Chief Constable’s
office, where he was cautioned, and the statement was read to him from Det.
Sergt. Skardon’s notebook. The statement was
as follows: “When we went on to the golf course on the Monday, the day I have
already told you about, I mean when I was with Phyllis and when we were sitting on the grass,
she was very quiet, and I said ‘What is the matter?’ She said ‘I am fed up and
I am going to do myself in’. I said ‘How are you going to do it?’ and she said
‘Strangle myself with a scarf round my neck’. She was wearing a green spotted
scarf. After we got up and walked across the golf links. She was very quiet and
kept saying she was fed up. I have not seen
her since that Monday, 22nd May, 1938.” “I might tell you that she was partly the cause of Rose
Woodbridge leaving me”, the statement concluded. Describing how the last sentence of the statement came out, witness said
before Whiting made the last part of the statement there was some delay. He was
very quiet and he appeared to be thinking very deeply.
The case was at this stage adjourned
until the following day.
Before the
evidence for the prosecution was continued on Tuesday Mr. Waddy referred to a
witness who was unconscious and in Hospital. He said one of the witnesses he proposed to call that day was in
Hospital dangerously ill. An officer was waiting to see if he regained
consciousness, and if he did it might be necessary to take an examination of
the witness at the Hospital, which was permissible under the Criminal Law
Amendment Act, 1867. It
was important, he continued, that if a witness was ill and not likely to recover
that it should be done. The Court would adjourn to the Hospital.
The Chairman
of the Magistrates: It is very unfortunate.
Mr. Wadcly: I
understand it was only this morning that the witness was admitted to the
Hospital unconscious.
When the
day’s proceedings were brought to a close, Mr. Waddy said he could have
completed all the evidence had it not been for the unfortunate illness of the
witness, Wanstall, who was still in Hospital. He was told that Wanstall was
expected to be there to give evidence on Friday.
It is
understood that a man named Frederick Wanstall, of Invicta Road, an employee of
the Folkestone Golf Club, was found unconscious at the edge of a pond on the golf
links on Tuesday morning. His clothing was wet, and he was taken to the Royal
Victoria Hospital, where he was detained.
Chief Inspector Parker went into the box for the
purpose of Mr. Stuart Daniel continuing his cross-examination.
Mr. Stuart Daniel: Why did you read
through his statement?
Witness: I was endeavouring to test the
accuracy of his statement.
During the interview was it you that
first mentioned suicide? - No.
Det. Sergt. Skardon? - No.
Det. Sergt. Skardon, New Scotland Yard,
said on the afternoon of 27th May, 1938, he went with Chief
Inspector Parker to a coppice near Caesar’s Camp. It was raining heavily at
the time. He noticed a clearing to the west of the barrier which was an
exhibit. There were signs as if some heavy object had been dragged towards the
barrier from a spot about ten to fifteen feet away. He was present when the
statement was made by Whiting. Prisoner was wearing a blue jacket which had a
right-angle tear. Chief Inspector Parker said “Where did you tear your jacket?”
and be replied "I don’t know where or when I did it”. He saw Chief Inspector Pinker produce the scarf and said “Do you
recognise the scarf?” Whiting said “I have never seen it before. I have not
worn a scarf myself for a long while, and I have never had one like that”. On
the 1st June he was present throughout the interview in which the
second statement was made. On the fourth June he posed for the photograph
(produced). On the 8th June he posed for a second photograph. He went through
the barrier backwards, the only practical way, wearing a blue tunic. He tore
his tunic on the barb of wire which he saw in the exhibit. He tore it on the left shoulder blade. That tear was
quite accidental though he Knew there was a barb there and there was a chance
of tearing it.
Mr. Stuart
Daniel: You have seen both these tears, have you?
Witness: Yes.
They are
quite a different shape? - 'Yes, they are different materials.
The weave in
the two coats runs at the same angle from the shoulder? - Yes.
Was it not
you or Inspector Parker who first suggested suicide? - No.
Did you say
to the prisoner “He is trying to help you”? - No.
Pte. Harold Wall, of the 1st Bn. Royal
Berkshire Regiment, stationed at Shorncliffe, said that he recognised a girl in
the photograph (produced) as Phyllis Butcher. He met her first about last
March. He became friendly with her, and they lived together as man and wife
from about 15th to the 19th May in Sandgate. In the
photograph he saw that Phyllis was wearing a scarf. It was his scarf. The piece
of scarf (produced) was part of his scarf. On two sides it was plain and on the
other two a sort of fringe. He had the fringe cut off and the ends bound over.
One side of the material produced showed where it had been bound over. He last saw her on the 19th
May, and he left the scarf behind him. He went to Aldershot. He had never seen
the green scarf (produced) in Phyllis’ possession.
Mr. John
Joseph Hearst, 100, Joyes Road, Folkestone, manager of Messrs. Hepworth’s,
Folkestone, said they stocked a similar scarf to the one produced. They
stocked them from October, 1936, to November, 1937. He might have had them in
stock after that date, but could not say definitely. They were definitely
again in stock from October, 1937, to February or March, 1938.
Mr. Stuart Daniel: It’s a very common
type of scarf isn’t it?
Witness: Yes.
Mr. Joseph Charles Kember, 4, Shakespeare
Road, Dover, employed at the Folkestone Employment Exchange, said he knew the
prisoner by sight, and had interviewed him in connection with his duties. He
last sent him to work on the 19th April to the Esplanade Hotel. He
noticed he was wearing round his neck a scarf or neckerchief. It was dark green
with white spots. The green scarf (produced) was very similar to the one he
wore. It was tied at the left-hand side of the throat. He would think that it
was wound twice round the neck and then tied. It appeared to be in a reef knot.
He saw him wearing the scarf on the 21st April. On the 16th
to 20th May, to the best of his recollection, Whiting was wearing
the scarf. That was the last time he saw him wearing the scarf. He next saw him
on the 30th May, but he could not say whether he was wearing a
scarf at all.
P.C. Pearce,
Dover Borough Police, said on the 9th April last the prisoner was in
his charge at Dover for about three-quarters of an hour. He noticed that he was
wearing a bottle green scarf with dirty white spots around his neck. The green
scarf (produced) was very similar to the one that lie saw. The scarf was wound
round prisoner's neck twice and tied in a small knot on the left-hand side of
his neck.
Mr. Stuart
Daniel: I want to get it quite clear it was
not in connection with any criminal offence that he was in your charge?
Witness: No.
Mr. John McKinnon Taylor, 24, Walton Gardens,
Folkestone, a clerk in the Folkestone Employment Exchange, said that he knew
the prisoner by sight. He went on leave on the 21st May and returned
on the 30th May. He last saw the accused on Friday, the 20th
May, before he went on leave. On that occasion Whiting was wearing a green
scarf with white spots round his neck quite similar to the one produced. He had
frequently seen him wearing the green scarf. He saw the prisoner on the 30th
May, and he was not wearing any scarf then, and he had never seen him wearing a
scarf since that date.
Mrs. A.M. Wright, of 9, Garden Road, Folkestone,
said she recognised Mrs. Spiers in the photograph. She came to her house on
Saturday, 21st May, and witness let her a room in the name of
Phyllis Minter, She stayed in the house on Saturday night, and on the Sunday
night, and witness took her bread and butter and tea into her room on Monday
morning. She used a certain kind of butter. On Monday morning witness went out
with Phyllis, and they walked into the town. They did some shopping and left
each other at 10.25 a.m., when witness caught a bus in Sandgate Road. She had
not seen Mrs. Spiers since, but she had an appointment to meet her at the Lido
at 7.45 p.m. on the Monday. Witness kept the appointment, but Mrs. Spiers did
not arrive. Witness went home and waited for Mrs. Spiers. The comb produced
belonged to Mrs. Spiers. She saw it on the chest of drawers by the side of her
bed. As far as she could see Phyllis did not have a green scarf similar to the
one produced.
Mr. Hubert Pynaert, a waiter at the Royal Pavilion
Hotel, said he first saw Mrs. Spiers at the hotel, where she was working, about
a year ago. He had only seen her once this year, on May 23rd, at
9.40 a.m., and he was with her until 12.30 p.m. During that time they walked by
the beach. She was wearing a dark scarf with light lines in it. The piece of
material produced was similar to the scarf.
Mr. Charles Leonard Varrier, of 13, New Street,
Folkestone, said he knew the prisoner and Mrs. Spiers. He knew her as the
“Minter girl”. He last saw her on May 23rd at about 1.30 p.m. or
1.40 p.m. on the corner of New Street. He saw Whiting come out of a shop and go over to her. They both turned
the corner of Bradstone Road together.
Mrs. Lilian
Maude Varrier, wife of the previous witness, said she knew the prisoner. She
saw him on Monday, May 23rd. He went to the corner of Bradstone Road
and New Street, where he met a girl wearing a long blue coat.
Mrs. Norah
Laws, of 68, Foord Road, said she knew the dead woman as Mrs. Butcher. She came
to her house on a Thursday in May and took a room. She stayed for two nights,
Thursday and Friday nights. She left without paying witness. Continuing, witness said she saw Mrs. Spiers the
following Monday at dinner time. She was with a man. Mrs. Spiers ran after her
and spoke to her. She saw Mrs. Spiers and the man cross over by the Foord
baths. That was the last she saw of her.
Mr. William
David Marsh, of 18, Clarence Street, Folkestone, a Folkestone Corporation
employee, said he had to do some repair work to paving stones in Radnor Park
Avenue, opposite the Peter Pan Pool. On Monday, May 23rd, he saw
Whiting and a woman pass, going in the direction of the golf links. He did not
know the woman.
William J.
Harbird, of 23. Allendale Street, Folkestone, a gardener, employed at 7, Julian
Road, said he saw Whiting in Radnor Park Avenue either on May 23rd
or 24th with a woman. They were going towards the golf links. The
woman was wearing a blue coat and was hatless. He recognised the young lady in
the photograph produced.
Mr. Harry
James Santer, of 5, Pavilion Road, Folkestone, a groundsman employed by the
Folkestone Golf Club, said on June 1st he was shown the dead body of
a young woman. He had seen her before on May 23rd at about 1.20 p.m.
on the beach road at the Folkestone golf links. Whiting was with her. He saw
the girl sit down on the bank and Whiting standing about nine feet away from
her. He noticed that the girl was very red under the eyes, and it appeared to
him as if she had been crying.
Mr. Waddy
said the next witness he wanted to call was the one in the Hospital.
Mrs. Florence
Thompson, of 19, Hamilton Road, Dover, said she knew the dead woman, Phyllis,
and Whiting. She had noticed that the prisoner wore a green scarf similar to
the one produced. She had seen him wearing the scarf at Dover on several
occasions. Once, when she came over to Folkestone she saw Whiting at the
Guildhall Hotel a day or two before May 30th. She went to various
places, and eventually to the South Foreland public house with Whiting. Witness
mentioned she knew a girl called Rose. Whiting told her that he thought a lot
of Rose, and he did not know the reason why she left him. Witness said she
happened to mention Phyllis` name in Jordan`s public house, and Whiting said
“If you don`t keep your mouth shut I will put you on the spot”. Witness said it
was a shame Phyllis was murdered, as she was a decent girl. Whiting asked her
how she would like a scarf round her neck. “He said `You can do a murder
without finding the print marks or the foot marks`”, continued witness. “I said
`No, it would not pay you to`”, added witness.
Mr. Robert
William Weatherhead, of 35, Darlington Street, Folkestone, said he knew Whiting
well. He remembered a “noisy” evening at the Guildhall public house on a Friday
about 23rd or 24th June. Whiting was in the saloon bar
and came round to the public bar and played a game of darts with witness as his
partner. Whiting was abusive to the landlord, and witness tried to pacify him.
Whiting tucked up his sleeves and rushed towards the counter. Witness tried to
pull him back, and he said “You ----. I will serve you the same as I served the
blondie”.
Mr. Daniel: I
think I will have an objection to this evidence.
Mr. Waddy:
How can there be any objection?
Witness said that Whiting had had one or two
drinks.
Mr. Daniel
said he did object to the evidence. It was not admissible against him unless it
amounted to a confession or admission of facts which tended to prove that he
committed the crime. Taken at its worst, the evidence amounted to nothing more
than the admission of a violent act on an unspecified person.
The Chairman
of the Magistrates said they did not find any grounds on which they could
object to the evidence going in.
Mr. William
W.H. Hall, of 16, Great Fenchurch Street, Folkestone, said he had seen Whiting
with Rose Milton (Mrs. Woodbridge) at the Elham Institution. Whiting stayed
with witness in March for about two weeks. He said he wished he was back with
Rose, and if she ever wanted to, he was willing to start a home. Witness knew they had been living together. Whiting
used to talk about her a lot. Whiting wore a green scarf with white spots on it. He wore it twice round
his neck and tucked inside his jersey.
Mrs. Daisy
E.C. Hall, wife of the last witness, said Whiting seemed very upset that Rose
had left him, and blamed the girl’s mother. She did the prisoner’s washing, and
she remembered that he had a green scarf with white spots on it.
Cross-examined,
witness agreed that Whiting had only one pair of braces.
Mrs. Elvey
Flynn, of 21, Fenchurch Street, Folkestone, said she knew the murdered woman as
Phyllis Minter. She also knew Rose Milton, Whiting and Mr. and Mrs. Hall.
Whiting asked
her on one occasion if she had seen Rose. She replied she had not seen her
since the time she came out of the pictures. He said “Have you said anything to
her?” and she replied “No”. He then asked her if she knew anyone who had, and
did she think Phyllis had said anything? He said if he did find out anybody who
did tell her anything he would strangle them. Witness noted that the prisoner
wore a green scarf with white spots on it. The scarf produced was the scarf.
She had seen him put it on. He knotted it in front and twisted easch end round
his braces.
Mrs. Rose
Cathleen Woodbridge, of the Eight Bells lodging house, King Street, Canterbury,
said she knew a man named Milton, and for a time lived with him as his wife.
While she was living with Milton she got to know a girl named Phyllis Minter.
On 4th September, 1935, she married Mr. Woodbridge and lived with
him for nearly a year. After she had separated from him she lived with the
prisoner. At that time she had known Whiting for just over a year. She lived
with him until a fortnight before Christmas, when she went home. She had been
to the Alexandra public house, Folkestone, with Phyllis while she was living
with Whiting. When she got home she told Whiting about two fellows who had
asked her and Phyllis to go away with them. Whiting started to get a bit rough
over it. He said “If you don`t stop going about with Phyllis I shall do
something wrong”. He said he would try to strangle
her (Phyllis), and witness told him to be careful as walls might have ears.
Later on her (witness’)
mother came and took her home, and Whiting was quite upset. She had not seen
him since she left him.
While Whiting
lived with her he wore a green scarf with white spots round his neck. It was
similar to the scarf produced. She had worn the scarf which he had said he had
purchased from Hepburn’s near the Savoy Picture Theatre.
Mrs.
Woodbridge, accompanied by Mr. Lloyd Bunce and Det. Segrt. Skardon, was taken
out to identify the shop. When she returned she said it was Lewis and Hyland`s.
Cross-examined,
witness said Whiting had only one pair of braces.
Alfred James Moore, of 10, Dale Street, Chiswick,
said in the early part of the year he was employed as a clerk in the Public
Assistance Department at Folkestone. He had seen the prisoner on several
occasions in the middle of March and he noticed that he was wearing a green
scarf with white spots.
Mr. Waddy said had it not been for the unfortunate
illness of an important witness he could easily have finished. He was unable to
call a man named Wanstall, who was in Hospital. He was told that they expected
to have Wanstall there to give evidence by Friday. It was just possible that in
calling him he might have to call one more witness to fix a certain place and
date.
Whiting was remanded in custody until today
(Friday).
Folkestone
Herald 23-7-1938
Local News
William Whiting, aged 38, a general labourer, of Folkestone, charged with
the murder of Mrs. Phyllis May Spiers, a Folkestone woman, was committed to
take his trial at the Central Criminal Court next September, when the case for
the Crown was concluded at the Folkestone Police Court yesterday.
After two all-day sittings on Monday and Tuesday, the hearing was
adjourned until yesterday owing to the illness of a witness, who was found
unconscious near a pond on the golf links early on Tuesday morning. During the
hearings earlier in the week the case for the prosecution had been continued, a
large number of witnesses being called. On Monday two alleged statements made
by Whiting to Chief Inspector W. Parker, of Scotland Yard, were read. On
Tuesday witnesses gave evidence of alleged statements which had been made by
the accused in local public houses on occasions since the finding of Mrs.
Spiers’s body in a coppice near Caesar’s Camp, Folkestone, on the evening of
Thursday, May 26th. There was much public interest in the
proceedings.
The magistrates were: Councillor R.G. Wood (presiding), Alderman G.
Spurgen, Mr. L.G.A. Collins, Alderman J.W. Stainer, and Mrs. R.L.T. Saunders.
Mr. Benjamin H. Waddy conducted the case for the Director of Public
Prosecutions with Mr. F. Donal-Barry, and Mr. J. Stuart Daniel, instructed by
Mr. H. Lloyd Bunce, defended.
Dr. William.
Claude Percy Barrett, Police Surgeon, was the first witness when the case was
continued on Monday. He said that on Thursday, May 26th at about
6.30 p.m. he went to a coppice at the foot of Caesars Camp. Chief Inspector
Hollands was there with other officers. Witness saw there the body of a woman. There was a
green scarf with white spots around the neck. It was wound around twice and
tied very tightly with the knot pressing on the right side of the neck. It was
above the larynx and close under the chin. The colour of the face was natural
and the expression was peaceful. There was no blueness or lividity of the face. The tongue
was just between the teeth and it was not injured. The nose was bruised and
there was blood exuding from both nostrils. The condition of the nose was
consistent with a blow shortly before death. The lower jaw was stiff when
examined in the glade and the fingers were also stiff. The appearance of the
scratches on the left shoulder blade and the position of the hair pointed to
the fact that the body had been dragged by the feet. Later that
evening witness conducted a post mortem at the Folkestone Mortuary. On entering
the mortuary there was a distinct smell of putrefaction. He noticed
one bruise on the lower jaw and three bruises on the forehead. There were also
three distinct bruises on the inner side of the right arm, and two immediately
below the collar bone, one the size of a threepenny bit and the other the size
of a shilling. There were multiple other bruises which were not visible at the
time. He discovered two fly eggs on the body. Fly eggs were normally laid on
the flesh as soon as it putrefied. At a temperature of about 50 degrees
Fahrenheit they would take about three days to hatch. On July 1st
he showed the body to Sir Bernard Spilsbury and was present when he made his
examination. In his (witness’s) opinion the cause of death was strangulation caused
by compression of the carotid arteries causing immediate death. After what
he had subsequently seen he was still of the opinion that death was due to the
compression of the arteries rather than the obstruction of the air passage.
Death took place at least two, and probably three days, before the evening of
May 26th.
Mr. Daniel:
That is quite different from the opinion you held formerly.
Dr. Barrett:
I presume you are referring to the short report I made at 2 a.m. for the
Coroner. I had had no time to consider it fully then.
Mr. Daniel:
I have the evidence you gave at the inquest. That was not at 2 a.m.
Witness said
since then other information had come to hand.
Mr. Daniel:
Were not the full facts before you? - No, I don’t think so. The fly eggs had
not hatched then and that was a factor that helped. Furthermore, on Saturday
there were signs of putrefaction which I did not know until after the inquest.
There were no such signs when I examined it.
Mr. Daniel:
You found scratches on the left shoulder blade. Were they made in your opinion
after or before death? - After death. The mark was not a bramble scratch. All
the others occurred before death.
Mr. Daniel:
I take, it as to the cause of death, you disagree with Sir Bernard Spilsbury?
Dr. Barrett said he did disagree as to the cause of death.
(At the previous hearing Sir Bernard gave the cause of death as manual
strangulation.)
Stanley S. Harrison, a professional photographer, gave evidence of photographs
he had taken of the place where the body was found.
Mr. Waddy said he understood that the Coroner had raised some objection
as to the report made by Dr. Barrett to him being produced there. He wanted the
report put in because counsel for the defence had asked about it: if necessary he would have to call the Coroner to produce the
document and then put it to Dr. Barrett.
The
Chairman: I should have thought he would have preferred to let you have the report.
Mr. Waddy
then called Mr. Bertram Harry Bonniface, Deputy Coroner, who said he had in his
possession a report made by Dr. Barrett to the Coroner with regard to his post
mortem and put in at the inquest held on May 30th.
Dr. Barrett
was then re-called by Mr. Waddy and asked to look at the report he made to the
Coroner.
Mr. Waddy:
In the last paragraph of the report you say: “Death occurred at least 48 hours
before the body was found and very likely 72 hours, i.e., Monday night, May 23rd,
or Tuesday night, May 24th”.
Dr. Barrett:
That is so.
Mr. Daniel said his questions were in regard to the evidence Dr. Barrett
gave at the inquest. He then found deceased had not been dead longer than two
days.
Det. Inspector J. O’Brien, New Scotland Yard, said on July 1st
he made photographs of a green scarf, a pair of braces, and a handkerchief.
Robert H. Bird, a photographer employed by Holiday Snaps, gave evidence
of taking a photograph of Mrs. Spiers on Saturday, May 21st on the
promenade near the Victoria Pier.
Alfred James
Carter, another photographer employed by the same firm, also gave evidence of
taking two pictures of deceased, one on the Saturday, May 21st, and
the other on Monday, May 23rd. The second picture was taken about
11.30 to 12 o’clock near the Zig Zag cafe on the promenade. He could not
describe the scarf Mrs. Spiers was wearing: it might have been a lined or
spotted scarf.
Geoffrey
Poole, assistant to the Borough Surveyor of Folkestone, produced a plan of the
coppice and country surrounding it.
Douglas S.
Moncrieff, in charge of the Meteorological Department, Folkestone, said on May
23rd there was no rainfall. At 6 p.m. on May 24th there
was recorded one-hundredth of an inch of rain. On May 25th there was
recorded .3 inches of rain, and at 10 a.m. on the following day .02 inches of
rain.
When the hearing was resumed after lunch, Mr. Daniel said the
accused had a complaint to make. He had had nothing to drink since he had been
there.
The Chief Constable (Mr. A.S. Beesley) said he did not know whether it
was intoxicating liquor prisoner wanted, but if it was anything else it could
be prepared for him.
Mr. Daniel said the prisoner was asking for a pint of beer.
The Chairman said they could not give permission for that.
Det.
Constable Bates, Coroner’s Officer, gave evidence of proceeding to the spot
where the woman’s body was found. Witness said he put the fly eggs
referred to by Dr. Barrett in a glass tube and left it at the Police Station.
He examined the tube from time to time. At 10.30 p.m. on Saturday, May 28th
there was no sign of life, but on the following morning at 9.30 a.m. he found
that the eggs had hatched and the grubs were crawling. The
temperature of the room was approximately 50 degrees Fahrenheit. On May 31st,
in the evening, he took the prisoner to an outfitter in Folkestone and
purchased for him a complete change of clothing. He then went with him to the
Police Station where he changed into the new clothing. Witness took
possession of all the clothing Whiting had been wearing. The hat,
trousers with braces attached, and a jacket were produced. Witness said there was a tear in
the jacket. The green zip-fastener purse was in the left hand pocket of the jacket.
Mr. Waddy:
That was the pocket from which. Dr. Roche Lynch said he took certain hairs.
Bernice
Katharine Hegarty, 18, Mead Road, Folkestone, who said that she had known Mrs.
Spiers as Phyllis Minter for three and a half years, stated that she recognised
the handbag produced as belonging to the dead woman. She also had
a green purse. Witness could not say whether the purse produced was the one:
it was something like the one Phyllis had. She had seen the dead woman wearing
a scarf—a plaid sort of thing with a white and black fringe. The pieces of material
(produced) were like the scarf she used to wear. Witness had never seen Phyllis
wearing a scarf like the green one with white spots.
Mr. Daniel:
When did you last see Phyllis?
Witness: On
the Saturday before she was found.
Robert John
Read, 50, Dover Street, Folkestone, said he was the deputy of a lodging house
at that address. He had known Whiting well for six or eight weeks. He had known
him for 15 years as a Folkestone man. He kept a daily record of the men
who stayed at the house. On May 23rd Whiting was booked as having stayed there the
night. He had also stayed there on May 24th, 25th and 26th.
He was occupying a bed at the top of the house. He had a suitcase under his bed
which witness handed to a police officer at the end of the week. Whiting had an old bus driver’s coat hanging over the bed, but practically everything he had was in the suitcase.
Cross-examined,
witness said he did not put anything into the suitcase. There was often
something left behind by other people when they went out and the beds were so
close together that it was difficult to tell whose it was. If he found
things lying about and knew to whom they belonged he put them into a suitcase.
Mr. Daniel:
I suppose things sometimes get into a bit of a muddle?
Witness:
Pretty often.
Mr. Daniel:
Is it common for men who come to the house to have two pairs of braces? - It is
seldom that the men have two suits let alone two pairs of braces.
Det.
Sergeant Johnson said on the evening of May 26th he went to the
coppice at the base of Caesar’s Camp. He took possession of a handbag and
examined the contents. He found a piece of scarf material in the handbag.
On May 27th he made a
search around the spot where the body was found during the evening. He found a
comb with one broken end in the clearing. He examined the ground between the
spot where he found the comb and the barrier of boughs. It had the appearance
of having had a heavy object dragged over it in the direction of the barrier. He also found a long hair close to the
spot where he found the comb. On May 26th
witness obtained a hair from inside the collar of the coat covering the body.
Another hair he found on the left lapel of the coat and he also discovered a
further hair on the right lapel. He found
another hair on the bramble over the body. He took a hair off the post of the
barrier. He also took three hairs from inside Whiting’s hat. He obtained other hairs from the head
of the deceased on June 1st at the mortuary. In the presence of prisoner’s
solicitor, on July 11th, witness obtained four hairs from his head
and handed those with the others to Chief Inspector Parker. On May 31st he went
to a lodging house, 50, Dover Street, Folkestone, and there obtained from the
deputy a suitcase of clothes, the property of the prisoner. Whiting later saw it at the Police
Station and he made some remarks about some photographs which were amongst the
clothes. He said he would like to have them. In that suitcase there were a pair of blue and white braces. There was
no scarf in the case. Witness said
on July 7th he purchased ½ lb. of Blue Label butter which he sent
to Chief Inspector Parker.
Mr. Daniel did not ask any
questions.
Det.
Inspector William Parker, New Scotland Yard, said on May 27th he
went with Det. Sergeant Skardon to the coppice near Caesar’s Camp.
He returned
there on the morning of May 28th and examined the clearing. It was
quite clear that some heavy object had been dragged to the obstruction in the
pathway. On May 30th at 10 p.m. with Det. Sergeant Skardon he saw
Whiting at the Police Station. He said to prisoner “We are police officers from
London making enquiries concerning Phyllis May Spiers who was found dead on May
26th at Caesar’s Camp. I believe you knew her”. He said “Yes”. Witness then
said “I desire you to tell me all you know about this woman and your
association with her”. He replied “I will tell you what I know”.
Mr. Daniel:
Was this the occasion when prisoner came to the Police Station from Woolworths?
Witness: I
could not say.
Mr. Daniel:
What time was it you came into contact with him? - About 10 o’clock at night.
Did you know
how long he had been in the Police Station? - I did not.
Would you be
surprised to know he had been there since 7.30? - No, I should not be
surprised.
What time
did he leave? - I finished with him somewhere about 2 o’clock in the morning.
There were interruptions in between.
Are you sure
it was not actually rather later than that? - No.
Did you make
him strip at this interview? - Yes.
The Clerk
(Mr. C. Rootes): At what stage?
Witness:
After the statement had been taken from him.
Mr. Daniel:
At what time between 10 p.m. and 2 a.m. was the statement taken? - Round about
11 o’clock.
How long did
it take to get the statement? - About two and three-quarter hours.
Did he sign
it immediately? - After the statement had been read over to him.
You are
quite sure it was read over to him? - He signed it.
Did you say
“Now sign here and walk out a free man”? - No, I certainly did not.
Did you say
“Sign here and you can go”? - No.
Did you say
anything of that sort? - No.
Did he have
anything to drink all this time? - While I was there, no.
The question
whether the alleged statement was admissible was raised and the Magistrates
decided that it was quite admissible.
The alleged
statement was then read by Mr. Barry. It commenced: “I am a widower. My wife
died on May 3rd, 1936. She was strangled by George Arthur Bryant,
who was afterwards executed at Wandsworth. I was at the time of her death
living apart from wife”. The statement went on to say that his (Whiting’s) wife left him in 1935.
Later he had lived in Dover with a Mrs. Woodridge, who left him in November,
1937, after her mother had received a letter from a landlord in Folkestone
saying that her daughter was drinking in public houses. While they
(Whiting and Woodridge) were living at Dover a young girl, whom Mrs. Woodridge
said was Phyllis Minter, came to see Mrs. Woodridge. Coming to
Monday, May 23rd, the alleged statement described how Whiting met
Mrs. Spiers about 12.30 p.m. and they went to the Globe Hotel on The Bayle. “We stayed
there about 10 minutes", the alleged statement continued, “and she said
she had something to show me, and she showed me some divorce papers. She said
‘I can get married again’. I said 'Can you?’ and read the divorce papers . . .
She said ‘Why don’t you many me and let’s go back to Dover?’ “ The alleged
statement next described how they went together to the golf links, and added
“We sat down on the grass when she pulled out something wrapped in brown paper,
some stitches and a ring, a little bone ring. She said that they were stitches
which she had had taken out after her operation. We were both thinking. I don’t
know what was the matter with her that day; she was not cheerful. She did not
speak much. I believe there was something worrying her. I have seen her like it
at Dover when she came in staring at me. I cannot say what she had on her
mind. Perhaps it was because she was down and out. I said nothing to upset
her”.
The alleged
statement went on to say that they crossed the golf links and then went up
Cherry Garden Lane, by the War Memorial, and into Cheriton Road. I again told
her I worshipped Rose (Mrs. Woodridge)”, continued the statement. “I said if
Rose does not come back I shall never settle down again”. The alleged
statement next dealt with Tuesday and the Wednesday, and in it Whiting said
that he did not see Phyllis on the Tuesday. It also stated that before the
Monday (May 23rd) they had not discussed living together before. Continuing,
witness said he examined defendant’s body and there were no scratches or
injuries on it. He noticed on the defendant’s jacket at the back, at the point of the
loft shoulder blade, there was a right angle tear. He said to
Whiting “Where did you tear your jacket?” and he replied “I don’t know where or
when I did it”. Witness said “Do you recognise this scarf?” He replied “I have
never seen it before. I have not worn a scarf myself for a long while, and I
have never had one like that”. About 11.15 p.m. on June 1st
he saw Whiting again at the Police Station and went through the statement with
him up to the point where he spoke about sitting on the grass on the golf
course. Whiting then made a statement. Afterwards witness said to prisoner
“Would you care for the statement you have just made to be taken down in
writing?’' He said “Yes, it is quite true”. Witness then cautioned Whiting.
Witness then dictated to prisoner the statement Det. Sergeant Skardon had
written down.
The alleged statement was then read as follows: “When we went to the golf course on the Monday, the day I have already
told you about, I mean when I was with Phyllis and when we, sat on the grass,
she was very quiet and I said `What is the matter?`” “She said `I am fed up and I am going
to do myself in.’” I said “How are you going to do it?” and she said 'Strangle
myself with a scarf, round my neck’”. “She was wearing a green
spotted scarf. After we got up and walked across the golf links she was very quiet and
kept on saying she was fed up. I have not seen her since Monday, May
23rd. I might tell you she was partly the cause of Rose Woodridge
leaving me".
Inspector Parker said before Whiting made the
last part of the statement there was some delay, he was very quiet, and he
appeared to be thinking very deeply The hearing was then adjourned until
Tuesday.
When the
hearing was continued on Tuesday morning, Mr. Waddy, prosecuting, said one of the witnesses he had proposed to call
that day was in hospital dangerously ill. “We
have an officer there watching to see whether this witness recovers
consciousness”, he said. “I understand he is unconscious.If a message comes
through that the witness recovers consciousness it will be necessary to take an
examination at the hospital under the Criminal Law Amendment Act, 1867. It is
important if a witness were likely to recover that that should be done”.
The Chairman (Mr. R.G. Wood): The court would be adjourned during that
period.
Mr. Waddy: It would be adjourned to the hospital. I understand only this
morning this witness was admitted to the hospital unconscious.
Later it was stated by Mr. Waddv that he hoped the witness would able to
give evidence on the Friday (yesterday).
Chief Inspector Parker was cross-examined by Mr. Daniel, who asked him
how long the interview on June 1st lasted.
Inspector Parker: You mean prior to the statement?
Mr. Daniel: Yes.
Witness: About 15 minutes.
Mr. Daniel: Why did you read over the first statement? - There was some
discrepancy in the dates in the first place.
You went on far beyond any question of dates in the statement? - Yes.
Why was that? - I was endeavouring to test the accuracy of his statement.
Was he then with you for some time after the statement was given that
night? -No.
During the interview was it not you who first mentioned the word
suicide? - No.
Did Det. Sergeant Skardon? - No.
Det. Sergeant Skardon, New Scotland Yard, was the next witness. He said
on the afternoon of Friday, May 27th, he went with Chief Inspector
Parker to a coppice near Caesar’s Camp. It was raining heavily at the time. He noticed a clearing to the west of the barrier (produced) and there
were signs on the ground that a heavy object had been dragged towards the
barrier from a spot about 10 to 15 feet away. He was present with Chief Inspector
Parker on May 30th when the prisoner made his statement. He
(prisoner) was then wearing a blue jacket which had a right angle tear. Witness said
on June 4th he posed whilst a photograph was taken and he also did
so on June 8th. On the second occasion he went through the barrier backwards dragging a
tailor’s dummy. He was wearing a police serge tunic. As he went through
backwards he tore the tunic on the barbed wire of the obstruction. Witness
pointed out the barb on the exhibit in court. The
tear was on the left shoulder blade. He knew there was a barb
there and that there was a chance of tearing the tunic, but it was quite
accidental.
Mr. Daniel:
You did mean to tear your coat, didn’t you?
Witness: No.
You knew the
barb was standing up vertically? - Yes.
Mr. Daniel:
The tears are of a different shape? - Yes, but the materials are different.
The weave of
the two coats runs in the same angle from the shoulder? - I had not noticed
that, but I am prepared to agree.
Mr. Daniel:
When the second statement was given how long was the prisoner with you?
Witness:
Half an hour to three-quarters of an hour.
Mr. Daniel:
Wasn’t it you or Inspector Parker who first used the word “suicide”? - No.
Pte. Harold
Wall, 1st Batt. Royal Berkshire Regiment, Shomcliffe, recognised the dead
woman in a photograph and said he knew her as “Phyllis Butcher”. He first met
her in March of this year. He became friendly with her. They lived
together from May 15th to 19th as man and wife. He recognised
the scarf Phyllis was wearing in a photograph as his. The scarf
was plain on two sides and on the other two had a fringe. Witness had the
fringe cut off and the end bound over. He last saw Phyllis on May 19th.
Witness went to Aldershot on that day and left his scarf behind. He had never
seen the green scarf with white spots in Phyllis’s possession.
John Joseph
Hurst, 100, Joyes Road, the manager of J. Hepworth and Son’s shop, Sandgate
Road, Folkestone, said he stocked a scarf similar to the green one from
October, 1936, to February, 1937, and again from October, 1937 to February or
March, 1938.
Mr. Daniel:
It’s a very common type of scarf?
Witness:
Yes.
Charles
Joseph Kimber, 4, Shakespeare Road, Dover, a clerk at the Folkestone
Employment Exchange, Ingles Lane, Folkestone, said he knew prisoner by sight
and had interviewed him in connection with his duties. He last sent
him to a job on April 19th. He (prisoner) was wearing a scarf or
neckerchief of dark green with white spots. The green scarf (produced) was
very similar to the one Whiting was wearing. The scarf was tied on the left
hand side of the throat. Witness thought the scarf was put round the throat twice and then tied
with a reef knot. He saw Whiting again on April 21st and he was wearing the
scarf then. He saw prisoner again between May 16th and 19th
and to the best of his recollection Whiting was still wearing the green scarf. He saw
Whiting next on May 30th but he could not see whether he was wearing
a scarf then as he had on a coat.
P.C. Pearce,
of the Dover Borough Police, said on April 9th prisoner was in witness’s charge
at Dover for about three-quarters of an hour. He was wearing a bottle green
scarf with dirty white spots. The green scarf (produced) was very
similar. The scarf Whiting was wearing was wound round his neck twice and tied
with a small knot on the left hand side.
Cross-examined,
witness said it was not in connection with any criminal offence that Whiting
was in his charge.
John
McKinnan Taylor, 24. Walton Gardens, a clerk at the Folkestone Employment
Exchange, said he saw Whiting on Friday, May 20th. He
remembered that he was wearing a green scarf with white spots, similar to the
one produced. He usually had it tied with a double knot on the left hand side. He had seen
Whiting wearing the scarf on several occasions. He saw Whiting on May 30th,
after witness had returned from leave, and he was not wearing any scarf then.
Mrs.
Adelaide Maude Wright, 9, Garden Road, Folkestone, recognised Mrs. Spiers from
a photograph and said that she knew her as Phyllis Minter. She came to
witness on Saturday, May 21st and she let her a room. She stayed in
the house on the Saturday and Sunday nights. She took her bread and butter and
tea on the Monday morning. Witness said she used Blue Label butter. Phyllis came
out with witness on the Monday morning. They did some shopping together and
they left each other at 10.25 a.m. She did not see her again. She had
arranged to meet Phyllis at 7.45 that evening outside the Lido. Witness kept
the appointment, but Phyllis did not come. She expected her to sleep at the
house that night, and she waited up for her. The comb produced belonged to
Phyllis. She had not seen her with the green scarf (produced).
Hubert
Pynaera, a waiter employed at the Royal Pavilion Hotel, said he first saw Mrs.
Spiers at the Royal Pavilion Hotel, where she was working about a year ago. He saw her
again this year, and from 10.40 a.m. to 12.30 p.m. on Monday. May 23rd,
he was in her company. She was wearing a dark scarf with lighter lines in it.
Charles
Leonard Varner, 13, New Street, Folkestone, said he knew deceased as the “Minter girl.” He last saw her on May 23rd at
the corner of New Street about 1.30 or 1.40 p.m. He saw Whiting come out of a
shop and go over to her. He saw them turn and go into Bradstone Road.
Lillian Maude Varrier, the husband of the last witness, said she saw
Whiting in Philpott’s shop in New Street about 1.30 p.m. on May 23rd.
He went to Bradstone Road where he met a girl.
Mrs. Norah
Laws, 68, Foord Road, Folkestone, said she knew the deceased as “Miss Butcher”.
She came to the house of the witness on a Thursday morning in the middle of May
and she let her a room. She stayed there two nights only and left without
paying. Witness again saw “Miss Butcher” on the following Monday at dinner time.
She “bumped into her” at the comer of Kent Road and Bradstone Avenue. Previously a friend of hers came in and spoke to her and it was in consequence of
that that she went to the corner. She was with a man, but witness
did not look at the man enough to recognise him again. Mrs. Spiers ran after
her and spoke to her and then crossed over Foord Road by the Baths with the
man.
William. David Marsh, 18, Clarence Street, Folkestone, said he was a
pavior working for the Folkestone Corporation. On Monday, May 23rd,
he had some repairs to do in Radnor Park Avenue opposite the Peter Pan Pool and
he finished on the following Thursday. He knew
the prisoner and while he was working there he saw Whiting pass about midday on
Monday. He had a woman with him and was going towards the golf links. Witness
did not know the woman.
William J.
Harbird, 23, Allendale Street, Folkestone, a gardener employed at 7, Julian
Road, Folkestone, said he knew the last witness and Whiting. He saw Whiting in
Radnor Park Avenue on either May 23rd or 24th. Whiting
had a woman with him and they were going towards the golf links. The woman
was not wearing a hat and had on a navy blue coat. He recognised the young lady
in the photograph as the woman Whiting was with.
Harry James
Santer, 5, Pavilion Road, Folkestone, a groundsman employed by the Folkestone
Golf Club, said on June 1st Det. Constable Bates showed him the body
of a young woman in the mortuary. He had seen her on May 23rd
about 1.20 p.m. on the beach road of the Folkestone golf links. She was accompanied
by Whiting. He saw the girl sit down on a bank on the grass. Whiting was standing
about nine feet away. She was very red under the eyes and it appeared as though she had been
crying.
Florence
Thompson, 19, Hamilton Road, Dover, said she knew the young woman in a
photograph as “Phyllis’’. She also knew Whiting: she had seen him wearing a
green scarf similar to the one produced. She saw him wearing the scarf in
Dover several times. She had seen Whiting in the Guildhall public house, Folkestone, a day
or two before May 30th. Later she went to the South Foreland
public house. Witness knew a girl named Rose. Whiting said he thought a lot of Rose
and did not know the reason why she left him. Witness happened to mention to
Whiting Phyllis’s name in another public house. She said that it was a shame
she was murdered because she was a decent girl. Whiting then said “If you don’t
keep your mouth shut about Phyllis I will put you on the spot”. He then
asked her how she would like a scarf round her neck. He said “You
could do a murder without finding the print marks or footmarks”. She said “It
would not pay you to”.
Robert
William Weatherhead, 35, Darlington Street, Folkestone, said he knew Whiting
well. He remembered a “noisy evening” at the Guildhall public house some
little time ago. Whiting was there. Witness said it was a Friday; he
believed it was June 23rd or 24th. He played
darts with Whiting, who got very abusive with the landlord. Witness tried to
pacify Whiting. Whiting tucked up his sleeves and rushed to the counter. Witness tried
to pull him back and Whiting said "You ----.I will serve you
the same as I served the blondie”.
Mr. Daniel:
I think I shall have an objection to this evidence.
Mr. Waddy:
How can there be an objection?
Witness said
Whiting had had one or two drinks.
Mr. Daniel
said he objected to the evidence on the grounds that evidence of what prisoner
said on other occasions was not admissible unless it amounted to a confession
or an admission of the facts which tended to prove that he committed the crime.
Taking it at its worst, this statement amounted to nothing more than an
admission of a violent act against some unspecified person.
The Chairman
said the Magistrates did not see why the evidence should not go in.
William W.
H. Hall, 16, Great Fenchurch Street. Folkestone, said he had seen Whiting with
Rose Milton (Mrs. Woodridge) on one occasion, at the Institution at
Etchinghill. Whiting stayed with witness in March of this year for about two weeks. He said that
he wished Rose was back with him and that if she ever wanted to make a home he was
willing to start another one. Witness knew that they had been living
together. Whiting talked about Rose a lot. Whiting wore a green scarf with white spots,
exactly the same as the one produced. He wore it twice round his neck
and tucked inside his jersey.
Mrs. Daisy Emily Hall, the wife of the last witness, said Whiting often
spoke about Rose and blamed her (Rose’s) mother for her leaving him. She remembered that Whiting had a green scarf with white spots on it.
Cross-examined, witness said prisoner had only one pair of braces.
Elvey Flynn, 21, Great Fenchurch Street, Folkestone, said she knew the
deceased as Miss Phyllis Minter. She also knew Rose Milton, Whiting
and Mr. and Mrs. Hall. Whiting asked her if she had seen Rose, and she said that she had not
since the time that she had seen her coming out of the pictures. He said:
“Have you said anything to her” and witness said “No”. He then
asked if she knew anyone who had; did she think that Phyllis had said anything;
and said that if he found out anyone who did tell her anything he would
strangle them. Whiting wore a green handkerchief with white spots on it round his neck. She had seen
him put it on. He twisted it round his neck, knotted it in front, and put the
comers of the scarf round his braces.
Rose
Cathleen Woodridge, Eight Bells Lodging House, King Street, Canterbury, said
she knew a man named Milton and for a time she lived with him as his wife. While she
was living with Milton she got to know a girl named Phyllis Minter. She married
a Mr. Woodridge on September 4th, 1935, and she lived with him not
quite a year. After she separated from him she went to live with Whiting, whom she had
known just a year. They lived in Dover until a fortnight before last Christmas when she
went home. She knew the Alexandra public house, Folkestone, and she had gone there
with Phyllis. When she got home she told Whiting that two fellows had asked her
and Phyllis to go away with them. Whiting started getting a bit
rough over it, and said that if she did not stop going about with Phyllis he
would do something wrong - he would try to strangle her (Phyllis). Witness told
him to be careful because walls might have ears. Later her (witness’s) mother took
her home. Whiting was upset. She had not seen Whiting since she had left him. While
Whiting was with her he wore a green scarf with white spots round his neck. The
scarf was like the one produced. She had worn the scarf. Whiting said
he had got the scarf from “Hepburn’s, near the Savoy Picture House”. Mrs.
Woodridge was taken out of the court to see the shop and on her return said it
was Lewis and Hyland’s.
Cross-examined,
witness said Whiting only had one pair of braces when she was living with him.
Clifford
James Moore, Ten Dials Street, Chiswick, said early this year he was employed
as a clerk in the Public Assistance Department at Folkestone. He had seen
Whiting on several occasions. On one occasion, in the middle of March, he
noticed that prisoner was wearing a green scarf with white spots.
Mr. Waddy
said but for the illness of the witness he had referred to he could have
completed his case. He said that the hospital authorities expected to have
Wanstall (the name of the witness) fit to give evidence by Friday. It was just
possible that in calling him he might have to call one more witness.
The hearing
was adjourned to yesterday.
(The witness
referred, to was found early on Tuesday unconscious at the side of a pond on the
golf links. His clothing was wet. He was taken to the Folkestone Hospital).
At
yesterday’s hearing, when the case was continued, Whiting was committed for
trial at the Central Criminal Court in London next September. The
proceedings did not last more than 20 minutes. Prisoner reserved his defence and
stated that he would call witnesses at his trial.
When the
hearing was resumed Mr. Waddy first re-called Mr. Kimber, who, he said, was not
satisfied with one of the dates he gave in his evidence. “I understand
you are not satisfied with one of the dates you gave”, he said. Witness
replied that that was so and said that he last sent Whiting to a job on March
19th and not April 19th.
The witness
who was unable to appear on Tuesday was then called. He was Frederick Wanstall,
of 17, Invicta Road, Folkestone, a groundsman employed by the Folkestone Golf
Club.
Wanstall said he knew Whiting. At the beginning of June he was taken to
the mortuary and shown the dead body of a girl. He had seen the girl on Monday,
May 23rd, between 2 and 2.30 p.m. when he was cutting the grass of
the 16th tee on the golf course. The tee
was close to the road called “Cherry Garden Avenue” or the “New Road”. She was accompanied by Whiting, and they passed four or five yards from
witness. They were going towards Caesar’s Camp. Witness went on with his work and
then when he looked up again he saw them going up Waterworks Hill. He saw them
up to the bend where they disappeared from view. Some way beyond the bend was a
sort of stile, and from there there was a track going round the foot of
Caesar’s Camp to Sugar Loaf Hill and the New Road.
Mr. Waddy:
That is the evidence for the prosecution and upon that evidence I shall ask for
prisoner to be committed for trial at the Central Criminal Court. There are no Kent Assizes for many months,
but there will be a sessions of the Central Criminal Court in the early part of
September.
Whiting said he reserved his defence, adding “I will call witnesses at my
trial”.
The Chairman
then announced that the Magistrates committed Whiting for trial at the Central
Criminal Court.
Mr. Bunce
(defending) asked for a defence certificate to allow for a solicitor and two
counsel at the trial.
The
application was granted.
Folkestone
Express 30-7-1938
Local News
The evidence for the prosecution in the case known as the green scarf
murder case was completed at the Folkestone Police Court on Friday, when
William Whiting (38), a labourer, of Dover Street, Folkestone, charged with the
murder of Mrs. Phyllis May Spiers, who was found strangled at the foot of
Caesar’s Camp on May 26th, was committed for trial at the Central
Criminal Court.
The case would have been completed earlier in the week, but Mr. B H.
Waddy, for the prosecution, was unable to call Frederick Wanstall, an important
witness, who was stated to be unconscious in the Hoyal Victoria Hospital.
First of all on Friday Mr. Waddy recalled Mr. J.C. Kember, a clerk at
the Folkestone Employment Exchange, who corrected a date he gave in evidence at
the previous hearing. He said he sent Whiting for a job on March 19th,
and not April 19th.
Frederick Wanstall, 17, Invicta Road, Folkestone, a groundsman employed
by the Folkestone Golf Club, said at the beginning of June he was taken to the
mortuary and shown the dead body of a girl. He saw the girl on Monday, 23rd
May, at about 2.30 p.m. Witness was cutting the 16th tee on the golf
course, which was close to the road known as Cherry Garden
Avenue or the New Road. The girl was accompanied by Whiting, and they
passed within four or five yards of him going towards Caesar’s Camp. He went on
with his work and saw the couple going up Waterworks Hill. He saw them up to
the bend, when they disappeared from view.
Beyond the bend there was a stile, and by getting over it a person could
follow a cow track round the foot of Caesar’s Camp to Sugar Loaf Hill and into
the New Road again.
Mr. Waddy said that was the evidence he called for the prosecution, and
upon that evidence he would ask the magistrates to commit the prisoner for
trial at the next session at the Central Criminal Court. There was no Kent
Assizes for many months. There would he a session of the Central Criminal
Court in the early part of September.
The prisoner reserved his defence, and said he would call witnesses at
his trial.
The Chairman (Councillor R. G. Wood) said Whiting would be committed for
trial at the Central Criminal Court.
Folkestone
Express 6-8-1938
Local News
We understand that Mr. St. John Hutchinson, K.C., has been retained as
leading counsel to defend William Whiting, the Folkestone man charged with the
murder of Mrs. Phyllis May Spiers, on his trial at the Central Criminal Court,
in September.
No comments:
Post a Comment