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