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.
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