Since one part of Podmore’s description related to a small scar he had over one eyebrow, this factor was a hook, which the press latched on to and all the reports referred to the search for the ‘man with the scar’. As for his girlfriend, since she had blonde hair, she was referred to as ‘Golden-haired Lil’.
On 17 January, officers in Southampton received a telephone call from their colleagues in Staffordshire. Lily Hambleton had apparently returned to her home address in Hanley. She was immediately interviewed and explained that until recently, she and Podmore had been in Birmingham. They had seen newspaper reports of the Southampton murder and talked about what they should do next. Podmore said that she should return home and he would go back to Southampton in order to clear his name. As Lily had travelled to Hanley, Podmore had gone down to London with the intention of going on to Southampton the following day. Finally, Lily was able to say that Podmore would be staying overnight at the Leicester Hotel on Vauxhall Bridge Road, a place they had stayed before and where they used to work.
On the morning of 18 January 1929, Detective Inspector Charles Simmonds went to the Leicester Hotel and arrested Podmore. It should be noted that Podmore had signed in at the Leicester, using his real name. Podmore was then escorted to the Gerald Road police station for interview.
The police believed that they had captured the man responsible for the murder of Vivian Messiter but they had no real evidence to back up a charge. No fingerprints of any kind had been found on the hammer. The officers did, however, have one thing on their side. Podmore, alias Thomas, was wanted for two other offences and could be charged with them, tried for them and, if found guilty, be sentenced for them.
Details of William Podmore’s criminal convictions, as detailed by the police.
Initially, Podmore was charged with the theft of a motor vehicle at Manchester. He was tried in that city on 29 January 1929 and sentenced to six months’ imprisonment. He originally began to serve that sentence at Strangeways prison but was transferred to Winchester so that he could attend the inquest on Messiter, as a witness. Not surprisingly, the inquest eventually returned a verdict of murder by person or persons unknown and Podmore was returned to Winchester prison to finish off his sentence.
On 29 June, Podmore was released from prison but immediately re-arrested at the gates and charged with the second offence of theft. This related to the stealing of wage packets at Downton.
After Podmore and Lily Hambleton had left Southampton on 3 November, he had started work as a mechanic for a building contractor at Downton. On Saturday, 22 December 1928, a number of wage packets had gone missing. Podmore, who at the time, was still using the name Thomas, was questioned by Superintendent Charles Townsend of the Salisbury police. He was asked where precisely he had worked prior to coming to Downton and said that he had been a tyre-fitter for the Allied Transport Company in Bold Street, Southampton. He also stated, correctly, that he had lodged at 5 Cranberry Avenue.
There were other people to interview and Thomas was allowed to go after he had been questioned. The following day, 23 December, he and Lily vanished and, of course, the company he told them he had worked for and the address he gave for their offices, both proved to be fictitious.
On 15 July 1929, Podmore was transferred to Wandsworth prison. Two days later, on 17 July, he was tried at the Central Criminal Court, found guilty of the Downton theft and sentenced to a further six months in prison. He would be due for release on 17 December.
This sentence raises an interesting point, which we will return to later but the police had all the evidence they would ever gather on the Messiter murder, in their hands, by the end of May or beginning of June, 1929. Despite this, Podmore was not charged with the murder at this time. Instead, the police preferred to have him sentenced to another six months in prison, for theft. It was what would happen inside that prison that would cause a number of people to come to eventually believe that a possible miscarriage of justice might have taken place.
William Henry Podmore was duly released from prison on 17 December and once again, was re-arrested at the gates. This time he was indeed charged with the murder of Vivian Messiter. After various appearances before the magistrates, he finally faced his trial at Winchester, before the Lord Chief Justice, Lord Hewart, on 3 March 1930. The trial would last until 8 March, during which Podmore was defended by Mr H du Parcq and Mr T R C Goff. The case for the Crown was led by Sir Thomas Inskip, who was assisted by Mr J G Trapnell.
Harold Frederick Galton was another of the men who, on 28 October 1928, had replied to the advertisement placed by Messiter. Galton had managed to sell a five gallon shipment of oil to Stanley Grover of Nursling Farm and, on the evening of 29 October, Messiter had written out a receipt and got Galton to sign it. This transaction was perfectly legitimate but the page prior to this, in Messiter’s book, had been torn out.
It was soon noticed that Galton’s signed receipt bore indentations from that now missing page. It was not until 7 March 1929, whilst Podmore was in prison, that this receipt was examined more carefully. A powerful light was shone, at an angle, onto the receipt and this revealed the writing from the page above. This had been photographed and was now introduced into evidence. The previous page had been a receipt, dated 28 October 1928 and read:
Received from Wolf’s Head Oil Company, commission on Cromer and Barrett, 5 galls at 6d, 2/6d.
It was signed, WFT – W F Thomas, the name Podmore had been using. The company named, did not exist. The inference was clear; Podmore had been submitting false orders and claiming commissions he was not entitled to. This was held to be the motive for Messiter’s murder. He had discovered the subterfuge and had no doubt threatened Podmore with the police and had been killed in order to prevent this.
Although Podmore denied it throughout his trial, there is a good deal of evidence that he was indeed stealing from Messiter. A number of receipts were produced in court giving names and address such as; Bold Street, Southampton; Baskerfield of Clayton Farm near Winchester and Ben Jervis of The Crescent, Bassett. All of these were shown to be fictitious, but an examination of Podmore’s past showed that he had links with people and places of a similar name. Thus, he had known a Bold Street in Warrington, a man named Baskeyfield, which was similar to one of the names, and another named Jarvis, again a close approximation. It was too much for coincidence and pointed to a systematic fraud, but did it point to murder? It was true that Podmore had a string of previous convictions for fraud and theft but none had ever involved any degree of violence.
Another witness, Henry Marsh, also did little for the prosecution’s case. Henry lived at 8 Oakfield Mansions, Grosvenor Square, Southampton and was an engineer at the Morris Motor works. Some time in October 1928 he lent his somewhat distinctive hammer to a man and never had it returned to him. Once the body of Messiter had been discovered, pictures and a description of the murder weapon were published and Marsh came forward to positively identify it as his property. He had subsequently attended an identification parade where he failed to pick out Podmore as the man he had given the hammer to. Another man from the Morris Motor Works, who had seen the exchange of the hammer, also failed to pick out Podmore as the man it had been loaned to.
A watch had been taken from Messiter’s body and this had been found, by a plumber, hidden in the cistern of a public convenience, situated at the junction of West Marlands Road and Windsor Road, in Southampton. The watch was only found some four weeks before Podmore’s trial for murder began. It bore a distinctive crest, and the initials VM, which was possibly why no attempt had been made to sell it to a dealer. It had certainly belonged to Messiter for some keys were found with it. Two of these fitted a trunk that had belonged to Messiter and been left behind in his lodgings. Attempts were made to show that Podmore had knowledge of this particular convenience but he denied knowing anything about it.
On 20 October 1928, the day that Messiter was probably murdered, Podmore had travelled to Salisbury with Lily Hambleton in
regard to the position at Downton. Lily testified that they had driven up in a red Morris Oxford, which, allowing for the discrepancy of colour, was probably Messiter’s car. Indeed, Podmore freely admitted that he had driven Messiter’s car to Salisbury.
Continuing her evidence, Lily stated that on that day, Podmore had left their lodgings at some time between 10.00am and 10.30am. She next saw him at 1.00pm when he came home for lunch. He told her he had been working on Messiter’s car but had now finished and was going to drive it over to Salisbury to deliver some oil. He then returned to Grove Street to pick the vehicle up.
At 2.00pm, Lily met Podmore, with the car, at the top of Cranberry Street. They drove towards Salisbury, finally returning to Southampton for around 5.30pm when Podmore said he had to return the car. He got back to their lodgings at about 5.50pm.
The inference from the prosecution was that Podmore had killed Messiter and then used his car to attend a meeting with his next employer at Downton. Business concluded he had then driven the car back to Grove Street and abandoned it, locking it in the storeroom along with the dead body of Vivian Messiter.
The next two witnesses were ones whose testimony, when examined, should have been rated as totally worthless. They were two convicts who had been in prison with Podmore at Wandsworth and the stories they told were full of contradictions.
The first of these was David Cummings, a Scot, who had gone into Wandsworth on 27 June 1929. It was widely known, throughout the prison, that Podmore was the man suspected of the Southampton murder and, according to Cummings, the two fell into conversation a number of times, especially on exercise. They spoke about the murder and discussed the evidence against Podmore.
According to Cummings, at one stage they spoke about the murder weapon and Cummings had said: ‘It was rather funny that they found your fingerprints on the hammer.’ To this, Podmore was said to have replied: ‘It is quite natural Jock. The hammer belonged to me. I was working with the hammer.’
This is an absolutely astounding statement. Chief Inspector Harry Battley was the head of the fingerprint department at Scotland Yard and he had made a careful examination of the hammer. No prints whatsoever were detected and yet, according to Cummins, Podmore was admitting that there was a legitimate reason for his prints to be on the murder weapon by claiming ownership of it. Further, the court had already heard that the weapon had actually belonged to Henry Marsh and no link with Podmore had been shown.
On another occasion, Cummings claimed that Podmore had actually confessed to the murder saying: ‘I went to steal the car but I had no intention of killing the man.’ Yet it was on record that soon after his admission into Wandsworth, Podmore had asked to be separated from the other men as they were talking to him about the murder and asking him questions. This is the same man who then, apparently, made a full confession to one of the other inmates!
Even more contentious was the testimony of the second convict, Joseph Deass, a negro, who was actually still in Wandsworth and was brought to court under guard to testify against Podmore. Deass said that one day, on exercise, Podmore had said that he wanted to tell him everything. He then continued to tell a story which contained, amongst other elements, the ‘fact’ that Podmore had; ‘…worked eleven months with that man in the garage.’ One day, Podmore had asked Messiter for some money but he had refused. They had argued and Messiter had used bad language to Podmore whereupon he had picked up the hammer and hit him. He had then left Southanpton that same afternoon.
There are two major mistakes with this so-called testimony. First, Podmore had only worked for Messiter for two days, not the eleven months Deass claimed. Secondly, Podmore had not left Southampton until 3 November, five days after Messiter was killed. In short, both of these witnesses were seemingly being rather economical with the truth, yet this was the only extra ‘evidence’ the police had collected after June 1929.
Of more importance perhaps was the testimony of William John Streets. He had been a prisoner at Winchester where he was sent in February 1929 for non-payment of rates. At one stage Podmore asked him if he came from Southampton and when he said that he did, Podmore asked Streets if he knew when the inquest on Messiter was to take place. The two then fell into conversation about the crime and at one stage Podmore said: ‘They had about sixteen hours at me down yonder, but I am not the man. I shall be glad when it is all over as I am innocent of the job.’
In fact, the police had a third convict witness at their disposal. William Goulden had also been in Wandsworth and he had testified at Messiter’s inquest, saying that he too had had conversations with Podmore in which he had admitted his guilt. So weak was his evidence that he wasn’t even called at Podmore’s trial.
The time came for Podmore to take the stand and give his own version of events. He stated that on 23 October 1928, he had replied to two advertisements in the local newspaper. The first of these was to Mr Messiter and the second was to Mr Joseph George Stuart Mitchell of Woodfields, Salisbury, about the position at Downton. Both letters were written in the name of William F Thomas.
Mr Mitchell contacted him the next day and made arrangements to meet at Bargate on Saturday, 27 October at 5.00pm. The two men met, as arranged, and later Mitchell wrote to ‘Thomas’ offering him a month’s trial at £2 10s a week. Podmore accepted but unfortunately, Mitchell was not in a position to take him on immediately and, since he had had a favourable reply from Mr Messiter, he started work for him on 28 October. It was always intended to be just a temporary position until he could take up the employment with Mr Mitchell.
Podmore, perhaps rather foolishly, continued to deny that he had been defrauding Messiter, saying that the fictitious addresses referred to in court were on a list given to him by Messiter. He had spent a good few hours searching for these addresses, obviously without luck. It was pure coincidence that some bore a resemblance to names connected to his past.
On 20 October 20, Podmore had been working on Messiter’s car and at lunchtime, returned to his landlady’s house to say that he would be leaving soon. This, of course, was because he was due to take the position with Mr Mitchell. At the time he was dressed in dungarees and his hands were dirty from his work on the car. These facts were indeed confirmed by his landlady, Mrs Horne.
Podmore admitted that he had used Messiter’s car to visit Mr Mitchell that same afternoon, taking Lily Hambleton with him. Messiter had given his permission for the use of the car as it needed a run to test it after Podmore had worked on it. At the meeting with Mitchell, Podmore confirmed that he had finished work in Southampton and was ready to start work for him. Mitchell told him that he wasn’t needed until the following Monday, 5 November.
On 3 November, the day they finally left Southampton, Podmore and Lily arrived at Downton at around noon. Podmore said that he had lost his wallet and Mr Mitchell loaned him £1 against his first wage packet. The matter of the later theft of the wage packets had already been dealt with and Podmore admitted that he had left the district in order to avoid arrest. Soon afterwards, he had seen an advertisement for a position at the Stonebridge Hotel, Meridien and Podmore had replied. He was interviewed by the proprietor, Alfred Charles Crumbleholme, on 31 December, after which both Podmore and Lily were taken on at a combined wage of £2 per week. They started work there on 4 January 1929.
Much had been made of the fact that Podmore had suddenly left the hotel, without picking up his wages, soon after details of the Southampton murder had appeared in the newspapers. The prosecution claimed that this was a sign of guilt but Podmore said that the hours had been unbearable and he had tried to get his wages but the manager said it would have to wait until after the stocks were checked. Podmore had simply been unwilling to wait.
He and Lily had then travelled to the Potteries, then to Birmingham where he had seen reports of the police wishing to interview him. Podmore had wanted to go to Southampton and travelled down to London for that purpose. Once in the Capital, he had tried to telephone Scotland Yard, to tell th
em he was on his way to Southampton but there was something wrong with the line. He added that the fault might have been with the call-box he was using, rather that with the police line. Asked why he had simply not handed himself in at Scotland Yard which was only a one penny bus ride from the Leicester Hotel, Podmore said that he had no intention of handing himself in to the London police. His intention was just to let them know that he would be in Southampton the next day.
A letter, sent from the office of the Director of Public Prosecutions to Scotland Yard. Dated 31 May 1929, it clearly states that there is not sufficient evidence against Podmore on the charge of murder, yet after this date the only ‘new evidence’ were the statements of Podmore’s fellow prisoners, which were shown to be filled with inaccuracies.
Was Podmore’s story plausible? That was for the jury to decide and, in the event, they decided that Podmore was guilty as charged. He was then sentenced to death by Lord Hewart. An appeal was immediately entered.
That appeal was heard on 7 April 1930 before Justices Avory, Branson and Finlay. There were two grounds to the appeal; that evidence had been admitted which ought not to have been and that the judges summing up had been misdirection. The evidence, which the defence held should not have been admitted was, of course, the testimony of the two prisoners both of whom said that Podmore had confessed his guilt to them. Without this, the evidence was purely circumstantial and it had to be remembered that Podmore had never been found guilty of any other offence involving violence. Despite the doubts, the appeal court judges ruled that there had been sufficient evidence to convict and the summing up had been perfectly fair. The appeal was dismissed.
On Tuesday, 22 April 1930, William Henry Podmore, possibly an innocent man, was hanged at Winchester by Thomas Pierrepoint and Alfred Allen. Only three other men were hanged in a British prison in that year: Sidney Harry Fox for the murder of his mother at Margate; Samuel Cushnan for the murder of a postman in Northern Ireland and Albert Edward Marjeram for the motiveless stabbing of Edith May Parker at Dartford Heath in Kent.
Foul Deeds and Suspicious Deaths in Southampton Page 6