Various witnesses had seen something of the fracas in the street, and they were able to supply descriptions of many of those involved. Those descriptions, and other evidence led to the arrest of eleven men, all of whom were charged with affray. In addition to Michael Bloom, the police also arrested Brian Robert Murray, George William Fletcher, Frederick John Jackman and his brother, Ronald James Jackman, Brian John Thwaites, John Budd, Ronald Bergonzi, Frederick Robert Newbolt, David Henry Bailey and Peter Sydney Dean. All would eventually appear in court on 11 February 1959 but, in the meantime, there was no sign of the man who had stabbed Constable Summers: Ronald Henry Marwood. He had simply vanished from his home at 37 Huntingdon Street.
Although none of the men who had been with Marwood would confirm that he had struck the fatal blow with his knife, they did reveal some of their movements on the night that Summers died. Exactly one year before, on 14 December 1957, Marwood had married, so the night of the stabbing was his first wedding anniversary.
Marwood had, apparently, asked his wife to go out with him to celebrate, but she had decided to stay at home. She had had no objection, however, to her husband going out with his friends. Marwood had first gone to the Spanish Patriot public house in White Conduit Street. From there he and his friends had gone to the Double R Club, in Bow Road, where they had remained until closing time. In all, it was estimated that Marwood had consumed around ten pints of beer in those two establishments.
Once the Double R had closed, the group decided to go to Barries Dance Academy at 12 Highbury Corner, and it was from there that they walked to Grey’s Dancing Academy. One of their number went to the front door, and almost immediately, another gang of youths dashed out and a street fight started. Coshes, choppers and knives were used, and some minor injuries inflicted, before Constable Summers had appeared, and many of the youths ran off.
In fact, it soon became clear that two officers had actually interviewed Marwood after the fight. Once news of Constable Summers stabbing had been broadcast on the police radios, officers went in search of the men who had been fighting in Seven Sisters Road. At 11.00pm, two officers in a police van, Constable Sidney Robert Baker and Constable Cyril Burt, had seen four men walking down Hornsey Road. As the police van approached them, two of the men ran off but the other two were stopped and questioned.
The two men identified themselves as Marwood and David Henry Bailey, and even as the two officers spoke to them, they could not help but notice that Marwood had a deep cut across the fingers on his right hand. Asked to explain their movements that night, Marwood lied, and said that they had been drinking at the Finsbury Park Hotel and had been involved in a fight there.
Baker and Burt were not prepared to accept this statement at face value. Marwood and Bailey were placed into the police van, and taken to Holloway police station. Both were interviewed separately, and made written statements, which roughly corresponded. At 9.30am the following morning, Monday 15 December, the two men were taken to the Finsbury Park Hotel to see if the landlord could confirm their story. Unfortunately, the previous night had been a very busy one and even though Marwood and Bailey indicated where they had been sitting, the landlord said he couldn’t possibly remember every customer he had served on the Sunday. As for the supposed fight outside, well, there were constant fights over every weekend and it was likely that there had been one on that weekend too. At this point, since the stories seemed to be acceptable, the two men were driven to their respective homes and released from custody.
Once things in Seven Sisters Road had become clearer, the police decided to interview Marwood and Bailey again. On the morning of Tuesday 16 December, Bailey was taken back into custody and interviewed again. At 7.30pm that evening he finally admitted that he, Marwood and others had been at the scene of Constable Summer’s stabbing and that Marwood had probably been the one who used the knife. Of course, by this time, Marwood had left home, and his family claimed to have no idea where he was. They also said that they believed he would not have had anything to do with the stabbing.
On Wednesday 17 December, Marwood’s wife, Rosalie, received a letter from her husband, postmarked South Kensington. In that letter he wrote that he could not understand why the police were looking for him, as he had already told them everything he knew when he had been picked up. That letter was handed over to the investigating officers that same day.
On Friday 19 December, as part of the round-up of those who had been involved in the fight, Michael Bloom was arrested. He now confirmed that Constable Summers had arrested him and had his arm pinned behind his back, when Marwood appeared to punch the officer in the back. Summers then let Bloom go and the two men ran off. They then hid in a private garden at 32 Isledon Road and, as they crouched down, Marwood said that he had done the copper. He then showed Bloom the knife before hiding it amongst a pile of garden rubbish. When officers went to that address later that same day, they recovered a bloodstained knife which proved to be the weapon that had been used on Constable Summers.
Still there was no sign of Marwood. On 3 January 1959, his description and a photograph of the wanted man was released to the press. It brought no new leads. By now the police were convinced that Marwood’s family knew far more than they were saying so, on 22 January, Rosalie Marwood was interviewed again. She told officers that she believed her husband was being hidden by John Nash, of 41 Macclesfield Road, and Robert Stokes, of 13 Moira Street, off the City Road. Both men were well known to the police but, when they were interviewed, both said that had nothing to do with hiding the wanted man.
Rosalie Marwood had, in fact, given the police one more very important piece of information. Now, finally, she admitted that before he had left home to go into hiding, her husband had admitted to her that he had stabbed a policeman.
Marwood knew that it was only a matter of time before he was picked up. In the event, he saved them the trouble. At 7.30pm, on 27 January 1959, three men walked into the police station on Caledonian Road. The three were Marwood, his uncle, Harry William Day, and his cousin by marriage, Daniel John Carr. Day and Carr both denied that they had been hiding Marwood. He had merely called them, said he wished to give himself up, and had asked them to accompany him to the station.
Taken in for interview Marwood said: ‘You can write it all down. I did stab the copper that night. I’ll never know why I did it. I have been puzzling over in my mind during the last few weeks why I did it, but there seems no answer.’
Marwood’s trial took place at the Old Bailey on 19 March 1959, before Mr Justice Gorman. The prisoner was defended by Mr Neil Lawson and Mr M Levene whilst the prosecution case was outlined by Mr Christmas Humphreys and Mr EJP Cussen.
The law relating to capital punishment had changed in 1957, and now there were just five circumstances in which a case of murder could result in a death sentence. One of those circumstances was the murder of a police officer, or a prison officer, in the course of their duty. That meant that if Marwood were found guilty of the murder of Constable Summers, he would face death by hanging.
In addition to the testimony of the witnesses already mentioned, the prosecution called Dr Francis Camps, who had performed the post-mortem on the dead officer. He reported a single stab wound on the left side of the back, some five inches below shoulder level and some four inches from the midline of the back. The wound had passed into the chest cavity between the sixth and seventh ribs, which was only possible if Constable Summers had had his arm raised at the time the wound was inflicted. The wound had then passed through the upper part of the lower lobe of the left lung and then on into the aorta. The cause of death was loss of blood.
This was an important piece of testimony, for the defence as well as the prosecution. Marwood admitted that he was responsible for Summer’s death, but claimed that he had acted in self-defence and so was only guilty of manslaughter. He claimed that he had seen his friend, Bloom, arrested and went to intervene. Constable Summers had told him to step away and pushed him to emphasi
se the point. Marwood took a step back towards the officer, who then raised his hand. Marwood thought he was going to be attacked. and lashed out in self-defence, not realising that he had the knife in his hand. However, this did not explain how Constable Summers had suffered a wound in his back.
Having considered all the evidence, the jury found Marwood guilty of the capital crime and he was duly sentenced to death. An appeal was heard, in April, and dismissed, but other efforts were made to save Marwood’s life. One hundred and fifty members of parliament, mostly Labour, signed an appeal for Marwood to be reprieved. There was also a public petition for mercy, which attracted thousands of signatures. A last minute request to the Attorney General was made for permission to appeal to the House of Lords, but that was rejected for the somewhat irrational excuse that it was out of time. Such a request was supposed to be made within seven days of the death sentence being given. The authorities were not to be moved, just because a man’s life was at stake.
On Thursday 7 May 1959, a crowd of more than one thousand people demonstrated outside the gates of Pentonville prison. At the same time, a group of prisoners inside the jail organised their own demonstration. None of it was to save Marwood from the gallows.
The following day, Friday 8 May, twenty-five-year-old Ronald Henry Marwood, an only child, was hanged by Harry Allen, who was assisted by Harry Robinson.
Chapter 38
John Patrick Quinlan
1962
There were a number of people living at 125 Andover Road in 1962. The owner of the house was Mary Kate Davitt, but she rented out a couple of rooms to lodgers. Peter Francis Clifford lived in one room and the one next door to his was shared by fifty-one-year-old John Patrick Quinlan and fifteen-year-old Michael Joseph Teahan.
On Monday 16 April, Quinlan, who was employed by London Transport, went to work at 6.20am. He was on duty until 4.30pm but did not go straight home. Instead he went to the company canteen first, had some tea, and finally left at around 4.45pm. From there he walked to Euston Square, where he went to the cinema, leaving there at 8.00pm. He would later claim that after leaving the picture house, he met a prostitute who offered him sex for 10s but he managed to negotiate a reduction to 5s. After that encounter he went to a public house, where he drank just one pint. He then went back to his room at Andover Road, stopping off for fish and chips on the way.
It was around 9.30pm by the time Quinlan arrived home. He sat down and started a letter to a friend of his in the United States, and whilst he was writing it, Michael Teahan arrived home. The two chatted for a while before both went to their respective beds.
At some time during the small hours of the next morning, Quinlan awoke to find that his bed and his pyjamas were wet. He felt disorientated and had something of a headache, but managed to get back to sleep. The next morning, he only woke at 10.00am, but still felt very tired indeed. Glancing across the room, he saw that Michael was also still in bed. That was most unusual as Michael was normally an early riser. Quinlan still didn’t feel very well, so decided to stay in bed. At 10.30am he shouted across to Michael, asking him if he was all right. There was no reply.
It was not until noon, when the landlady, Mary Davitt, came into the room, that Quinlan finally got out of bed. Mary was also most surprised to see that Michael was still in bed, and noticed that he looked rather pale. She went over to his bed and saw that he had apparently been sick in the night, as there was some vomit close to his mouth. She tried to rouse him. At one stage she even gently slapped his face, but it was no use. Michael could not answer his landlady, for he was dead.
Dr David Cline attended the scene and confirmed that Michael was dead. He noted that, once the bedclothes were removed, Michael’s skin had a pale pinkish tinge. That, added to the fact that he had vomited, and that his room-mate had been feeling sick during the night, led Dr Cline to suggest that Michael had been the victim of an accidental carbon monoxide poisoning, most probably from a faulty gas meter. However, Dr Cline also noted that Michael’s body lay in a rather posed position, as if he had been placed in that bed by some other person.
It was 5.15pm on Tuesday 17 April, when Dr Hugh Robert Molesworth Johnson, a forensic pathologist, made his own examination of the young man. He began by noting the frothy vomit that had issued from the corner of Michael’s mouth, and the pale cherry pink tinge to his skin. This seemed to confirm that death was due to carbon monoxide poisoning, and Dr Johnson placed the time of death between 1.00am and 5.00am. There was, however, one other factor, which led to police involvement. A good deal of spermatozoa was discovered on Michael’s body, and in his anal passage. It seemed that Michael had engaged in anal intercourse some time before he had died. Since there was only one other person in his room, the most likely suspect for that was John Quinlan.
Quinlan had already made a statement to the police, in which he had outlined his movements of the previous night, but had omitted his encounter with the prostitute, and the fact that he had had sex with her. On 18 April, Detective Inspector Thomas O’Shea called back at Andover Road, to interview Quinlan again. He was not at home, so the officer waited in the street outside. At 11.15pm, he saw Quinlan staggering up the road, obviously the worse for drink. He identified himself as a police officer and told Quinlan that he would be taken to Holloway police station for further questioning. It was there that he made a second statement, now mentioning the prostitute, thus causing the police to conclude that he had deliberately lied the first time he had been interviewed. These factors led to John Quinlan being charged with buggery on 20 April and murder on 9 May.
Quinlan’s trial began on 19 June 1962 and would last until 22 June. The prosecution began by explaining that the prisoner had been born on 5 March 1911, in Eire, and was one of a family of twelve children. He had six sisters and five brothers, and had worked for London Transport for the past five years.
William Peter Roxborough told the court that the dead man had been his brother-in-law and would have been sixteen on 25 April 1962. It was Michael’s custom to have his evening meal at Roxborough’s house. He had done so on the night of 16 April, and had left to go home at 10.05pm. It was a twenty-minute walk, or so, to Michael’s lodgings so he would have arrived there shortly before 10.30pm.
The suggestion, by the defence, was that this had been an accidental death, due to a faulty gas meter. No fewer than three men were called to give evidence on the meter in the premises.
Arthur William Lightfoot was a gas-fitter, working for the North Thames Gas Board, and he had fitted a new coin-operated meter at 125 Andover Road at 7.35am on 12 April, just a few days before Michael died. He had tested it at the time and found it to be in perfect working order.
On 17 April, after the tragedy had taken place, the meter was checked by another fitter, Samuel Albert Bateman. He noted that the main stop-cock was in the off position and the lever had been incorrectly placed, so that it was pointing downwards instead of upwards, though this would not render the meter dangerous in any way. Finally, the meter had been checked by Godfrey Gibbs, the District Service manager for the gas board, and he had found it in good order.
Some of this testimony appeared to be negated by the experience of Peter Clifford, who lodged in the room next to the one where Michael had died. He said that he had arrived home at 11.20pm on the night of 16 April, and decided to make himself a cup of tea. He turned the gas on, but found that it must have run out, so placed a shilling in the new meter. Still there was no gas so he gave up on his tea and went to bed.
During the night he heard a loud noise as if someone had fallen. He heard someone moving about outside his room, but did not go to investigate, thinking it was most probably one of the tenants coming home late. The following morning, Peter had a very bad headache, felt sick and had a funny taste in his mouth.
The post-mortem on Michael had been carried out by Dr Francis Edward Camps. He described Michael as being five feet six inches tall and said he had been well nourished in life. There were no signs o
f external violence on his body but his anal passage was relaxed and there was evidence that there had been anal intercourse on several occasions in the past. In Dr Camps’ opinion. Michael had last engaged in anal sex within an hour of his death. Finally, he was able to report that carbon monoxide had been the cause of death and Michael had a 74% saturation in his blood.
Bryan John Culliford was a Senior Scientific Officer at the Forensic Science Laboratory at New Scotland Yard. He reported that both Quinlan and Michael had type-O blood. Quinlan, however, was a secretor, meaning that blood cells were secreted in other bodily fluids such as spittle and sperm.
Mr Culliford had taken an anal swab from Michael’s body and had found human spermatozoa in the passageway. The blanket he had slept under also bore semen stains, as did his trousers, pyjama top, vest and underpants. All these stains had been deposited by someone who was not a secretor, showing that they did not belong to Quinlan. There were, however, stains from a group-O secretor on the eiderdown.
The jury retired to debate the case and came to the conclusion that this was clearly an accident. Michael Teahan had obviously inhaled household gas, but Quinlan and Peter Clifford had also been ill that night. It was clear that, despite what the three witnesses from the gas board had said, there was something wrong with the new meter. Coins had been placed in it but, apparently, still no gas was produced. Forensic tests had also shown that if gas was allowed to flow freely inside the house, there was a strong concentrated build up close to Michael’s bed. The jury duly returned a not guilty verdict.
A number of questions were never actually answered. Had the gas meter been faulty after all? Should the Gas Board have been called to account for the death of Michael Teahan and, finally, who had Michael had sex with in the hours before his death?
FDSD Islington Page 19