by Andrew Cook
13. POST 120/131 (originally closed until 1994; opened 1995).
14. The shop at No 14 was ‘Vanity Fayre’ which held the lease for a five-year period, 1961−66.
15. POST 120/130 (originally opened in 2011; some material remains closed until 2014).
16. POST 120/449 (officially opened 2003; some material still closed until 2017).
17. Ibid.
18. POST 120/130 (officially opened in 2011; some material still closed until 2014).
19. POST 120/133 (officially opened 2011; some material still closed until 2014).
20. POST 120/130 (officially opened 2011; some material still closed until 2014).
21. Ibid.
22. Ibid.
23. Ibid.
24. Lola Willard was in fact the mother of Peter Collinson, who six years later directed the widely acclaimed film The Italian Job, starring Michael Caine. Collinson’s widow, Hazel, spoke at length to the author about Lola Willard. Willard was ‘a glamorous woman in her early 40s who worked in nightclubs in London’s West End such as the Pigalle Club. She had never been a prostitute’, said Collinson, ‘although she certainly had a host of male friends and acquaintances who supported her financially and were no doubt observed by Mr Billington coming and going from the house’.
25. Identified by tailers Gray and Fowler as Albert Millbank; POST 120/133 (officially opened in 2011; some material still closed until 2014).
26. POST 120/448 (officially opened in 2003, although the reports on 99 Pollards Hill South were only opened in November 2011; some material remains closed until 2017).
27. DPP 2/3717, Report 10 (originally closed until 2045; redacted version opened 25/6/10).
28. Ibid.
29. Ibid.
30. Ibid.
31. POST 122/15954 (officially opened in 2011).
32. Ibid.
33. George Hatherill, A Detective’s Story (Andre Deutsch, 1971), p. 210.
34. Ibid.
8
BLIND MAN’S BLUFF
Before fingerprint evidence was available, Metropolitan and Surrey police officers conducted a huge trawl in August of all known associates of the men on Commander Hatherill’s suspect list. Builder Ronald Biggs, whose name was not actually on the Hatherill list, was initially visited at his home on the basis that he was a former known associate of Bruce Reynolds. They had initially thought that Biggs might be handling some of the stolen money, but soon dismissed this suspicion, as DI Basil Morris of Surrey CID explains in his statement:
At 6.45 pm on Saturday, 24 August 1963, in company with Detective Sergeant Church, I saw Ronald Biggs at his home at 37 Alpine Road, Redhill. His wife was present at the time. I told him that we were police officers from Reigate and that we had heard that his wife had recently been spending quite a lot of money. He said, ‘Yes, I expect she has. I won £510 at the races and we decided to spend that and use the money I get from the business towards the houses’.
I told him that I understood that the bookmaker concerned was a man named Inkpen and he said, ‘Yes’. I told him that Inkpen had already been seen and that we had verified that he had, in fact, won £510, and that I understood that the winnings had been collected by a man named Stripp. He said, ‘Yes, he is my partner’. I then asked him why he had not collected the money himself, and he said, ‘I had to go down to Brighton that day so he collected it for me.’ I asked him if he knew any of the men who were wanted in connection with the train robbery in Buckinghamshire, and he said, ‘I knew Reynolds some years ago. I met him when we were doing time together in Wandsworth. Then he used to come down to Mrs Atkins place at Malmstone Avenue when I used to go there, and I met him there once or twice afterwards, but I haven’t seen him now for about three years’.1
I then asked him if any cases or boxes had been brought to his house recently, and he said, ‘No. We had a party last night and we brought a crate of beer in, but that’s all that’s been brought in here’.2
Once the fingerprint evidence garnered by DS Ray and his C3 fingerprint section at Leatherslade Farm was available, it was realised that Biggs was more than an associate and a warrant for his arrest was immediately issued. DI Frank Williams of the Flying Squad and a team of officers arrived at Biggs’s home at 37 Alpine Road, Redhill at around 2.45 p.m. on 4 September, just as Charmian Biggs was about to leave with her two children for a doctor’s appointment. Mrs Biggs was allowed to proceed to the doctors but was accompanied by three police officers. Williams and the other officers remained at the house. On her return from the doctors she found the police carrying out a full forensic search of the house.
DI Williams’s statement gives his version of what took place when Biggs arrived home from work that evening:
At about 6.20 pm, Ronald Arthur Biggs arrived there and I said to him, ‘We are Police officers. We are here in connection with the train robbery in Buckinghamshire recently, and I am in the process of searching your house’. He said, ‘What again? The local law turned me over some time ago about that. You haven’t found anything, have you?’ I said, ‘No, nothing has been found’. He said, ‘That’s all right then.’
The search was continued in his presence, and when this had been more or less completed, I said to Biggs, ‘It is proposed to take you to New Scotland Yard in order that further enquiry may be made’. He replied, ‘That don’t sound too good. What are my chances of creeping out of this?’ I left the address with him, and on the way to New Scotland Yard he said, ‘I don’t know how you’ve tied me in with that lot in the papers’. I said, ‘Do you know any of them?’ He said, ‘Well, I’ve read all about it, but I don’t know any of them’. I said, ‘Are you sure?’ and he said, ‘I know what you are getting at. Yes, I know Reynolds. He’ll want some catching’.
At 7.30 pm the same day I introduced Biggs to Chief Superintendent Butler at New Scotland Yard. I was present when Biggs was asked a number of questions which were taken from a prepared questionnaire, and I saw the replies written down by Chief Superintendent Butler as Biggs uttered them. He refused to sign the document when he was asked to do so.
Chief Superintendent Butler then said to Biggs, ‘I am satisfied that you have been consistently lying. You will be taken to Aylesbury Police Station and charged with being concerned with others in committing robbery’. Biggs was cautioned and he said, ‘Get on with it. You will have to prove it all the way. I’m admitting nothing to you people.’ He was taken to Aylesbury Police Station, accompanied by Chief Superintendent Butler, Detective Sergeant Moore and myself. During the journey Detective Sergeant Moore was instructed to take Biggs’ antecedent history. He did so, and when this officer asked Biggs to account for his employment during the last two months, he said, ‘I’ve been working on four different jobs with my partner, who is named Stripp’. Sergeant Moore asked him to specify each job, and he then gave the name and address of one firm. He then refused any further details. Chief Superintendent Butler pointed out to him that it was in his own interests to explain where he was working on or about the 7 and 8 August 1963, whereupon Biggs said, ‘I’m not saying. I’ll keep that up my sleeve’. I later formally charged and cautioned Biggs at Aylesbury Police Station, and he replied, ‘No’.3
Once Biggs’s fingerprints had been discovered and confirmed, the police undertook an in-depth investigation into him and his known associates, which would ultimately lead to a new line of enquiry. For some weeks it had been erroneously thought by the police and the IB that forcing Jack Mills to drive the train for the half-mile journey from Sears Crossing to Bridego Bridge had been part of the robbers’ original plan. Mills, too, believed this and in an interview with the Daily Mirror’s Tom Tullett had said: ‘I think they might have killed me, but I was too important to their plans … I’m certain they didn’t know how to drive the diesel and that’s what saved me.’4
However, as the IB’s R.F. Yates relates in his report, it was during the first week of September that:
Information came to hand that Biggs had recruited
an ex Railway Engine Driver known as ‘Old Alf’5 to drive the TPO after Driver Mills had been knocked out but that ‘Old Alf’ had failed to get the train to move because of the broken vacuum and that Driver Mills had to be brought back to the foot plate. ‘Alf’ has not so far been identified.6
As a result of further information received by DCI Frank Williams, a warrant was obtained on the morning of 6 September to search the home of Daniel Pembroke, CRO No 27206/56. Flying Squad officers, led by Williams and DS Slipper, searched 22 Hood House, Elmington Estate, Camberwell SE5, but nothing incriminating was found. Pembroke, who was in the flat at the time, was then taken to Scotland Yard where he was interviewed by DCS Butler in the presence of DCI Williams.
In Butler’s report to Commander Hatherill, he states that Pembroke was ‘closely interrogated and denied complicity in the case. His palm prints were taken and compared with several palm prints left at Leatherslade Farm by the robbers, but no identification was made.’
Likewise, when a forensic search was undertaken at Leatherslade Farm, pubic hair had been found in a number of the sleeping bags left behind. Pembroke was therefore asked to give samples in order that Dr Ian Holden could undertake a comparison. These also proved to be negative, and Pembroke was allowed to leave.7
The following day, 7 September, a warrant was issued to search the home of painter and decorator James Hussey. Hussey had been under observation for a while, although nothing suspicious had been noted. He was not spending any more money than normal and was doing nothing that might support the information the police had that he was one of the robbers. It was decided, however, that the flat should be searched and Hussey brought in for questioning. DSgts Nevill and Slipper were sent over to the flat where Hussey lived with his parents. In DS Nevill’s statement he says that:
I went to 8 Eridge House, Dog Kennel Hill, London, SE22 in the company of another officer, Detective Sergeant Slipper. I saw a man, James Hussey. I said to him, ‘We are police officers and have a warrant to search this address in connection with the mail train robbery at Cheddington on the 8 August 1963’. Hussey said, ‘Help yourself, there is nothing here.’ We searched the premises with a negative result. I said to Hussey, ‘You will be taken to New Scotland Yard where enquiries into this matter are to be continued’. He said, ‘OK, I have no objections’.8
In the car to Scotland Yard, Hussey allegedly asked Slipper, ‘Guv’nor, what’s this really all about?’ When Slipper replied again that it was in connection with the train robbery, Hussey said, ‘Guv’nor, you keep saying that, but what do you really want?’ After Slipper repeated yet again that it was about the train robbery, Hussey said, ‘I feel much better now as I had nothing to do with that.’
According to Nevill, ‘We arrived at New Scotland Yard at 10.45 am. Hussey was introduced by me to DCS Butler.’ Tommy Butler later wrote an account of the interview:
On the 7 September 1963, at 11 am, Hussey was introduced to me by Detective Sergeant Nevill. I said to him, ‘I am making enquiries in connection with the Mail Train robbery and I have reason to believe that you were one of the men concerned.’ Hussey said, ‘I had nothing at all to do with it. I don’t know Buckinghamshire at all.’ I said, ‘Do you know Leatherslade Farm?’ Hussey replied, ‘No I don’t.’ I said ‘Do you know of villages named Brill and Oakley?’ Hussey said, ‘No, never been there as far as I know.’ I said, ‘Do you know any of the persons already charged with this matter?’ Hussey replied, ‘No, I don’t know any of them.’ I then said, ‘Do you know any of the four men whose names and photographs have appeared in the press in connection with this case?’ Hussey replied, ‘No, they’re all strangers to me.’ I said, ‘Have you any objections to your palm prints being taken?’ Hussey replied, ‘No. I’ve no worries.’ Hussey’s palm prints were then taken by Detective Sgt Nevill and when concluded I said to Hussey, ‘Would you care to make a written statement concerning what you have told me?’ Hussey said, ‘Yes, that’s fair.’ Detective Sgt Nevill then took a written statement, under caution, which at its completion Sergeant Nevill read to Hussey and he signed it as being true.9
At this point DS Ray had a number of palm prints found at Leatherslade Farm that had not yet been identified and set about trying to find out if Hussey’s matched any of these. Eventually, over an hour later, he found a match. Butler further records in his statement that:
I had left the office and returned at 1 pm. I reminded Hussey of the caution and said, ‘I want to ask you about a lorry and a Land Rover which were used in the commission of this offence.’ Hussey said, ‘Ask what you like about them, they’re nothing to do with me.’ I said, ‘Did you take part in the purchase of a Land Rover from Humphries at Winchmore Hill in July, or an Austin lorry from Mullards by a man Blake of Kenton, Middlesex, in the same month?’ Hussey replied, ‘I don’t know anything about those people or the motors.’ I then said, ‘Do you wish to make a further written statement concerning this?’ Hussey said, ‘Yes, I don’t mind.’ Detective Sgt Nevill then took a further written statement under caution, which at its completion Hussey read and signed as being true.
Hussey was then told that he was going to be taken to Aylesbury Police Station where he would be charged with involvement in the robbery.
While still unable to find any fingerprint evidence on Gordon Goody at Leatherslade Farm, the police had asked the IB to shadow him and record the comings and goings at Courtneys, the ladies’ hairdressing salon he owned in Lower Richmond Road, SW15. While a great deal of time was clearly invested in the Goody observation exercise, the operational files make clear that very little of value was achieved by it. Typical is a report from IB officers E.H. Hood and F. Underwood on 10 September, three days after Hussey’s arrest:
12 Noon: Two men, aged about 30 years, 5’ 10”, smartly dressed arrived at Courtneys in a car – Maroon Consul 722 CFY (first registered in 1961 to James Pemberton, flat 89, Kings Court, London W6). In the shop about 2 minutes and drove in direction of Putney Bridge. Unable to follow.
3.15 pm: Saw a man, recognized as Goody, arrive at 6 Commondale in a black and White MG car 894 AMW.
4.45 pm: Mr Goody left the house and drove in the direction of Putney Bridge, where he was lost from view. Not seen again.10
IB and Flying Squad officers were also keeping the home of turf accountant Thomas Wisbey under observation. He had initially been questioned shortly after the robbery, not as a suspect but on account of the fact that he and his wife Rene were close friends of Ronald and June Edwards. When Wisbey’s fingerprint had been found at Leatherslade Farm it had been decided that rather than publicising his name, the Flying Squad would wait for him to surface. Initial enquiries had established that he had not been seen around his usual south London haunts for the past week. In light of this, DI Frank Williams thought that Wisbey might be hiding out at home, and therefore raided his third-floor flat at 27 Ayton House, Elmington Estate, Camberwell at 7 a.m. on 7 September. Wisbey lived close to Daniel Pembroke on the Elmington Estate and they were known to be close friends. According to Williams’s report, Rene Wisbey made tea while the flat was being searched. However, neither Wisbey nor anything else of assistance was found at the flat. Wisbey’s tearful wife told Williams that he had left her for another woman and that the pair were now in Spain on holiday. A disbelieving Williams thanked her for the tea and returned to Scotland Yard.
In spite of the raid, Wisbey was clearly confident that the police had no evidence against him, so much so that four days later he telephoned Frank Williams at Scotland Yard and offered to meet him. Williams knew Wisbey well, although this is not apparent from his somewhat formal and measured report:
On 11 September 1963, at about 11 am at New Scotland Yard I received a telephone call from a man who said, ‘I am Wisbey, I understand you want to see me.’ I said, ‘That’s right, where can I see you?’ He said, ‘I will be in my shop in half an hour.’ At 11.30 am I saw Thomas Wisbey in a betting shop at 1 Red Cross Way, SE1, I was with Detective Sergeant Moor
e.11 I said to Wisbey, ‘I would like you to come with me to New Scotland Yard where you will be questioned in connection with the train robbery in Buckinghamshire.’ He replied, ‘I thought so, that’s why I rang you up. I’ll come now.’ He was taken to New Scotland Yard where Detective Sergeant Moore took his palm impressions. Following this at about 12.15 pm he was interviewed by Chief Superintendent Butler in my presence and that of DSgt Moore.12
Butler asked Wisbey the same set of standard questions he had asked the others, which were designed to compromise them in light of the fingerprint evidence from Leatherslade Farm, which thus far he had not disclosed to them:
I said to him, ‘I am making enquiries into the robbery of a train at Cheddington, Buckinghamshire, on the 8 August of this year and I have reason to believe that you can assist us in this case’. Wisbey replied, ‘I don’t know anything about it’. I said to him, ‘Do you know villages called Brill or Oakley in Buckinghamshire’. He replied, ‘No, I’ve never been there as far as I know’. I said, ‘Do you know Leatherslade Farm?’ He said, ‘No, not at all, except what I’ve read in the newspapers’. I said, ‘Can you tell us in greater detail than we have at present what your movements and location were on the 7 and 8 August 1963?’ Wisbey said, ‘I have already told the other officers that. It was all written down’. I showed Wisbey a typed copy of the statement he had made earlier. He read it and said, ‘That’s it, that’s the absolute truth. You can ask those people I have mentioned. They will tell you so as well’. I said, ‘Do you know any of the persons charged in connection with this case?’ Wisbey said, ‘I only know Jimmy Hussey, I’ve known him a few years. I don’t know the others’. I said, ‘Do you know the persons whose names and addresses were in the papers recently?’ He replied, ‘I saw their photos, I don’t know any of them’. I asked him if he would be prepared to make a written statement fully covering his movements at the material time and he said, ‘Sure I will’. A written statement was taken under caution from him by Inspector Williams in my presence and Wisbey signed it as correct after it had been read to him. I left the office and returned later after about five minutes. I said to Wisbey, ‘I have reason to believe that you were in fact one of a number of men directly concerned in this crime. You will therefore be taken to Aylesbury Police Station and charged with robbery’. He was cautioned and said, ‘All right, I know it will be done on its merits’.13