POLICE: Okay and what did you use those for?
COOPER: Well working outside, we lived in the country; we always had to have torches, always.
POLICE: Have you any alibi, I know the officer’s asked you, for that evening?
COOPER: I don’t know what I was doing on that day.
POLICE: Okay. When did you first hear about the incident?
COOPER: Local, local uh news. Maybe Percy. Percy used to bring most of the news from town out to us.
POLICE: Can you see the significance and the reason why we’re questioning you about this offence in that a fibre from gloves from the incident at Sardis have been linked to a fibre from inside the underwear of the rape victim?
COOPER: I can see the significance of everything that happens, no matter what, shoplifting down in Milford Haven and whatever, is tenuous line trying to, trying to put it back to John Cooper. Well you people must stop this.
POLICE: And the way that we investigate offences is to look at evidence, to look at suspects and to question them.
COOPER: Yes.
POLICE: I’ve no further questions in relation to the Milford Haven rape. If we move on now to another matter which you’ve already been interviewed on in 2008 by myself, Louise and also DC Nigel Jones. In connection with the murders of Richard and Helen Thomas at Scoveston on the 22nd December 1985. I’m not going to cover all the detail of the previous interview okay but what I’m going to do is to ask you to comment, ’cause I think it’s only fair, on some fresh information that we’ve received, okay? To sum up you initially stated in the previous interviews that you hadn’t been on the grounds of Scoveston Park and then you later recalled an incident where you may have been in there to retrieve some irrigation equipment and then you asked us whether there was a clock tower there. We went to check and there was. Is there anything else you wish to add with regards to occasions you’ve visited Scoveston?
COOPER: I’ve only ever been down to Scoveston about two or three times that I can recollect.
POLICE: Okay.
COOPER: And one of the occasions would have been with Flo and my wife in the car. With Flo Evans sorry, right. Are you aware who Flo Evans...?
POLICE: Yes.
COOPER: She was their nanny.
POLICE: Yeah we discussed in previous interviews, okay. You were also questioned in relation to knowledge and contact with Richard Thomas. You said you’d only met on a few occasions and those meetings had been at Flo Evans’ house.
COOPER: Oh yeah, mostly.
POLICE: And you mentioned if my memory serves me correct that you helped put some items in the car and may have touched all the doors of Richard Thomas’ Rover.
COOPER: Yeah, yeah, yeah.
POLICE: Yeah? Okay. We asked you in the previous interviews whether or not you’d been to the property to purchase any feed or hay and you said you hadn’t.
COOPER: Yes.
POLICE: Okay, is that still the case?
COOPER: What would I buy off him? Let me explain, right. I was only a smallholder right, small… I used to rear calves up. Somebody like Mr Thomas would be buying not what I finished, what somebody had finished after me. He had older stock, right. Why would I buy hay, straw or barley off Mr Thomas? I don’t know whether he did sell it or not, but why would I? Mike Richards used to sell me all I wanted as part of my wages.
POLICE: And we went through that and explained it.
COOPER: Yes.
POLICE: Do you remember the previous interview I detailed you a statement from a Christopher Davies who said that you’d visited there to purchase feedstuff and you said you hadn’t, okay?
COOPER: Yes.
POLICE: Have you ever argued with Richard Thomas regarding the price of hay?
COOPER: I’ve never bought a thing off Mr… Mr Thomas. I had no need to. I bought it off Mike Richards, ask him.
POLICE: From your initial comments and, obviously the contents of statements, it suggests to you playing down your knowledge and relationship with Mr Thomas. What have you got to say to that?
COOPER: He wasn’t a man I could socialise or many other people could socialise. It was to get a good day out of the man down at Flo’s. I met mostly down Flo’s.
POLICE: Okay so we’ve talked about the cut fences at that… Were you the person responsible cutting fences in, on or around Scoveston Farm fields?
COOPER: You wouldn’t go near the place because the man was didn’t tolerate things like that.
POLICE: And what about afterwards?
COOPER: After?
POLICE: After 1985. Have you ever cut any fences in or around Scoveston?
COOPER: I haven’t been across the land there.
POLICE: Okay. In your last interviews we spoke about Mr Raymond, who you call the son of Davey Raymond.
COOPER: Yeah.
POLICE: Yeah? In fact it’s Davey Raymond’s younger brother okay? You seem surprised.
COOPER: I didn’t know that.
POLICE: And he’s the victim of the burglary at 23 Castle Pill on the 1st March 1996 okay? We’ve been through in previous interviews today about recording the fact that he didn’t have any ammunition or shotguns, sorry any ammunition stolen at the time of your shotgun okay? In a previous interview you said to us, ‘Go and speak to him about it’ and in fact, to confirm as we did earlier, we have. He has denied that the cartridges recovered from your duck run were from his address okay? So obviously then I’ve explained earlier the significance we find…do you remember I showed you photographs in the previous interviews of a box with Maxim 5 written on, on the Baikal box?
COOPER: Oh yeah.
POLICE: Yeah?
COOPER: Yeah.
POLICE: And that’s been examined by a handwriting expert who said that those details on that box were not written by yourself, were not written by Richard Thomas but may have been written by Helen Thomas okay? And the ammunition, the cartridges in there are the same type as those used in the murders of Richard and Helen Thomas. I’ve got to ask you that as a result of that and other evidence were you the person responsible for murdering Richard and Helen Thomas?
COOPER: No I was not.
POLICE: Okay. By telling us or trying to link the shotgun ammunition with the shotgun, were you trying to distance yourself from the shotgun, from the Scoveston incident and to lead our investigation in another direction?
COOPER: I’ve already explained how they came into my possession.
POLICE: So again I’ll ask you, were you the person responsible for the murder of Richard and Helen Thomas?
COOPER: No I was not.
The interviews had been fascinating and the potent combination of male and female officers had worked a treat: Cooper did not like it. Much of his violent offending had been directed against women and when challenged by Louise, the real John Cooper had come to the surface. At one stage he had almost said something insulting to her, but had just about managed to hold on to his tongue. I think he was going to make a derogatory comment about her being female. “Young lady, I won’t say it” said Cooper. What was it he was going to say? At the conclusion of the challenge interview I was happy we had put the relevant issues to him. There is a temptation to keep hammering on, but for me this would have been pointless and unnecessary. I sat with Lynne Harries and Glyn Johnson and reviewed our position and we were happy. “Okay team, let’s speak to the CPS and get a decision,” I said, sensing the anticipation in the room. As the day had gone on I had spoken to the CPS on a number of occasions and they were fully across events. I didn’t have to wait long for their response: “Charge him with the lot!”
There are not many times in a career that you get the chance to charge a serial killer. It was important that I chose people from the original team who had been in for the long haul. The honour fell to DC Nigel John and DC Steve Rowe. Both had made significant contributions to the investigation doing some of the less glamourous but no less important work. When I asked them to charge Cooper they had a look
of disbelief, quickly followed by a look of satisfaction and determination to be professional to the end. At 19.02 p.m. on 14 May 2009, John William Cooper was charged with the following offences:
The murder of Richard Thomas at Scoveston Park on the 22nd of December 1985.
The murder of Helen Thomas at Scoveston Park on the 22nd of December 1985.
The murder of Peter Dixon at Little Haven on the 29th of June 1989.
The murder of Gwenda Dixon at little Haven on the 29th of June 1989.
Attempted robbery on XXX at Milford Haven on the 6th of March 1996.
Attempted robbery on XXX at Milford Haven on the 6th of March 1996.
Attempted robbery on XXX at Milford Haven on the 6th of March 1996.
Attempted robbery on XXX at Milford Haven on the 6th of March 1996.
Attempted robbery on XXX at Milford Haven on the 6th of March 1996.
The rape of a 16 year-old female at Milford Haven on the 6th of March 1996.
Indecent assault of a 15 year-old female at Milford Haven on the 6th of March 1996.
Cooper made ‘no comment’ to all charges. The only emotion he showed was when he was charged with the sex offences on the children. For me this was nothing more than concern for himself, not for the victims. Cooper had spent over ten years in prison and he knew how other inmates treated child sex offenders and how this could possibly impact on him. Nigel John and Steve Rowe came back into the control room. “Done boss.” There were no cheers or backslapping, just a collective sense of satisfaction that the hard yards had been rewarded. I knew that we would face many challenges before he would be standing in the dock, but I also knew I had the right team to get him there. I spoke with DCC Andy Edwards and Chief Superintendent Steve Mears who had been preparing for a news conference to make the announcement that Cooper had been charged. The media interest was huge and an indication of things to come. As we took stock of the extraordinary events we knew it would be almost two years before we saw Cooper in the flesh again. Then he would be standing in the dock of a courtroom.
Preparing for the Big House
THE LAST FEW WEEKS HAD been a whirlwind with little time to draw breath. Cooper had now been remanded into custody. Speculation had started in the press suggesting Cooper was responsible for other murders and everyone wanted to get my views on this theory. My focus was on providing the best case for the Crown and nothing else. Two days after charging Cooper I pulled the management team together. We agreed that Gareth Rees and Paul Jones would act as Officers In the Case (OIC) and be responsible for the file preparation, which was split into four sections: Scoveston Park murders, Dixons murders, Milford Haven robbery/rape and Evidence of Bad Character. Lynne Harries and Glyn Johnson were identified as the team leaders and would co-ordinate the activity of the rest of the Ottawa team that had now grown to eighteen.
Like the rest of my management team I believed that other forensic ‘golden nuggets’ would inevitably come our way. The disclosure team needed to be aware of any possible angles for the defence whilst reviewing the vast amount of material. It was clear that they had an excellent working relationship with Grenville Barker from the CPS who had provided considerable advice and guidance on the process. I insisted that I wanted to be as transparent as possible with the defence in relation to disclosure and would work with them in discharging this responsibility. Failure to get a proper hold of the disclosure process had been the graveyard of many high profile investigations and I was determined this would not happen to Ottawa. We had come too far only to fall at the final hurdle.
The main challenge in the file preparation work was identifying where there might be gaps in our evidence. Many of the contributions of the experts and scientists were in the form of reports and not evidential statements, and a significant number of the police officers involved in the investigations had either retired or passed away. There were also holes in some of the continuity evidence about how exhibits and material were moved from A to B and so on; the records of continuity existed, but statements had not been taken from those responsible for individual movements. Gareth and Paul needed to pull together a skeleton file and find the evidence where possible to fill the gaps. It was clear that the Forensic Science Service had vast amounts of documentation and case notes connected to Ottawa and they needed to be recovered and transferred to LGC Forensics. The documents would help them assess the integrity of any potential fibre or DNA evidence and this could be vital to the court case.
The role of the family liaison officers was now crucial, particularly for the Milford Haven victims. Three officers were identified to provide this support. They were Fred Hunter, Helen Coles and Donna Thomas. I had an excellent relationship with Tim and Keith Dixon and Julie Pratley (née Dixon) so would continue to deal with them directly. It was important that the family liaison officers were clear about their role. They would provide support to the victims and be their link with the investigation. They would not discuss the evidence, identification issues or the location and identity of Cooper’s family.
Facebook was a new social phenomenon and comments about the case were already appearing. There had also been daubing on walls in Milford Haven, some supportive of Cooper, some not. I knew that the Milford victims had access to Facebook and it was important that they did not engage in local gossip. I was also concerned that this would negatively impact on Cooper’s family, who had behaved impeccably during the process. I did not want them to be affected and I took comfort in knowing that Dean Richards, the local Commander, had dedicated resources to manage the community impact. The victims themselves were at the forefront of my mind. They had suffered long-term effects from that night. Maria, in particular, had suffered significant health problems, directly attributable to that terrible attack. Steven and David had never gone out into the fields again and it had also changed their lives. They had become withdrawn and nervous, and personal relationships had been affected. Susan and Jayne had suffered the most harrowing effects and they would need considerable support over the coming months. I needed them to give evidence and stand in court with the man who had terrorised them. At this stage I was not convinced that I could get them to do this so the work of the Family Liaison Officers would be essential.
The time scale for the initial submission of a file would be tight but achievable, and again I was determined that we would not be found wanting and give the defence the opportunity to criticise us. Discussions had already taken place regarding a possible venue for a trial, likely to take place in the summer of 2010 in Cardiff or Chester. Tom Atherton from the CPS had a view that the Presiding Judge for the West Wales area would not accept the trial being moved from his jurisdiction and would want it heard in Swansea. This presented hidden problems. The first was the selection of a jury not tainted by the reporting of the case. The second was the location of Cooper. He was now a Category ‘A’ prisoner and in a maximum-security jail. Neither Swansea nor Cardiff prisons are Category ‘A’ so would be unable to hold Cooper; this would mean him being escorted from Long Lartin in West Mercia on a daily basis. Clearly this would be impractical and something would need to be sorted out. Thankfully this was not my problem, but Tom was still of the view that Swansea would probably be the venue.
Another pressing issue was the current location of the team. We had now outgrown Pembroke Dock and needed to move. A possible suite of offices had been identified at Pier House in Pembroke Dock. It was a large three-story building owned by the Port Authority and its top floor was vacant. The location was ideal. It had been recently redecorated and had one very large room that could act as the incident room and one large enough to store the files and documents. Following negotiations it was secured and with great assistance from our IT department and with a significant security upgrade, we were able to move in. The office was in a fantastic location with views down the Milford Haven waterway. Of course, I checked the window ledge for binoculars: Fred Hunter was not going to catch me for a second time!
The media inte
rest in the case meant we would need a robust strategy and Rhian Davies-Moore and her team started to think about how we would handle the trial. The BBC Crimewatch programme had indicated that they intended to broadcast an update to both murder investigations on 2 June 2009. The press were also aware that the Dixon family made an annual pilgrimage to Little Haven on the anniversary of the murders to lay a wreath at the scene. It was important to me that Tim and Julie and their family did not suffer the same unacceptable intrusion and treatment they had received from the press in 1989. I leaned on Rhian to call in some favours from the press to avoid this. Thankfully the media were very sympathetic and behaved impeccably.
It was also my plan to carry out a reconstruction of the Dixons’ murder at Little Haven on the anniversary. The news broadcast back in 2007 had already shown us that there were still witnesses out there, and the reconstruction would generate a great deal of interest. It would also be an opportunity for the local officers to provide some reassurance to the local community. We would need the assistance of the National Park in closing off parts of the coastal path, ensuring privacy for Tim and Julie. The National Park and local council would become excellent partners in supporting us up to and through the trial process. Closing the path would give me an opportunity to re-construct the scene and compare it with how it looked back in 1985. It had changed significantly. Young saplings were now fully developed trees, and the old stile below Talbeny Church had long gone. The closed off areas allowed us to secure evidential photographs and put ourselves back in the mind of Cooper to understand why he had selected that location. It was clear that the elevated view from Talbeny Church enabled him to see potential victims walking the coast path and gave him enough time to walk down the slope and climb over the stile to intercept them. The reconstruction was an important part of the case preparation and went like clockwork.
It was now time for my senior team to visit LGC. We had identified some critical exhibits recovered during the searches of Cooper’s home and from the Sardis robbery trail:
The Pembrokeshire Murders: Catching the Bullseye Killer Page 23