Foul Deeds and Suspicious Deaths in Reading
Page 1
TRUE CRIME FROM WHARNCLIFFE
Foul Deeds and Suspicious Deaths Series
Barking, Dagenham & Chadwell Heath
Barnet, Finchley and Hendon
Barnsley
Bath
Bedford
Birmingham
Black Country
Blackburn and Hyndburn
Bolton
Bradford
Brighton
Bristol
Cambridge
Carlisle
Chesterfield
Colchester
Cotswolds, The
Coventry
Croydon
Derby
Dublin
Durham
Ealing
Fens, In and Around
Folkstone and Dover
Grimsby
Guernsey
Guildford
Halifax
Hampstead, Holborn and St Pancras
Huddersfield
Hull
Jersey
Leeds
Leicester
Lewisham and Deptford
Liverpool
London's East End
London's West End
Manchester
Mansfield
More Foul Deeds Birmingham
More Foul Deeds Chesterfield
More Foul Deeds Wakefield
Newcastle
Newport
Norfolk
Northampton
Nottingham
Oxfordshire
Pontefract and Castleford
Portsmouth
Rotherham
Scunthorpe
Shrewsbury and Around Shropshire
Southampton
Southend-on-Sea
Staffordshire and The Potteries
Stratford and South Warwickshire
Tees
Uxbridge
Warwickshire
Wigan
York
OTHER TRUE CRIME BOOKS FROM WHARNCLIFFE
A-Z of London Murders, The
A-Z of Yorkshire Murders, The
Black Barnsley
Brighton Crime and Vice 1800-2000
Crafty Crooks and Conmen
Durham Executions
Essex Murders
Executions & Hangings in Newcastle
and Morpeth
Great Hoaxers, Artful Fakers and
Cheating Charlatans
Norfolk Mayhem and Murder
Norwich Murders
Plot to Kill Lloyd George
Romford Outrage
Strangeways Hanged
Unsolved Murders in Victorian &
Edwardian London
Unsolved London Murders
Unsolved Norfolk Murders
Unsolved Yorkshire Murders
Warwickshire's Murderous Women
Yorkshire Hangmen
Yorkshire's Murderous Women
Please contact us via any of the methods below for more information or a catalogue
WHARNCLIFFE BOOKS
47 Church Street, Barnsley, South Yorkshire, S70 2AS
Tel: 01226 734555 • 734222 • Fax: 01226 734438
email: enquiries@pen-and-sword.co.uk
website: www.wharncliffebooks.co.uk
First Published in Great Britain in 2009 by
Wharncliffe Books
an imprint of
Pen and Sword Books Limited,
47 Church Street, Barnsley,
South Yorkshire. S70 2AS
Copyright © John J Eddleston, 2009
ISBN: 978 1 84563 113 0
eISBN: 978 1 78303 753 7
The right of John J Eddleston to be identified as author of this Work has been asserted by him in accordance with the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act, 1988.
A CIP catalogue record of this book is available from the British Library.
All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise, without the prior permission in writing of the publishers.
Printed in the United Kingdom by Biddles
Pen & Sword Books Ltd incorporates the imprints of
Pen & Sword Aviation, Pen & Sword Maritime, Pen & Sword Military,
Wharncliffe Local History, Pen & Sword Select, Pen & Sword Military Classics,
Leo Cooper, Remember When, Seaforth Publishing and Frontline Publishing.
For a complete list of Pen & Sword titles please contact:
PEN & SWORD BOOKS LIMITED
47 Church Street, Barnsley, South Yorkshire, S70 2AS, England.
E-mail: enquiries@pen-and-sword.co.uk
Website: www.pen-and-sword.co.uk
Contents
Introduction
Acknowledgements
Chapter 1 An Unkind Man: Mary Newell, 1858
Chapter 2 The Reading Baby-farmer: Amelia Elizabeth Dyer, 1896
Chapter 3 Executions at Reading
Chapter 4 A New Life: Ada Jane Cook, 1918
Chapter 5 Avoiding the Noose: Edith Agnes Loader, 1919
Chapter 6 A Gentleman of the Theatre: The Murder of Alfred Oliver, 1929
Chapter 7 Too Good to Live: Queenie Pennington, 1929
Chapter 8 Behind Closed Doors: Ernest Hutchinson, 1932
Chapter 9 The Airman: Eric Stanley Pocock, 1946
Chapter 10 A Blue Silk Scarf: George Russell, 1948
Chapter 11 Fire! Donald Zombie Batholomew Walton, 1963
Chapter 12 Fingerprints: Benjamin Frank Achilles Comas, 1966
Chapter 13 The Red Mini Murder: Raymond Sidney Cook, Eric Jones, Valerie Dorothy Newell, 1967
Chapter 14 The Gravel Pit Murders: David Burgess, 1967
Chapter 15 The Elvis Fan: Barbara Frances Browne: 1966/67
Chapter 16 Sacrifice: Olton Goring and Eileen Goring, 1971
Introduction
The city of Reading, and the surrounding areas, hold some fascinating stories of murder.
The early chapters of this book carry a theme of women, driven to distraction by unwanted pregnancies, who, at their wit’s ends, deposited their offspring into the cold waters of one of the rivers flowing through the area. The exception, of course, was Amelia Dyer, the infamous Reading baby-farmer, who turned this practice into a lucrative business. We will never know just how many innocent victims died at her hands.
There is, also, the still unsolved murder of Alfred Oliver, who was murdered in his tobacconist’s shop; a crime for which an American actor suffered, in effect, a trial by coroner’s inquisition.
There are those where the person found guilty of the crime suffered death by hanging. One of these was George Russell in 1948. Read his story for yourself and decide if he really was guilty of the crime which claimed his life.
Finally, there are the more modern murders including the red-mini murder and the gravel pits murders. There are even crimes which involved an Elvis Presley Fan Club, and religious sacrifice.
The foul deeds in this book involve murders over a period of more than one hundred years and show a darker side of parts of the county of Berkshire.
Acknowledgements
There are a number of people and organisations I would wish to thank for their valued assistance in the preparing of this book.
My deepest appreciation must go to Yvonne Eddleston, my wife. Not only did she help with the research, making copious notes on some of the cases, but she also proofread every chapter. Her efforts only served to make this work better.
&nbs
p; I must also thank the staff of The National Archives at Kew. It is always a pleasure to work there and the staff are amongst the most helpful I have encountered. They also assisted with many of the illustrations within the book.
My thanks too must go to the staff of the British Library’s newspaper archive at Colindale, north London, for producing many newspapers covering the later cases.
Finally, I would wish to offer my thanks to my publishers, Wharncliffe Books, and especially Mr Rupert Harding.
CHAPTER 1
An Unkind Man Mary Newell 1858
Samuel Mortlake, the master of the Henley Union Workhouse, travelled up to Reading on business, on Wednesday 11 August 1858.
At one stage, Samuel’s business took him past the local police station and he could not help but notice a small crowd gathered around a photograph, pasted up near the main door. Curiosity having got the better of Samuel, he too stopped to take a look at whatever seemed to be generating so much interest.
The photograph was of the body of a male baby, aged some three months or so, recovered from the river near King’s Meadow the day before, 10 August. Whilst the rest of the small crowd gazed at the picture with idle curiosity, Samuel looked at it with something approaching horror, for he had recognised the child.
That evening, Samuel returned to the workhouse and made some further enquiries. These appeared to confirm his worst fears, so the next day, 12 August, he returned to Reading, called at the police station and asked to be allowed to view the body itself. Permission was granted and, finally, a positive identification was made. The body recovered from the river was that of Richard Newell.
The river at King’s Meadow where Mary Newell put her child into the water. The author
Samuel Mortlake went on to make a full statement to the police. In that statement he explained that on 11 January, twenty-two-year-old Mary Newell had been admitted to his workhouse. At the time, she was pregnant but refused to give any details as to who the father might be.
On 7 May, Mary gave birth to a healthy baby boy, who she named Richard. She then remained in the workhouse until 9 August, when she announced that she was leaving, to go to a friend’s house. Mary was interviewed by Mr Mortlake before she left and said she had received a letter from a cousin, a Mrs Bakehouse, who had offered her a place for herself and the child. Mr Mortlake tried, once again, to discover something about the child’s father, but Mary would give nothing away, apart from the fact that he lived in Reading. She had then left the workhouse, at some time between 1.00pm and 2.00pm.
Something of Mary’s history was, of course, known to the workhouse authorities and they were able to give the police details of her family. It was this, which led Constable David Pitts to Mary’s mother’s house, at Ipsden. Mary was at the house and when Constable Pitts asked her where her child was, Mary replied that she had left it with a nurse, but was either unable, or unwilling, to say precisely where. Not satisfied with this answer, Pitts said that he would have to take Mary into custody whereupon she broke down and cried: ‘I was forced to do it.’
Taken to Oxford police station, Mary Newell made a full written statement, admitting that she was responsible for her son’s death. She explained that she had been in service at Wallingford since 1853 and had become rather friendly with a gentleman named Robert Francis, whom she had known for some six years in all. The relationship developed and, in due course, Mary found herself pregnant. By now it was close to Christmas and, naturally growing concerned as to what might happen to her, Mary had gone to Robert and explained her predicament. To her surprise, Robert had shown little interest in her welfare and had simply announced that he was unable to help her, as he was now keeping company with another woman. At her wit’s end, Mary had left her job and gone to stay at the workhouse in Henley, some seven miles away. There she had given birth to Richard and, after a time, had decided to go back to Robert and again ask him for help.
Robert ran a shop in Friar Street, Reading and on 9 August, after she had left the workhouse, Mary had confronted him there. Far from showing the slightest interest in her or the child, Robert had, rather unkindly, simply walked out of the shop leaving Mary with his sister. Mary waited for him to return, but in due course, the sister said she had to put the shutters up for the night. Mary stood outside and then walked up and down Friar Street for some time. When it was clear that Robert was not going to return, she walked on and found herself at King’s Meadow, near the river.
Unsure even what she was doing, Mary stripped her son down to his nappy, tied a small bag she carried around his waist, and weighted it with stones. She then watched as her son lay on his back on the riverbank, kicking his feet. Then, suddenly, he kicked once again and rolled over, into the river. She then walked to her mother’s house where she stayed until her arrest.
Charged with murder, Mary Newell appeared before Mr Justice Erle on 20 December 1858. Mr Griffiths detailed the case for the prosecution whilst Mary was defended by Mr Cripps. Throughout the trial, Mary was constantly in an almost fainting condition and often had to be assisted by the officials set to guard her.
Charles Duffield explained to the court that on Tuesday 10 August, he had been cray-fishing in the King’s Meadow, close to the mill, with a friend of his, Francis Shepherd. At the time, Duffield was standing on the riverbank whilst Shepherd was standing in the river, some two or three feet from the bank.
At one stage, Duffield saw a flash of something pale in the weeds close by. Thinking at first that it might be a fish, he glanced over and, as he gazed, the flash came again. To his horror he saw that it wasn’t a fish, but appeared to be a small, human hand. He shouted across to Shepherd who waded over to where Duffield indicated and grabbed the hand. Shepherd then pulled the body towards the bank where Duffield pulled it out to reveal that it was the body of a male infant, naked except for a nappy but with a bag tied around its waist. Francis Shepherd confirmed this testimony and stated that whilst his friend stayed with the child, he had then run off to find a policeman.
Inspector William Moses told the court that he had charge of this case. The body of the child had been brought to him at the police station and he had noted that the bag was tied around the child’s waist by means of two pieces of string.
Doctor Timothy Lorkin Walford testified that the last witness, Inspector Moses, had brought the child’s body to him and he had therefore performed a post-mortem later that same day. There were no external marks of violence on the child which measured twenty-four inches in length and weighed fifteen pounds. The boy had been well nourished and looked after in life and there were no signs of decomposition. The child’s tongue protruded slightly from between his lips but he had not been strangled or asphyxiated. The condition of the lungs showed that the boy had been placed into the water whilst still alive and the cause of death was drowning.
After Samuel Mortlake, the master of the workhouse, had given his testimony, other witnesses from that same establishment were called to confirm his identification of Richard Newell.
Mary Jones was an inmate of the workhouse and had been there since April. She knew Mary Newell very well and had often helped her to nurse her child, after he was born. Besides identifying Richard’s body, Mary was also able to say that the bag found around his waist had been made by Mary Newell some two or three weeks before she had left on 9 August.
Harriett Gale was a nurse at the workhouse and had attended Mary Newell during her confinement. She was also able to make a positive identification of the body.
The time came for the child’s father to tell his story. Robert William Francis said that he was a poulterer, running his business from a shop in Friar Street. He had first come to know Mary when she was in service and, when she told him she was pregnant, he told her that he was seeing someone else, was about to get engaged and would not help Mary in taking care of the child.
That was the last he saw of her until some time between 7.00pm and 8.00pm on Monday 9 August, when she came into his shop askin
g him for money. He told her that he had none, and then left the shop. He had not seen her again until now, in court.
After Constable Pitts had given his testimony, the jury retired to consider their verdict. After an absence of only twenty minutes, they returned to say that they had found Mary guilty of murder but wished to add a strong recommendation to mercy. As she received the statutory sentence of death, Mary almost fainted and had to be supported.
In the event, the recommendation of the jury did move the authorities and the death sentence was commuted. Mary was then sent to Reading prison to serve out her sentence. Unfortunately, the birth of her child, the unfeeling attitude of the father, the crime she had committed and the ordeal of arrest, trial and the subsequent death sentence had affected Mary’s already fragile mind and she was judged to be insane.
On 4 February 1859, she was transferred to Millbank prison and then, almost immediately, sent to the Fisherton Lunatic Asylum where she remained until December, 1864. By then, she was judged to have recovered somewhat and, on 1 December, was sent back to Millbank. By now she was being considered for eventual release and so, on 1 March 1865, she was transferred to Parkhurst prison for assessment. On 3 July 1866, she was transferred to Brixton where she stayed for two more years, finally being released on 30 November 1868, after serving just over ten years in various institutions. She was now thirty-two years old.
CHAPTER 2
The Reading Baby-farmer Amelia Elizabeth Dyer 1896
On 30 March 1896, a bargeman steering his vessel slowly down the river Thames, between Kennet’s Mouth and the Caversham Lock, spotted a brown paper parcel floating in the river. Grabbing his boat-hook, the bargeman snagged the parcel and dragged it towards his boat. Then, as he pulled the sodden bundle from the river, the paper tore and a baby’s foot slipped out. The bargeman had just recovered the body of a child.
The tragic parcel was soon handed over to the police and one alert officer, Constable James Anderson, found a label from Temple Meads station in Bristol. He also noticed that there was some faint writing on part of the paper. The cold water of the Thames had all but obliterated the writing but by subjecting it to a microscopic analysis, Anderson was able to decipher a name and an address: Mrs Thomas, Piggott’s Road, Lower Caversham. Unfortunately, when that address was checked, officers discovered that Mrs Thomas was no longer there. Meanwhile, using the apparent link to Bristol, officers discovered that a young mother had recently placed a child in the care of a Mrs Thomas. This, in turn, led to the identification of the child found inside the brown paper parcel, as Helena Fry.