Walter Dew: The Man Who Caught Crippen

by Connell, Nicholas

  The Crown had finished presenting its case. Now it was the turn of the defence. Mr Tobin pointed out that every witness who knew Crippen described his character in glowing terms. He was, according to people who knew him, ‘amiable’, ‘kind-hearted’, ‘good-hearted’, ‘good-tempered’, and ‘one of the nicest men I ever met’. How could such a man suddenly become ‘a fiend incarnate’? Furthermore, Crippen’s behaviour did not appear to have changed immediately before Cora’s disappearance, and he carried on working as normal immediately afterwards. Tobin continued:

  The position, therefore, was this. There was an illicit intimacy between Mrs. Crippen and Bruce Miller, and an illicit intimacy between Crippen and Le Neve – the latter might be another reason for Mrs. Crippen’s departure. Where was she now? Why did she go? She went because she had long disliked Crippen, and her dislike had turned to hate. Who knew where Belle Elmore was? Who knew whether it was Belle Elmore’s flesh that was buried in the cellar? Who knew for a certainty whether Belle Elmore was alive to-day or not? Who knew for certain whether she was abroad, whether she was ill or well, alive or dead? In a case of life and death, and in a charge of murder, they had to know, to know beyond all reasonable doubt, before they could find a verdict that would send a fellow-man to death.

  Crippen’s flight could be explained. ‘Feeling there was that high mountain of prejudice which he had erected by his lies against himself, he did what innocent men, threatened with a charge, have done before. He resolved in his folly to fly.’ Finally, Tobin reminded the jury that they had to be sure that the remains had not lain in the cellar of 39 Hilldrop Crescent for years, and that they were indeed those of Belle Elmore.

  When Crippen took the stand he said that the reason he had made such a large purchase of hyoscine was for ‘a nerve remedy in a homeopathic preparation, that is, reduced to extremely minute doses’. He freely admitted purchasing the five grains of hyoscine on 19 January, but claimed to have diluted them into 500 minute doses, two-thirds of which he had already dispensed. He had wanted ‘to prepare some special nerve remedies for some very obstinate cases’. Crippen was unable to provide any record of his disposal of over 300 doses of hyoscine; nor could the remainder of the 500 doses be found.

  Crippen stuck rigidly to his story about returning home from work one day to find his wife gone, and insisted that the statements he had subsequently made concerning her death had all been false. When examined by Huntley Jenkins, Crippen explained his motives for saying Cora had died:

  Crippen I said that my wife had left me, that she afterwards became ill, and that subsequently her death took place. I admit all that.

  Jenkins Were those statements true or false?

  Crippen The statements that I made were false.

  Jenkins Why did you make those statements?

  Crippen She told me I must do the best I could to cover up the scandal, and I made those statements for that reason; I wanted to hide anything regarding her departure from me the best I could, both for my sake and for hers.

  Jenkins Was the statement that you made to Inspector Dew a false or a true statement?

  Crippen It was quite true. Inspector Dew was very imperative in pressing upon me that I must produce my wife, or otherwise I would be in serious trouble. He also said that if I did not produce her very quickly the statements I had made would be in the newspapers the first thing I knew. I made up my mind next morning to go to Quebec, and, in fact, I did go.

  Dew had not told Crippen that he would be in serious trouble if he did not produce his wife, nor did he say anything about publishing details in the newspapers. ‘Obviously, this was a thing I should never have dreamed of doing’, was the indignant Dew’s response.

  Crippen also gave an account of his dramatic arrest by Dew:

  Jenkins Was Inspector Dew’s coming on board at Father Point a surprise to you?

  Crippen It was at Father Point – well, I did not expect him at all. I thought there had been a cable to the Quebec police; I did not expect Inspector Dew; that was a surprise to me.

  Jenkins Inspector Dew says that you said on arrest, ‘I am sorry; the anxiety has been too much.’ What were you referring to then?

  Crippen I was referring to this, that I expected to be arrested for all these lies I had told; I thought probably it would cast such a suspicion upon me, and perhaps they would keep me in prison – I do not know how long, perhaps for a year – until they found the missing woman.

  Crippen was at pains to point out that all he had told Ethel Le Neve about the affair was that Cora had left him, and that she had died.

  On the fourth day of the trial Crippen was recalled, and this time he was examined by Richard Muir. Whispers passed around the court. ‘What is Muir like as a cross-examiner?’, some one asked. ‘Very slow, but very direct,’ was the reply, ‘with a wonderful way of asking awkward questions.’23 Muir’s incisive questioning was in stark contrast with what Crippen had experienced the previous day with Jenkins:

  Muir On the early morning of the 1st February you were left alone in your house with your wife?

  Crippen Yes.

  Muir She was alive?

  Crippen She was.

  Muir And well.

  Crippen She was.

  Muir Do you know of any person in the world who has seen her alive since?

  Crippen I do not.

  Muir Do you know of any person in the world who has ever had a letter from her since?

  Crippen I do not.

  Muir Do you know of any person in the world who can prove any fact showing she ever left that house alive?

  Crippen Absolutely not; I have told Mr. Dew exactly all the facts.

  Muir But you have made no inquiries?

  Crippen I have made no inquiries.

  Muir It would be most important for your defence in this case on the charge of murder if any person could be found who saw your wife alive after the Martinettis saw her alive; you realise that?

  Crippen I do.

  Muir And you have made no inquiries at all?

  Crippen I have made no inquiries at all.

  The crucial evidence of the pyjama top found with the remains made Crippen’s already fragile defence seem all but futile. According to Humphreys, he and Muir had to procure the evidence themselves. Dew had told them that Jones Brothers, who had sold the pyjamas to Crippen, could only say that the jacket was similar to those they occasionally sold to Crippen, and that they could not give a precise date as to when Crippen had bought them. Crippen told the court that he had bought all of the pyjamas that Dew had found at Hilldrop Crescent after he and Cora had moved to that address. Crippen thought that the newer pyjama suit had been purchased by himself in September 1909.

  Muir and Humphreys felt sure there was more information to be gained from Jones Brothers, and on the eve of Crippen’s trial they wrote a series of questions to them explaining why they thought the information was obtainable. The answers showed that they had been sold on 5 January 1909. Regardless of the date of purchase, Muir had established one fact. The material used in the pyjama trousers that Dew found, and its accompanying top found with the remains, was not manufactured and could not have existed before November 1908; therefore the jacket, produced in the court in a sample jar, could not have got among the remains before November 1908, well after the Crippens had moved into Hilldrop Crescent.

  It was such a vital piece of evidence for the Crown’s case that Muir had been worrying whether he could establish the facts about it in their favour, and hoping that the defence would not find out what he was doing. As the information had not arrived until after the trial had started, the prosecution thought it would be unfair to produce it without giving the defence prior warning. The defence could have asked for the trial to be postponed while they found experts to examine the pyjama evidence.24

  The evidence of the pyjama top was so conclusive that the Lord Chief Justice could barely contain his incredulity at Crippen’s defence. He asked the prisoner, ‘Do you re
ally ask the jury to understand that your answer is that, without your knowledge or your wife’s, at some time during the five years, those remains could have been put there?’ Crippen weakly replied, ‘I say that it does not seem possible – I mean, it does not seem probable, but there is a possibility.’

  Richard Muir was relentless in his blunt questioning of Crippen, who was becoming less convincing in his answers despite maintaining his composure. Dew was spellbound by Muir’s cross-examination, saying that ‘Crippen was clever, but not clever enough. There were gaps in his armour which Mr. Muir’s skill was able to pierce.’

  Muir When did you make up your mind to go away from London?

  Crippen The morning after Inspector Dew was there – the 8th or 9th.

  Muir Had you the day before been contemplating the possibility of your going away?

  Crippen I would not like to say that I had made up my mind. When Inspector Dew came to me and laid out all the facts that he told me, I might have thought, well, if there is all this suspicion, and I am likely to have to stay in jail for months and months and months, perhaps until this woman is found, I had better be out of it.

  Judge Mr. Crippen; do you really mean that you thought that you would have to lie in gaol for months and months; do you say that?

  Crippen Quite so, yes.

  Muir Upon what charge?

  Crippen Suspicion.

  Muir Suspicion of what?

  Crippen Suspicion of – Inspector Dew said, ‘This woman has disappeared, she must be found.’

  Muir Suspicion of what?

  Crippen Suspicion of being concerned in her disappearance.

  Muir What crime did you understand you might be kept in gaol upon suspicion of?

  Crippen I do not understand the law enough to say. From what I have read it seems to me I have heard of people being arrested on suspicion of being concerned in the disappearance of other people.

  Muir And that is why you contemplated on the afternoon of 8th July flying from the country?

  Crippen Quite so – that, and the idea that I had said that Miss Le Neve was living with me, and she had told her people she was married to me, and it would put her in a terrible position; the only thing I could think of was to take her away out of the country where she would not have this scandal thrown upon her.

  In the light of Crippen’s devotion to Le Neve, this was a considerably more plausible response.

  Another point raised by Muir was that Crippen had written letters to Cora’s friends and relatives telling them that Cora was dead. How did he know that she would not write to them herself, if indeed she had simply left him to live with Bruce Miller? Dew’s final assessment of the cross-examination was that it had ended in the Crown’s favour, but he had gained a strange kind of admiration for Crippen, whose composure had not cracked throughout his appearance, which had lasted three hours and forty-eight minutes:

  And so, hour after hour, the cross-examination went on. On the whole, Crippen came out of the ordeal well, but there were times when the penetrative questioning of Mr. Muir laid bare the weaknesses of his case.

  No person, with experience of criminal court procedure, could have escaped the impression that the little doctor was seeking cleverly, if unconvincingly, to give innocent interpretations to facts all pointing strongly to his guilt.

  A lesser man – that is lesser in education and self-control – would have collapsed completely under the searching cross-examination for the Crown.

  16

  The Verdict

  For a man with a cool head and some ability to think he also did many things which simply didn’t make sense.

  Raymond Chandler

  All of the evidence had been presented, but one important question remained unanswered. It was never established what had happened to Cora Crippen’s head, bones and other missing parts. Dr Pepper made a passing remark about a limb found in the River Thames at Greenwich, but nothing conclusive came of this. Dew knew of two theories. The first was that Crippen had burnt them in the kitchen grate of 39 Hilldrop Crescent, but none of the neighbours Dew interviewed had noticed any offensive smell around the time of Cora’s disappearance, other than Frederick Evans, who made his statement at a later date. The other theory was that Crippen had disposed of the remains in a bag over the side of the cross-channel steamer when he and Le Neve had gone to Dieppe in March. Melville Macnaghten thought this was the likeliest explanation, and admitted that it is what he would have done had he been in Crippen’s position.1

  In Alfred Tobin’s closing speech for the defence, he laid out the case in favour of Crippen’s innocence. He explained to the jury that ‘the burden of proof rested on the prosecution, and if on a single material point there could be reasonable doubt it was not for him to appeal for mercy; he had

  only to claim what was the right of the prisoner’.

  According to Tobin, Crippen’s failure to look for his missing wife was simply explained by the fact that he was glad to be rid of her and able to live with Le Neve. ‘It was idle to suppose’, he pointed out, ‘that he would be other than relieved at her departure from Hilldrop Crescent. One would have supposed that he did not care, or that he would prefer her to be away.’

  Tobin claimed that Le Neve had spent the night of 2 February at Hilldrop Crescent (although the prosecution refuted this, as there was only Crippen’s word for it). It was inconceivable, Tobin said, that Crippen could have murdered Cora on 1 February before spending the whole day at work and then dismembering her corpse, then tidying up and regaining his composure to such an extent that Le Neve noticed nothing the next day.

  The prosecution had made a great deal of the fact that Dr Crippen was a liar, as shown by his letters to Cora’s friends and relations informing them of her death. Remarkably, Tobin said that these letters were almost an act of kindness on Crippen’s part, for ‘those friends would have been glad indeed to find that Dr. Crippen’s story of her illness and her death was quite untrue, and further, they would have thought none the worse of Dr. Crippen for having told those lies in order to try and cover up his wife’s disappearance and his wife’s shame’.

  The flight of Crippen and Le Neve, in disguise and under false names, was thus explained by Tobin, stoically trying to make the best of a bad job:

  [The jury] had to consider what was the reason for his flight, or his folly, if they liked. They had to realise the time of his flight, and what had just been said by Inspector Dew. They had to remember the lies Dr. Crippen had told, and that he had admitted that they were lies. They must not forget what Inspector Dew had said to him, ‘I am not satisfied about your wife,’ and, ‘There will be serious trouble in store for you unless you find your wife’ [which of course Dew had never said]. A man who had lost sight of his wife for all those months, who had no notion where she was, and who remembered that he had told lie after lie as to the reason for her disappearance, might be thoroughly alarmed when an officer of the law appeared and said there would be serious trouble in store for him about this disappearance. Dr. Crippen realised the mass of prejudice he had raised against himself by the lies he had told, and was flight, although an act of folly, a clear proof of guilt?

  Tobin told the jury that they must be entirely satisfied that the remains were female before they could even address the question of whether they were those of Cora Crippen. ‘Suspicion was not enough.’ He also raised the question of Crippen’s anatomical skill:

  There was another thing was admittedly needed, and that was a dextrous hand, well versed in anatomical operations. So far from being dextrous in anatomy, he was, compared with the skill required by an anatomical surgeon, a very commonplace manager for Munyon’s remedies. Something else was needed. There was needed the fiend incarnate to do a deed like that; but the prisoner’s reputation was that of a kind-hearted, good-hearted, amiable man.

  Tobin did not attempt to offer an alternative explanation for how the remains managed to find their way to Crippen’s cellar. He asked the jury if they
could believe that a man who had committed such a terrible crime could go about his day-to-day business with no one noticing any change in his demeanour. ‘Were they to be told that during the doctor’s close intimacy with his friends in London, and with his business people in London, they would never have detected any trait such as cruelty or something of that kind in his nature? The characteristics of the man who would do a deed like this were absolutely absent.’ Edward Marshall Hall had visited the court during the trial. He later told a journalist, ‘When I took the opportunity of snatching that hour at the Old Bailey, and hearing the line which the defence had taken to try to save Crippen, I walked out appalled.’2

  The fifth and final day of the trial heard the closing speech for the Crown, presented by Richard Muir. Muir had been staggered by Tobin’s assessment of Crippen as a kind man:

  Let me examine the foundation for that theory. The prisoner had admitted that over a long series of months he had led a life of studied hypocrisy, utterly regardless of the pain which the lies which he was telling and was acting would inflict upon friend or sister of his wife. Letters full of grief of a bereaved husband were written to Mrs. Martinetti, to Dr. Burroughs to be seen by Dr. Burroughs’ wife, to Mrs. Mills, the half sister of Cora Crippen. There was that letter of his carrying the sobs of the bereaved husband across the ocean to harrow the feelings of his wife’s relations. He put on mourning, wrote on black-edged paper, mocked the grief of his wife’s dearest friends, who thought they were sympathising with him, when they wished to lay a last tribute of love upon the far-off grave of their dead friend. He said, ‘A wreath is no use; she is not being buried, she is being cremated; her ashes will soon be here’ – and then with his tongue in his cheek – ‘you may have your little ceremony then.’ Ashes to be fetched across the sea! They were asked to say then that he was too kind-hearted to have done this deed.

  In addition to Crippen’s lies, there was also his rank hypocrisy. He had told Dew that Cora had been unfaithful to him with Bruce Miller, despite the fact that they ‘had never cast eyes on each other for six years’. Besides this, ‘the man who brought those accusations against his wife was the man who was himself carrying on an intrigue with Ethel Le Neve, extending over three years, and who said in the witness-box that he believed his wife knew nothing about it’.