Missing on Dartmoor

by Julian Mitchell

  Jack Lacey: Jack Lacey left Marker and Makepeace estate agents at the same time as the co-owner, Mrs Burton, left her husband. Their regular, clandestine, and illicit assignations developed into a steady relationship. They decided to set up a rival agency, much to the annoyance of Mr Burton, and rented a unit in a local shopping arcade in Ivybridge. Lacey & Burton for sale and sold boards are now a regular feature outside properties in the town. They had such fond memories of Paddock Wood House where they had met and had sex on the day Mary went missing, they bought it and live there together. They no longer have to make love in front of the gas fire, but they still do.

  Tom Bowers: Tom Bowers moved away from Plymouth to Bristol and set up his own solicitors’ practice. He never forgot Mary Cranson, but his life had to move on. He began dating a solicitor, who he had hired for his practice, and she became his partner in work and in life.

  Sonia Hill: Sonia Hill got her degree in sports physiotherapy from Plymouth University and now works at a gymnasium in the city. She is not promiscuous, but does have a conveyor belt of fit male torsos to work on. She often reflects on her encounter with Harry Sutton in the changing room of the rugby club and, at the same time, about Mary, her friend. In her darker moments, she thinks that if she had resisted Sutton’s advances that night, what happened to Mary, could have happened to her. She occasionally has nightmares about being dropped into Burrator Reservoir and although she used to walk around it, since she found out what happened to Mary, she never goes near that particular stretch of water.

  Paul Betteridge: Betters changed his allegiance and became the director of rugby at Ivybridge Rugby Club. Occasionally, he asks himself if he could have, or should have done more to help Mary on that February afternoon? He appeases his conscience by, rightly, absolving himself of all blame: he wasn’t to know the horror that awaited her.

  Rachel Betteridge: Rachel Betteridge left Bovey Tracey Rugby Club at the same time as her dad. However, she didn’t follow him to the club’s bitter rivals. Like him, she still wonders if they could have done more to prevent what happened to Mary. She isn’t quite ready to completely exonerate herself and, maybe, never will be.

  Fred Pearce: There is an age-old saying that there is no honour amongst thieves. This idiom became a truism for Fred and Dylan Pearce, as they, conveniently, blamed all the thefts on the absent Kate Pearce. At his trial, the prosecution barrister likened Fred Pearce to a modern day Fagin. He was the mastermind behind the thefts from farms, and his son and daughter were his Artful Dodgers. At his bidding, they would target the farms he had chosen, sometimes stealing to order. If a buyer in the West Midlands wanted a cut-price Land Rover Defender, it would be stolen and delivered within twenty four hours, and sold for cash at a quarter of the forecourt price with no questions asked. Pearce could afford to undercut the used car sales market.

  His mobile phone records revealed that he was in contact with his son and daughter on the night the thefts took place. The records also showed regular contact with John Sutton, and the prosecution successfully linked Sutton to the thefts, as an accessory. He, it was claimed, identified targets he had earmarked on market days. Contact between him and Pearce often took place on the evening after attending the market. Dylan Pearce would then stake out their victim using ground surveillance or a drone to plan the best way to steal the target vehicle. Knowing the farm layout and where vehicles were parked overnight was crucial to the smooth execution of the robbery. The Sutton brothers were thought to be implicated in the thefts, but the Prosecution counsel knew that the evidence against them was purely circumstantial.

  At his trial, as he had pleaded not guilty, Fred Pearce was intensively questioned for over three hours and evidence was produced, largely from phone records, of every farm theft. The jury was shown the link between him and the records of his accomplice, John Sutton. The prosecution wanted the jury, and the judge, to understand the full extent of the misery Pearce and his offspring, aided and abetted by the oldest Sutton, had caused many farmers over many months. It was alleged that some farmers suspected the Pearces of the thefts, but chose to keep quiet for fear of retribution: this was a very nasty family.

  When questioned about his contact with John Sutton, Pearce responded that the mobile contact was merely neighbourly chit chat. He was also questioned about his alleged verbal contact with the Sutton sons on market days. In a particularly vitriolic attack by the strident Prosecution barrister, when Pearce was specifically asked questions about Harry Sutton, he, unexpectedly, broke down in tears. After eventually regaining his composure, the judge, Mr Justice Fairweather, asked the defendant why he reacted in the way he had at the mention of the younger Sutton? Pearce slowly raised his bowed head, looked straight at the judge, and spoke through tearful eyes.

  “Because he is my son. Sir, I’d like to change my plea to guilty.”

  John Sutton suddenly broke the hush that had momentarily descended on the courtroom, at this startling announcement. He began raging at the defendant with an expletive-laden rant. He was removed to the cells below by two burly security officers, before he could be held in contempt. The judge had to call for order in his courtroom, and suggested to the Defence counsel that they have an adjournment, while he discussed the change of plea with his client.

  During the recess, Pearce explained to his barrister that many years ago, he and John Sutton, and their wives, helped each other on their respective farms, particularly during haymaking, when time was paramount to gather the hay before it rained. While Jean Sutton, John Sutton’s now deceased wife, and Fred Pearce were working together in the barn, they were drinking many glasses of cider to quench their thirst, after a long, hot day. John Sutton and Fred Pearce’s wife, were gathering more hay bales from a distant field. The barn workers rested for a while as they quaffed yet another glass of scrumpy. In their semi-inebriated state, they became playful, which soon led to sex. It never happened again, and it remained their secret. When Harry Sutton was born, Jean Sutton knew he was the result of that illicit intercourse.

  Because of the disappearance of his daughter abroad, the likely imprisonment of his illegitimate son and the discovery of his illegal pastime, he decided to end the subterfuge: he had had enough. In his subsequent confession he implicated his legitimate son, Dylan, his daughter and his erstwhile friend. It transpired that John Sutton was paid a thousand pounds for each theft where he had identified the target.

  He later confessed to thirty six thefts, which had “earned” the Pearces nearly £300,000. Most of the money had been used to pay for the construction of the barns at Black Tor Farm. The detectives finally understood how a ‘poor’ farmer could afford to have six brand new barns built. Pearce’s guilty plea was accepted and Mr Justice Fairweather later sentenced him to eight years in prison and also made him subject to the Proceeds of Crime Act. This allowed for the confiscation of the money from his crimes. The figure Pearce would have to pay was calculated as £200,000 and if he didn’t pay that amount, five years would be added to his sentence. He had to sell part of his farm and its stock to raise the sum. As it was, he, his son and his daughter were in no position to continue farming anyway.

  Kate Pearce (aka Trudy Best): Kate Pearce sold the Jeep in Nantes in the South of France in exchange for a small Citroen. The switch was partly to avoid being traced and partly to get a left hand drive car to be less conspicuous. Although the transaction was made using her false name, it alerted the French police as they had been contacted by their English counterparts. Avoiding detection was not going to be easy.

  She rented a small apartment under her new name and got a job on a nearby cattle farm in Floriac close to Bordeaux, on the banks of the Garonne river. One evening after a particularly hard day’s work, she was relaxing outside a small bar, close to where she lived. She had just taken her first thirst-quenching mouthful of lager, when she heard an authoritative voice from behind where she was sitting.

  “Kate Pearce.
Je vous arrête soupçonnés de vol et de meurtre. Venez avec nous s’il vous plaît.”

  She couldn’t translate every word, she didn’t need to, as the message from the uniformed gendarme was clear.

  She was extradited the next day and appeared in Exeter Crown Court the day after. When her case came to court, it took some time for the clerk to read out the charges against her. Each theft, and there were many, was listed, most damning of them all, the aggravated vehicle taking and the murder of John Hope. Although by then she knew of her father’s confession, she pleaded not guilty to all the charges.

  At her trial in the Crown Court a few months later, she was convicted by a jury’s unanimous verdict of the thefts and the aggravated vehicle taking charges. With the agreement of the defence and prosecution, the murder charge was reduced to manslaughter and the jury returned the same guilty verdict.

  She was given a five-year sentence for the thefts and eight years for the manslaughter of John Hope. The judge was at pains to point out that the sentences would be served consecutively, not concurrently.

  The police later contacted Mrs Hope to inform her of the verdicts and sentences. She thanked them, but she really wasn’t interested: that chapter in her life ended the night her husband died.

  Dylan Pearce: Dylan Pearce was charged with vehicle thefts, resisting arrest and being in possession of an illegal weapon: the gun he had wielded was not licensed. Through his Defence barrister, he pleaded his innocence, but his father’s late change of heart, was to prove too damning. The jury found him guilty on all counts and the judge sentenced him to six years in prison.

  John Sutton: Farmer Sutton reacted with fury when he was informed that Fred Pearce had implicated him in the thefts. His fury turned to incandescent rage when he found out he was not, in all probability, the father of his younger son. At that point it was just as well that he and Pearce, both remanded in custody, were kept in different cells!

  John Sutton continued to deny his involvement in the thefts, but Pearce’s testimony was damning and, coupled to Sutton’s mobile phone records, convinced the jury at his trial of his guilt. He was sentenced to five years in prison. In addition, as he had benefited from the crimes he, like Fred Pearce, had a Proceeds of Crime order against him amounting to £25,000, which he refused to pay: a further two years were added to his sentence.

  Dick Sutton: When he knew that he and his brother did not have the same father, Dick Sutton sat in the dock, both motionless and expressionless. He now understood why he and his brother were so unalike, in stature and temperament. It also explained why his mother’s present to him and Harry, a Swiss Army knife, had different inscriptions: his saying ‘love from mum and dad’, while Harry’s simply read ‘love from mum’.

  He was found not guilty of any involvement in the thefts and he returned to Quarry Farm to continue his work, initially alone. Obviously, with his father and brother in jail he was short-handed and happened to know someone who was struggling to find employment. George Kemp not only works at Quarry Farm he actually lodges there as well: the rent money is deducted from his wages.

  Harry Sutton: Harry Sutton faced charges at Exeter Crown Court of abduction, rape, murder and sexual assault. He pleaded not guilty to all the charges using as his defence the same story he had told the detectives at his interview. Namely, Mary had willingly gone with him, had consensual sex, died from natural causes – presumably a heart attack – and as to the sexual assault charge, he was about to give Alice Cranson CPR.

  The judge, Mr Justice Evans, briefed the jury of seven men and five women before the trial started on what they could and couldn’t do, stressing the need for absolute confidentiality, particularly as the press would be very interested in the case. After the trial that lasted for three weeks, the Defence and Prosecution summed up and the jury retired to deliberate. As the jurors hadn’t returned within two days, Mr Justice Evans took this as an indication they could not reach a unanimous verdict. He spoke to the foreman of the jury and informed him that his preference was for the verdicts to be unanimous, but he would accept a majority decision, provided a minimum of ten jurors were agreed. The jury returned two hours later and had reached its verdicts.

  On the abduction charge the foreman announced the jury’s decision: not guilty. On the sexual assault charge: again not guilty. The other two charges, rape and murder, the jury was unanimous: guilty. There were gasps from the public gallery where many of Mary’s friends were gathered.

  Mr Justice Evans thanked the jury and dismissed its members. He then instructed that Sutton should be assessed as to his mental state before sentencing. The young farmer showed no emotion as he was taken to the cells. The lack of protest was taken by some to be an admission of his guilt.

  Four weeks later Harry Sutton returned to court to be told by Mr Justice Evans that he was a sadistic psychopath, but his illness did not excuse his vile behaviour. He was sentenced to life imprisonment with a minimum term of 18 years to be served. Even then he would have to undergo psychiatric tests to ensure he was no longer a danger to the public.

  After the court case was reported in both the national and local press, seven women came forward claiming they had been raped by Sutton, three accusing him of using a predator drug, more commonly known as date rape. He awaits trial on all those alleged offences and, if convicted, will not taste freedom for a very long time.

  Alice Cranson: Alice Cranson’s counsel would have liked to defend her client on the grounds of self-defence, in view of Harry Sutton’s intentions that stormy day. However, Alice was adamant that she was pleading guilty to the charge of grievous bodily harm with intent.

  This was accepted by the trial judge, Mr Justice Fairweather, and a guilty plea was entered: he called for psychiatric reports before sentencing. Alice Cranson was ambivalent towards the judicial process and prepared to accept her fate, without question.

  Some weeks later when she was sentenced, after having read the reports on her mental state, the judge informed the packed Court One at Exeter Crown Court about the facts of the case. He took into consideration the mitigating circumstances surrounding the attack on Sutton. Nevertheless, he said in a grave tone, she did set out armed with a knife not intending it as a means of self-defence. Quite the contrary as, on her own admission, she wanted him dead.

  The judge said that he would be failing in his duty if he did not give a custodial sentence. She was given an indeterminate term in prison on the basis of her diminished responsibility at the time of the offence, but would serve a minimum of two years. Alice left the courtroom, just as she had entered it, with an inscrutable expression.

  She served two years in Channing Wood Prison, Newton Abbot – a Category C establishment – but was allowed to attend her sister’s belated funeral. It was not the only funeral she was to attend. While she was in prison, both her parents died broken-hearted and when eventually released, she inherited £2.4 million from their estate, which included the proceeds of the sale of their hotel in Bovey Tracey. She would have given every pound and every penny of that substantial sum, and more, to have her beloved Mary and, her fiancé, Josh back.

  Mary Cranson: The crematorium was absolutely packed when the coffin of Mary Cranson was brought in to the chapel. Tom Bowers delivered the eulogy, just as he had done for his friend, Josh, and, once again, his emotions nearly overwhelmed him. Alice attended, but was too overcome to speak.

  Superintendent Edwards: Colin Edwards continued to be very effective at his job, but would never be a copper’s copper. That in itself was no barrier to promotion, and he became Chief Superintendent Edwards the following year.

  Detective Constable Sam Dyson: Inspector King gave full credit to DC Sam Dyson following the successful prosecution of the farm thieves. Having already passed the examination that made her eligible for promotion to sergeant, there was no doubt that her efforts, and his praise, strengthened her credentials. However, she was in no ru
sh to move up a grade and knew she still had a lot to learn.

  Detective Constable Alex Hammond: With glowing praise from King, DC Hammond returned to the police station in Exeter after his secondment. The posting had been mutually beneficial and the inspector spoke to his counterpart in Exeter to verbally support the effusive report he had written on Hammond.

  Detective Sergeant Lucy Harris: Lucy Harris also received fulsome, and genuine, praise from her inspector for her role in the farm thefts, the manslaughter conviction of Kate Pearce, and for her tireless efforts in the Cranson case. She still had much to absorb in crime detection, and although she continued to learn from her mentor, Inspector King, she would have to wait for her promotion. Although she was very ambitious, she knew that learning more in her current rank would make her a better inspector in the future.

  Her admiration and affection for her boss was undiminished, but remained personal and private.

  Inspector Richard King: Following the successful convictions, Inspector King received many plaudits for his work on the recent crimes. However, privately, he still chastised himself for not detecting the young Sutton as the person responsible for Mary Cranson’s brutal demise. He had often asked himself just how it would be possible to detect a psychopath? His research told him that they can be incredibly charming; gain the trust of individuals; can be manipulative; surround themselves with admirers; lie constantly and be parasitic. Some of those traits were evident in Harry Sutton’s character and King admonished himself, somewhat unfairly, for not spotting them earlier.

  Chief Superintendent Edwards urged King to apply for a chief inspector’s role, and, although he was flattered, the inspector declined as he was happy doing what he did: as he put it, being closer to the action.