It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Dr. Crippen, guilty or framed by the police?

page: 1

log in


posted on May, 22 2009 @ 07:04 AM
Dr. Crippen was hanged in Pentonville Prison, UK, on the 23rd of November 1910, for the murder of his wife. He has gone down in history as the first 'on-the-run' criminal to be caught through the use of wireless communication.

Hawley Harvey Crippen was his real name. He was an American Physician and came to England to improve his medical knowledge. Born 11 September 1862 in Coldwater, Michigan he was to have quite an adventurous life in comparison to some.

Obtaining two diplomas, one from the Faculty of the Medical College of Philadelphia, another as an eye and ear specialist, from the Ophthalmic Hospital in New York. After his first wife died in 1891, he eventually came to meet and marry Cora Turner, real name Kunigunde Mackamotski, she was a 'would be' music hall singer, stage name: 'Belle Elmore', who was known for her regular extra-marital affairs.

Crippen came to England and was the manager in the offices of a homeopathic pharmaceutical company by the name of Dr. Munyon's. Meanwhile his wife, Cora, was still treading the boards in the USA and had met another music hall performer, by the name of Bruce Miller, who was to later testify at the trial. Later that same year Cora came to England to be with Crippen. They resided at 39 Hilldrop Crescent, Camden Road, Holloway, London and took in lodgers to boost their income.

During Crippens work, he met and hired Ethel le Neve, who also became his mistress. Crippens wife became aware of this and eventually grew tired of Crippen. Crippen was a mild character, pleasant, well groomed. Cora, on the other hand, was known to be 'vivacious and pleasant, fond of dress and display.'

The couple held a party at their home on the 31 January 1910, after which, Cora dissapeared. Crippens explanations as to where she had gone were conflicting. Firstly There was the letter to the Secretary of the Music Hall Ladies Guild stating that Cora had gone back to the states on a family medical emergency. This letter was not in her handwriting. He later went on to say that Cora had died and had been cremated.

Further evidence came to light that suggested something else was going on. In December of 1909, cora had requested a withdrawl from their bank account... half of the 600 pounds that they had together. This amount was unusual as it seems they were living beyond their means to begin with, renting a large house they could not afford and Cora buying jewels and furs...

Crippen had also placed an order for five grains of Hyoscine Hydrobromide which was such a large order that special requests had to be made. This order was collected by Crippen on the 19th of January 1910.

On February the first, Crippen pawned some of his wifes jewels, and his mistress, Ethel, spent the night at Crippens home. By March, she had permanently moved in. In that same month crippen informed his landlord that he wished to vacate the house and gave his three months notice.

A while later, after Crippen had thought he had explained everything to all that were involved, one of Coras friends, a Mr. Nash, had decided to visit the USA and try to track down the full story of what happened to Cora. He came bak to the UK with a confusion and reported to the police at Scotland Yard.

About a week later, Chief Inspector Dew paid a visit to Crippen. Crippen admitted he had lied about Coras death. Crippen believed she had gone back to Chicago to be with her friend, Bruce Miller. His reason for lying was to stop any complications and embaressments caused by her elopement. The inspector left, mostly covinced by Crippens tale.

Shortly after this, Crippen panicked and with Ethel disguised as a boy, they headed for Antwerp to board the ss Montrose bound for Canada in the names of Mr and Master Robinson. Coincidence found the Inspector back at Crippens house to find it empty. The alarm was now well and truly raised.

In Crippens absence and with a massive manhunt being brought about, inspector Dew began to search Crippens house. nothing was found, until the 13th of July when human remains were found under the stone floor of the cellar.

By now Crippen and Neve were well on their way to Canada, but the ships Captain had recognised them and reported them to the authorities via the new wireless transmission... an historic marker in the field of catching criminals. The police boarded a faster ship and were ready to board the Crippens ship and arrest him before the ship docked.

The evidence gathered by the police was no more than;

Human remains found 13 July . Medical organs of chest and abdomen removed in one mass. Four large pieces of skin and muscle, one from lower abdomen with old operation scar 4 inches long - broader at lower end. Impossible to identify sex. Hyoscine found 2.7 grains. Hair in Hinde's curler - roots present. Hair 6 inches long. Man's pyjama jacket label reads Jones Bros., Holloway, and odd pair of pyjama trousers.
The rest of the body had apparently had the;

bones and limbs professionally removed and burned in the kitchen stove. Her organs were dissolved in acid in the bathtub, and her head was placed in a handbag and thrown overboard during a day trip to Dieppe, France.

Dr. Bernard Spilsbury identified the remains as that of Mrs Crippen from a piece of abdominal scar tissue and that this tissue sample contained traces of Hyoscine.

All the time, Crippen stated that he was innocent. Winston Churchill signed the authority to execute Crippen. Crippens grave is unmarked, but rumour has it that a rose bush was planted where he is buried. His closest living relatives are asking for him to be exhumed and returned to America for a proper burial and that his guilty verdict be quashed after the latest techniques used to investigate this case suggest that the flesh in the cellar was male and not female. Questions have risen as to why a poisoner would dismember a victim.

According to John Trestrail, the toxicologist who led the new research, poisoners rarely inflict external damage on their victims. "It is so unusual that a poisoner would dismember the victim, because a poisoner attempts to get away with murder without leaving any trace. In my database of 1,100 poisoning cases, this is the only one which involves dismemberment," said Mr Trestrail, who heads the regional poison centre in Grand Rapids, Michigan.

Crippen is innocent of the crime for which he was hanged. "Two weeks before he was hanged he wrote 'I am innocent and some day evidence will be found to prove it'. When I read that the hairs stood up on my arms. I think he was right."
Chief Inspector Dew was involved with the Jack the Ripper case. Did the police manipulate and tamper with all the evidence in order to persuade public opinion?
Was Crippen set up in order to get a conviction?

The Crippen case stands out as one of the biggest cases ever solved by the British police and it seems they are going to be hard pressed to change their position on the case. Its famous place in criminal history has made a possibly innocent man into a depraved killer and his waxwork at Madam Tussauds is one of the most visited.
Doctor Crippen may have been innocent
100 years on, DNA casts doubt on Crippen case
Di Stefano calls for Crippen pardon
Dr. Crippen, part 1

Dr. Crippen, part 2

Dr. Crippen, part 3

Was Crippen innocent?

Petition to pardon Crippen

Nick Ross, Secrets of the crime museum


[edit on 22-5-2009 by Extralien]

posted on May, 23 2009 @ 03:06 AM

Nearly a century later, an American research team has applied pioneering forensic analysis to those remains.
“We don’t know who that body was or how it got there, but it does not belong to Cora Crippen. We are certain of that,” says David Foran, director of the forensic laboratory at Michigan State University.
Dr Trestrail says: “I think he should be granted a pardon. There is also the matter of his waxwork image which should be removed from the Chamber of Horrors at Madame Tussauds.”

Camden New Journal

Mr Crippen, a former senior marketing executive from Dayton, Ohio, said: "He did not kill his wife, of that I am sure and the evidence is overwhelming that the body was male. It is a celebrated horror case but the prosecution was entirely wrong.

"There was so much furore around the case that Hawley was bound to be found guilty. The jury took just 27 minutes. The DNA evidence and a longer, more sober look at the facts reveals this is a gross miscarriage of justice."

Mr di Stefano is also enlisting the help of the American Ambassador to the UK as official protocol was broken because the Home Office failed to inform US authorities that they were executing an American citizen. Further letters have been sent to the governor of Pentonville prison demanding the return of Crippen's body from its prison grave.
London Evening Standard

We have been examining this case for over three years as we have always doubted the results of Dr. Spillsbury on a number of cases but were simply not able to substantiate scientifically and beyond reasonable doubt that his findings were wrong.

For this we are wholly indebted to the research by Michigan’s State University Dr. David Foran and John H. Trestrail III, RPh, FAACT, DABAT, Clinical & Forensic Toxicologist Grand Rapids, Michigan, USA and his team. They elected to do so because Dr. Crippen was in fact a citizen of the United States of America and thus in any view must hold a locus in the matter.

We cite from the submissions addressed to us on this matter from Dr. Trestrail III:

“The mtDNA evidence clearly indicates that the remains found under the home, and for which he was convicted and ultimately hanged, were NOT those of the missing Cora Crippen. For that reason I feel that he should receive a posthumous pardon. As to who’s remains they might have been – that is another trial in which one would have to prove motive, method, and opportunity. The science is sound, the genealogy is sound, and therefore the conclusion is sound. Crippen was wrongly executed for the murder of his wife, due to evidence which we now know is invalid.”

The findings of the above forensic scientists and results proved that mitochondrial DNA evidence conclusively showed that the body found beneath the cellar floor in Crippen's home was not actually Cora Crippen. The research were based on genealogical identification of three matrilineal relatives of Cora Crippen (grandnieces), whose mtDNA haplotype was compared with DNA extracted from a slide taken from the torso in Crippen's cellar. They did not match those taken from the body found in situ as per the indictment.

Studio Legal Internazionale

The media glare and close government scrutiny put Scotland Yard under intense pressure to catch Crippen and solve the crime. Even a young Winston Churchill, then Britain’s Home Secretary, was intimately tracking the investigation.

Trestrail began to dig deeper into the police and court archives, slowly unraveling a series of suppressed documents. Among the noted evidence is a letter to Crippen from Cora, in which she claims she is living in America and has no plans to save him from execution. The letter was deemed a hoax by investigators, but was never even shown to Crippen or his lawyers. Could the police have tampered with the evidence used in trial?
Secrets of the Dead

Faced with pressure from a horrified public, the media and Winston Churchill, then home secretary, the police may have resorted to planting evidence and suppressing documents that could have helped to prove Crippen’s innocence at his trial.

Dr Andrew Rose, a defence barrister and author of a book about Spilsbury called Lethal Witness, has studied seven murder cases in which the pathologist’s evidence was key to the prosecution and which Rose now believes were miscarriages of justice.

“He’s got ‘form’ for responding to police pressure,” said Rose. “In this case he was under enormous pressure to deliver the goods – and he delivered them.”

The detective in charge of the case was Chief Inspector Walter Dew, an original member of the police squad tasked with capturing the Ripper, who murdered a string of prostitutes in 1888.

Trestrail and Rose believe that Dew was so determined not to let another killer get away that he may have planted Crippen’s pyjama top with the body parts in the coal cellar.

Other previously classified documents found in the National Archives – not made public at Crippen’s trial – indicate that two weeks before his wife disappeared, a woman matching her description was seen removing trunks from the couple’s home. Cora also tried to withdraw the couple’s life savings around the same time.

“The police in effect suppressed that evidence because it didn’t support their interpretation of facts,” said Rose.


experts believe he may have been framed by police anxious to secure a high-profile conviction after the embarrassment of their failure to find Jack the Ripper two decades earlier.
Researchers also found that police failed to show Crippen’s lawyers a letter purporting to have come from Cora, a failed actress and heavy drinker.
Daily Express

A century ago, the pathologist became the country's leading expert witness, dominating trials during the heyday of the Great English Murder, when lurid details of sensational court cases filled the newspapers. But Spilsbury - who committed suicide in 1947 after two of his sons died and his marriage collapsed - also courted controversy because of an unswerving conviction in the correctness of his opinions. Experts claimed recently that he contributed to several miscarriages of justice. His newly acquired records may shed fresh light on these cases.


So if the prospect of Crippen’s innocence intrigues, that unexplained body — that sudden flight for Canada — that (permanent) failure of Cora Crippen to resurface — nevertheless remain. They might lead us to question our implicit faith in the finality of DNA’s verdict on history rather than the other way around.

Are we certain that an unbroken line of blood relations really connects Cora Crippen to the modern DNA donors of her “family”?

Are we certain that a reliable chain of custody has preserved the original tissue samples unsullied across a century?

And if we are certain, what do we make of that body after all?

It is humans who must ultimately interpret and contextualize even the firmest forensic science. Whatever we might believe of Dr. Crippen we retain the burden of that belief, with all its intrinsic potential for grievous wrong.

The tales Hawley Crippen has yet to unfold from the grave might or might not shed still another different light on our understanding of what happened at 39 Hilldrop Crescent a century ago.


posted on May, 23 2009 @ 04:36 AM
reply to post by Extralien
Very well-laid out thread and a good read. I've read about Crippen since being a kid and remember when the DNA evidence came out a couple of years ago indicating that the bones weren't Cora's. The case was heralded as a new leap in crime detection yet history shows it to be deeply flawed.

If a wife is missing and Police discover remains buried beneath the cellar; it's a fair bet that they'll conclude 'case closed.' Especially in that period when DNA wasn't known and detective work was still learning investigative techniques. If the suspect is then fleeing the country, it's even likelier he is guilty. When apprehended he can't offer a good explanation of her whereabouts. Meanwhile, back home, he has a new girlfriend who has moved in and wears Cora's clothes. Johnnie Cochran's Chewbacca Defense would struggle to get a jury to acquit.

Years later we have DNA that dispute the remains were hers. We have documentary evidence of a woman living in the US with Cora's relatives, with a name used on stage by Cora.

I recall there being some rumors (not really investigated) that Crippen ran a back room abortion business. The remains could, therefore have been those of a woman that didn't survive the procedure. Many didn't back then and perhaps he used the acid and buried them in panic. Possibly Cora knew and simply fled to the States to avoid hanging by association. If this was the case, it would offer some explanation as to why Crippen insisted he hadn't killed Cora, but fell short of saying where she was. He was effectively caught in a situation that could only result in swinging from a noose.

When he collapsed en route to execution, I wonder if he admired the delicious elegance of circumstances that put him at that place, at that point in time. It seems like he was doomed to inevitable damnation.

posted on May, 23 2009 @ 06:06 PM
reply to post by Kandinsky

Yes, there are several things that do not ring true with this entire case. The one question in my mind that stands out is why they left England for Canada if Crippen was innocent. We'll look at that in a while.

First let's consider the evidence found buried under the floor.

1. The torso

2. The pyjama top

3. The hair clip and hair

4. The scar tissue

Here we see the torso in the ground. Looks like it's been there a good while considering the condition it appears to be in. There are conflicting reports which suggest that the pyjama was wrapped around the torso or it was in the ground with it. Either way, does this piece of cloth really look as though it was in this exacavation? Does it look as though it had had lime anywhere near it? Does it have any soil stains or any other stains left behind by the rotting flesh or from the surrounding soil? Why is it so shredded? Which exact part of a pyjama is this? I'm having a hard time trying to find a recognizable part of an item of clothing. Why was the label found seperated from any item? This label was used to suggest the hole had been dug after 1905. Why and how was the label removed from an item and placed with the torso? Did they wash this item in order to present it to the court, or was it in this condition prior to the torso being dug up?

This piece of cloth was supposedly in the wet ground, next to or on a rotting torso, covered in lime for approximately 4 months. There is a problem with this pyjama as evidence though as, yet again, there ar conflicting reports about its involvement.

Chief Inspector Dew searched the house, and found that the bricks under the cellar were loose. When they were pried up, he found Cora Crippen's remains, wrapped in the shirt from a pair of pajamas. She had been buried in slaked lime, which had preserved her (rather than quicklime, which would have destroyed the body).

Then we come to the hair. The clip may just be a 'personal item' with which the police used as evidence to give the hair a more 'belonged to a living person' type of feel.. ie, they were playing on emotions. This hair was found in the same place as the torso.
Really? Why? According to reports, the head was never found. Crippen was supposed to have thrown it into the English channel on a trip to France.
Why would someone with medical knowledge dispose of a head, bones, organs and limbs yet leave a sample of hair behind?
Was there a fight or struggle where a chunk of hair was ripped from Cora's head? If so, why did Crippen not burn it.. would only take one match.

The skin sample has been shown, through DNA tests, that it belonged to a male. This immediately stops two things. the first being that this torso was not Crippens wife, the second is that there is absolutely no evidence to suggest that Crippen was involved in back street abortions.

Now let's have a look as to why Crippen and Neve went to Canada and not America.

Yes, It would have been extremely difficult for the British to get Crippen extradited from the USA, but would it have been very difficult for Neve to enter the USA? Far easier for them both to enter the USA through Canada.
At the time Canada was still a Dominion of the British Empire. They may have decided that they no longer wanted anything to do with England, their life there and the questions being asked about Cora. Was Crippen able to handle pressure? After all, he did collapse on his way to the rope and, apparently, he was supposed to have said 'thank God it's over' at the time of his arrest. Did he mean the chase? Was he talking about something else or was this statement fabricated as a statement of guilt?

If Crippen and Neve just wanted to get away from all the nonsense and simply wanted to start a new life, then let's not forget that a man travelling with a woman who were not married to each other was highly frowned upon in this particular era. They may have believed they would have been asked many difficult to answer questions as to who they were and where they were going. Crippens previous answers about where Cora was were also a bit of a mess, so maybe he was just a bit of a fumbler when it came to situations that left him uncomfortable in any way.

It has been suggested Cora had syphilis.
Onw witness statement from the trial states that Crippen had written a letter to him;

I received a letter from prisoner on the 5th on black-edged paper (Exhibit 31), stating "I have been nearly out of my mind with my poor Belle's death so far away from me. She was not with her sister, but out in California on business for me, and, quite like her disposition, kept up when she ought to have been in bed, the consequence being that pleuro-pneumonia set in and proved fatal. Almost to the last she refused to let me know that she was in danger, so that the cable came as an awful shock to me. I am afraid I have sadly neglected my friends. Pray forgive me. Even now I feel I am not fit to talk to my friends."
Was Crippen covering up for his wifes sexual disease to save her and himself from disgrace? Is this another act to show that Crippen did not like too many awkward questions?

The two letters just read are not in the least like Mrs. Crippen's handwriting.
source as above.
So who wrote these letters? Did anyone do any comparison to Crippen's or Neve's writing?

Inspector Dews statement about the statement he took from Crippen regarding his wifes dissapearance

Some time after this he ceased to cohabit with her, but never interfered with her movements. They were of no interest to him. On January 31, the day before he wrote the letter resigning her position from the Guild, Mr. and Mrs. Martinetti came to their place to dinner, and after they had left his wife abused him and said she would not stand it any longer; she would leave him next day and he would not hear of her again, and he might cover up the scandal with their mutual friends and the Guild the best way he could. On returning home from business on the evening of February 1 he found she was gone.
source as above
Again, we see an apparent need to cover up a scandal. It was only through the police presence and questioning that Crippen told the 'truth' about all that had gone on.

In relation to the pyjama it was said that this was found in a room, proving that the bodt could not hav ebeen in the floor prior to 1905. How the polive made this connection we may never know, but it conflicts with the report that the pyjama was found with the corpse.

On searching the house itself I found a quantity of woman's clothes and jewellery. In a bedroom I found a box containing two suits of pyjamas (Exhibit 76), and one odd pair of pyjama trousers (Exhibit 48).
source as above

Here we read that Dew made no mention of Crippens 'thank god its over' comment upon his initial arrest;

I said to him, "You will be arrested for the murder and mutilation of your wife in London about February 2." Chief Inspector McCarthy, of the Canadian Provincial Police, cautioned him, and he made no reply.

Just how much has been sensationalised by the press? How much had been changed, manipulated or tampered with in order to get a conviction?

A lot of things are definitely not correct in this case. A lot of it may have been deliberately twisted in order to make any member of the public confused as to the real truth of this case.

Old Bailey witness statements

[edit on 23-5-2009 by Extralien]

posted on May, 24 2009 @ 03:08 AM
reply to post by Extralien

I've just read a few more articles, particularly the Old Bailey records. From our perspectve, it seems reasonable to discount the remains in the cellar as having a bearing on the Crippen trial. DNA proves them male etc.

I'm curious about the origins of the body and the lack of police interest. Can a body lie for at least 4 years and 5 months in slake lime and remain preserved? I ask this, because, if not Crippen, somebody killed the man. A previous tenant would inevitably be a main suspect. A brief look explains that slake lime can desiccate and preserve a corpse for at least a year (forensic experiments on pigeons). The landlord, Lowne, would have kept records of previous tenants (assuming they gave correct details?) that may well have indicated a suspect. Crippen was there for over four years, another tenant could have been their even longer...

All idle speculation
Looking at the circumstances of Cora's disappearance and Crippen's behavior, it would be fascinating to see how a Crown Court would view the evidence? It seems a strong case of circumstantial evidence would be made for Cora's murder. There are precedents in recent years of murder convictions without bodies. Certainly, his defense would find his inconsistent accounts problematic. A Jury would become skeptical.

A woman doesn't often leave a marriage and leave her furs and jewelry behind. A man who's wife is away on business is unlikely to pawn her belongings. I don't understand his bizarre movements as being accountable by 'not wishing to create a scandal.' His wife was openly promiscuous and he was enjoying an open affair. The Prosecution could easily undermine his explanations regarding 'scandal.' The letters from 'Cora' would now undergo graphological tests and be compared to Crippen and Le Neve's writing. The signature on the checks and the resignation letters would be analyzed also.

I agree with your suspicions that the Police might have confabulated evidence to bolster their case. It's hardly unknown, even today. In some cases, it may even be understandable? The pajamas could be well-preserved under ground. In years past, I have dug holes in cellars. Some were bone dry, others damp. The preservation is actually irrelevant as the corpse isn't Cora.

If I was on the Jury and was prompted to find 'beyond reasonable doubt,'I would be very close to the margins. It would be a very fine line between finding him guilty or not. You are currently immersed in the information, following your research, what would your verdict be?

Guilty or not guilty?

posted on May, 24 2009 @ 08:39 AM
reply to post by Kandinsky

At this moment in time, I am inclined to believe that there is insufficient evidence to secure a conviction.

Cora enjoyed 'men of means' and Bruce Miller was one such. It may be that Cora was offered an invitation to 'drop everything' and join up with whomever it may have been that she was involved with at the time. This may explain her abandonment of certain personal items as she may not have had the capacity to take it all.

We need to look deeper and closer at everything involved in this case. There are way to many inconsistencies to pin this down. For one, the information floating around on the internet seems to have symptoms of 'Chinese whisper' syndrome. One report differs slighlty from another, but many remain relatively consistent. Other small snippets of information crop up in odd places and must be considered, no matter how minute the detail.

I am suspicious of this torso, its condition, the way it has been placed, the dug hole, Old Bailey statements and evidence presented. The pyjama is said to have been with the torso, yet it is said to have been found in a cupboard too. The pyjama is not good evidence and does not link Crippen to anything. A pyjama laying in a cupboard for 5 years does not deteriorate to this condition. Cloth buried in undisturbed ground, soaked in lime with a rotting corpse does not come out looking so clean and so 'torn'.

The evidence of the torso gets a bit mixed up, even for the period.
Inspector Dews statement from the Court;

on the 13th I determined to closely examine the cellar. It had a brick floor: I probed about with a poker; at one place I found that the poker went rather easily in between the crevices, and I got a few bricks up. I then got a spade and dug the clay immediately beneath the bricks. After digging about four spadesfull down, that is, about nine inches below, I came across what appeared to be human remains.
Looking at the picture below, you'll soon see that the top of the torso is not 9 inches below the surface. Looking at the wall of the hole you'll see that it may be very well 9 inches to the bottom.

Remember that the body was supposed to have had all the bones removed? Why does this torso appear to have a cavity as if supported by a rib cage or a pelvis? Why is this cavity not full of dirt? Why does it look like it has the top of a spinal column at the bottom of the picture yet no obvious collar bone structure? I see no mammary glands if the spine is on the floor of the hole.

Dew goes on to say;

The remains were close packed, with clay above them; but the clay was looser there than what was found in other parts of the cellar, where there were no remains. It was a heavy soil. The remains were found over an area about 4 ft. 1 in. in length and 20 in. wide. It was pretty regular. The remains were all mixed up in a mass with lime. The lime was all round the remains, over them, under them, and at the sides, but not placed between the pieces in the sense of layers. The bits of skin and so forth were all jumbled up together. I could not make a sufficiently close examination to say whether some portions of the skin was folded over others.

I found that the poker went rather easily in between the crevices, and I got a few bricks up..... On the occasion of my finding the remains, the bricks were held together very firmly by the clay; I do not think mortar had been used.
source as above.

This statement by Dew is very odd.

In the hole where the remains lay the earth was very firm, as if it had never been disturbed. It was only at this one place that I found the bricks had been loosened. I had previously tested round the sides of the cellar and at each end, and it was when I came to this spot that I found the bricks loose; the othere were quite firm. In my judgment, the area of loose bricks almost corresponded with the hole.

Very vague statement. Loose bricks in only one place, others quite firm and almost corresponded with the hole... very odd indeed. Does not make sense. Especially when you consider the large area that he described. there would have had to have been numerous loose bricks and a lot of disturb earth beneath. Inconsistent.

I am astonished that this photo of the evidence can be compared to Dews statement. There is an obvious error here. The picture shows an obvious cavity, of what appears to be an almost complete torso, including the possible bone content to retain its form. Dew clearly states the remains were all mixed up in a mass. The photo shows formation, albeit decomposing. He could not make a sufficiently close examination, yet somehow, this cavity appeared. Was it cleared of dirt?
From all items in this photo, there is no way that this lump of flesh could be spread over a 4' by 20" area. Dews statement as to what was found does not match up with the Master surgeons statement to follow.

AUGUSTUS JOSEPH PEPPER . I am a Master in Surgery, London University, F.R.C.P., consulting surgeon to St. Mary's Hospital, in a hole in the ground I saw what appeared to be animal remains. They included, besides some tufts of hair, a large piece of flesh composed of skin, fat, and muscle from the thigh and lower part of the buttock of a human being, and another small piece. The head was missing, and there was no bone or part of a bone, but, except the organs of generation, all the internal organs were found. a piece of skin with some fat attached to it measuring 11 in. by 9 in. that came from the upper part of the abdomen and lower part of the chest. I found another piece of skin 7 in. by 6 in. There were also found with the remains fragments of a woman's cotton combinations and a portion from the neck part of a pyjama jacket; the latter bore the maker's label, "Shirt makers, Jones Brothers (Holloway), Limited, Holloway, N."

All the organs were connected together; the diaphragm or the septum between the chest and the abdomen had, of course, been cut round; such an operation would certainly require skill. I found the stomach and the kidneys and the heart and the liver and the pancreas. The spleen was very soft, as one would expect from decomposition. The intestines were healthy. The lungs were more advanced in decomposition than the other organs.

The most common operation in which the middle line between the navel and the pubes is the seat of the scar is operation for removal of the ovaries or uterus, or, in the male, removal of stones from the bladder. It is frequently performed there on male subjects. The scar there would be of the same appearance;
Source as above.

Yet according to most reports, the bones were burnt and the organs dissolved in acid in a bath. So how could the organs be found in the ground? The organs were said to be connected together, yet Dew states that everything was mixed up in a mess and spread over an area. The picture of the dug hole suggests a very 'cleaned up' area. Note that the scar on the tissue is frequently found on males. The DNA test confirms a male identity.

BERNARD EDWARD SPILSBURY; I believe I had already heard, when I first saw the skin, that Mrs. Crippen had had an operation. It was more difficult to tell if the scar was a scar when I saw it than it would have been had it been fresh.
Re-examined. I was only associated with Mr. Pepper by attending his lectures and acting as a surgical dresser; that fact had absolutely no influence on my opinion; nor did hearing of an operation having been performed on Mrs. Crippen. It is beyond doubt that this is a scar.

Had been told about a previous operation. Was not left to find it himself.

THOMAS MARSHALL , M.B., Divisional Surgeon, Kentish Town District. Before I examined the skin and flesh I had heard that there had been an operation. It was on August 8 that I noted the scar;
Re-examined. The fact that I had heard that Mrs. Crippen had had an operation had no effect upon my forming the opinion that this was a scar.

Again, prior knowledge.

REGINALD CECIL GLYNE WALL . I am an M.A., M.D. of Oxford, F.R.C.P. Lond., and M.R.C.S. I obtained the Andrew Clark prize in medicine and pathology at the London Hospital. As the result of my examination I concluded there was no scar. I could not see on inspection by the naked eye or with the hand lens such an appearance as I should have expected to find if there had been a scar in that situation. I found appearances which I could explain much more easily on the supposition that the skin had been folded in that region. Secondly, after the incision which had been made by Mr. Pepper, I did not on examining the cut surfaces of the edges of the skin find such an alteration in structure as I should have expected had there been originally a scar, and on comparing the cut surface at the site where the scar was alleged to be I did not find that the appearance of the cut surface differed from the appearance of the cut surface of the other part of the flesh, where it is admitted there is no scar.
source as above

Symptoms of overdose of Hyoscine may include: irregular heartbeat, reddened skin
Was reddened skin ever noticed on the flesh?

main source of quotes;
Old Bailey

posted on May, 24 2009 @ 10:38 AM
All that aside for one moment, let's take a look at some other things that many were not informed of at the time and some things that only history has been able to shed light upon.

Bernard Spilsbury

He began to make some terrible mistakes. He sent more than one innocent to the gallows. His theories increasingly took precedence over facts. Most notorious was the 1923 case of Norman Thorne, sentenced to death for killing his girlfriend. She had almost certainly committed suicide, and the evidence was thin, but Spilsbury’s testimony was unwavering. Modern science has even questioned his conclusions in the Crippen case.

judges began to express concern about his invincibility in court and recent researches have indicated that his inflexible dogmatism led to miscarriages of justice

Critics of Spilsbury cast doubt over his ability, particularly given his lack of academic attainment. He has been accused of being behind several miscarriages of justice.

Chief Inspector Walter Dew

(17 April 1863 – 16 December 1947) was a Metropolitan Police officer who was involved in the hunt for both Jack the Ripper and Dr Crippen. In his memoirs, published fifty years later in 1938, Dew made a number of claims about being personally involved in the Ripper investigation. None of these claims have been confirmed by surviving police records, and some of them contradict known evidence in the case.

In 1911 he brought libel actions against nine newspapers for comments they had printed about him during the Crippen case. Most settled out of court, and Dew won his case against those who did not, resulting in his being awarded substantial sums as damages.

The connection between the Jack the Ripper case and Dr. Crippen is this man, Francis Tumblety (1833-1903) a.k.a. J.H. Blackburn, Frank Townsend. He was in the same method of practice as Crippen, commonly known as a 'quack' doctor. The inability of the police to catch Jack may have led to Dew being determined to get a conviction on yet another American quack doctor practicing in the UK who, just so happened, to have a missing wife.

The only problem was that there was no body. No remains or any evidence to suggest Mrs. Crippen was dead

The only way Dew could secure this would be to fabricate the entire story based mostly on the poorly chosen words and actions of Crippen. The purchase of the Hyoscine may very well have been completely innocent in its manner of use. Crippen did not have to sign the poisons book but he did anyway.

Dew had plenty of time, and contacts, in order to obtain a badly mutilated corpse and other human portions and plant them in the cellar. The leaking of information to the surgeons, in particular Spilsbury, about an operational scar casts a large cloud over the trial. The placing of the hair and hair clip, the pyjama and the torso could easily be achieved while Dew dug the cellar.

Why was it necesary to involve so many doctors and surgeons in the case?
The focus on this one piece of flesh with a scar is so over the top that it is almost inadmissible as evidence. Especially when some say that it is a scar commonly found on men. Another says it is not a scar at all..

Why was there very little effort to trace Mrs. Crippen. All that was done was to place a small advert in the newspapers asking her to get in touch. If you've run away and don't want to be involved anymore, would you reply?

why was the ss Montrose not ordered to return to port or call in to any port in Ireland the moment the Captain had contacted Scotland Yard about Crippen being on board. Why were they allowed to sail? They were just off the coast of Cornwall at this time.
Was it so that Dew could manipulate the Captain into getting the ships quartermaster to make Crippen have some incriminating evidence (the cards) upon him on his arrest? A 250 pound reward was a lot of money.

the quartermaster suggested that I should leave something to show that I was going to jump overboard; it was his suggestion, but it was my idea to put it as I did on this card; the language was entirely my own. I wrote the card on the day before Dew arrived. The first communication from the quartermaster came without any invitation from me. About noon on July 30 he told me he had a letter to give me at three o'clock. At that hour I went to the wheelhouse and he handed me a letter which stated that the captain knew who I was, and that the police were coming to arrest me at Quebec; then he said that if I liked he would stow me away and smuggle me ashore at Montreal. The letter was not signed, and I returned it to the quartermaster; he seemed afraid to trust me with it.

Scotland yard was also billed the same amount by the wireless company. Why was this? Just how many messages were sent between them? Why was it necesary to continue such a contact.

Why were the Captain and steward not called as witnesses?

In his statement at the trial, Crippen tells us of the constant pressure being applied to him by Dew, gives his reasoning for his flight and explains everything else the best way he can for a man in his position. Was the actions of Dew to blame for Crippens flight?

Were Dew and Spilsbury connected in the fabrication?
Fingerprinting does not appear to have been used as evidence in the case. Were none found or was the evidence previously contaminated?

Whilst going over all this evidence, without taking into consideration the DNA evidence, I am inclined to say that Crippen should NOT have been hung for murder. The evidence was very thin. There was not any way to 100% confirm the identity of the body. They could not say if it was male or female.
The public had been whipped up into a frenzy through the media. Too much information had been given to certain individuals who gave statements against Crippen in court.
Not enough was done to ensure that the case against Crippen was water tight. Not enough was done on behalf of Crippen in order to prove his innocence.

It appears that certain minds had alread been made up and they were determined not to let another American quack doctor walk free.
This trial was prejudiced from the start.

There is a strong suggestion that a lot of the evidence has been tampered with and that several people have been influenced in order for all the claims to fit the bumblings of a meek, mild mannered man who just wanted a simple life.

Crippen said that he was innocent. He said that one day he would be proven correct. Inspector Dew and Bernard Spilsbury have been shown, by history, to have several corruptions of character.

Present all this evidence to a court today and I highly suspect it will get laughed at and thrown out of court as insubstantial.

Add the DNA evidence recently obtained and Dr. H. H. Crippen is not guilty, should be exhumed and taken for proper burial as requested.

posted on Apr, 11 2010 @ 06:03 AM
Dr. Crippen has not been pardoned.

The new evidence was not taken into account. We're all aware that new evidence can be used to either free a wrongly imprisoned person or help to send someone to prison for a crime.

Yet, here, it seems that it is more about the personal link to Dr. Crippen that is more important, or rather, the credibility of the British legal system and the historical events surrounding this case, ie the Marconi transmissions and the CSI submitted evidence of the time.

The Criminal Cases Review Commission refused to send the case back to the Court of Appeal, saying the applicant was not a "properly interested person".

Not a properly interested person??? What???
We're all interested in the case. It's such an historical case, after Jack the Ripper, that the interest in this is overwhelming. Surely this is more to do with keeping corrupted evidence, police, judges and legal system under wraps.

James Crippen has been fighting for years for an appeal, a royal pardon and the release of his relative's remains, which are buried in the grounds of Pentonville Prison, London.

Mr Crippen, who lives in Dayton, told the BBC News website: "It's an embarrassment to the British courts to have to admit, after 100 years, that the gentleman was innocent.

"They didn't want to review the case - it's so old they felt they shouldn't change it. They just leave our name in disrespect."

they leave your name in disrespect but they keep their image and the historical records in the way they want it to stay.. clean.
Having egg on their faces over something like this is just typical of a system that does not want to be tarnished in any manner.

As the case is so old, why should it matter so much to the TPTB that this case cannot be reviewed on the evidence alone? It would seem that a family name is not as important as an established, dominant societal system.

We are constantly reminded that nobody is above the law, yet the law seems fit to suit itself according to its own agendas.

The commission said in cases where the person whose conviction is to be appealed against was dead, the request must come from someone "approved" by the Court of Appeal.
That person should be the widow or widower, "personal representative", or a relative who has a "substantial financial or other interest" in the appeal.

Please define 'other interest'... and why does a 'financial interest' have any relevance? Are TPTB only interested in someone who would care to sue, and possibly lose so as to have to pay legal fees boosting the courts pockets?

Will the truth be finally revealed in the near future? Will someone make the court of appeal see sense?

posted on Jul, 29 2010 @ 03:20 PM
Dr. Crippen in the news again... EXACTLY 100 years after his arrest...

I have to say that I believe he is innocent. The evidence is poor and due to the ripper case, the police wanted and needed a result in order to gain back public trust.

James Patrick Crippen of Ohio, second cousin three times removed of Dr Hawley Crippen, hopes to officially exonerate the black sheep of the family and bring his remains to the family plot in Michigan for a decent burial.

"The evidence says the man should be pardoned," he says. "But everyone thinks of him as a murderer. Every time I have come through customs to England, someone has made a comment on my name, linking me to a murderer."

There does seem to be a bit of dispute over crippens actions and what he said and as to whjy his lover was disguised as a boy when they were 'on the run', but perhaps he was actually trying t cover up the fact that he had run off with his lover.. which at the time would have been big news in itself considering the way that extra marital affairs were thought about back then. This may have been why he reacted so oddly.

top topics


log in