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.


The life and death of Ruth Ellis- was she a murderer or the victim?

page: 1

log in


posted on May, 27 2011 @ 10:48 AM

For some years this story has fascinated me since I first read an account of it in a well established murder magazine. I don’t know how many people know of this women and her story so I thought I would share it with ATS to the best of my abilities, I will show both the official outcome of the trials, why people suspect a conspiracy, connections with other possible set ups/murders and hopefully shed some light in what, to me anyway, is the story of a very unfortunate women. So was Ruth Ellis just a simple murderer, or was she the victim in a larger scale plot?

The beginning is good place to start – The basic biography of Ruth Ellis

Born: Ruth Neilson 9 October 1926 Rhyl, Wales
Died 13 July 1955 (aged 28) Holloway prison, London, England
Cause of death Hanging
Resting place Holloway prison; later reburied in St. Mary's Church, Amersham, Buckinghamshire.
Occupation Model, nightclub hostess and Known for Being the last woman executed in the UK Religion Christian
Spouse George Johnston Ellis (m. 1950–1955)
Children Clare Andrea Neilson (1944—1982), Georgina Ellis (1951—2001)

Being 1 of 6 children ruth never had the greatest up bringing in the world, which by any means was very typical in that time. Her mother was a Belgian refugee and her father was a cellist who spent most of his time playing on the Atlantic cruise liners. Originally a hornby her father changed his name to Neilson after the birth of his ruths older sister. Ruth left school at 14 to become a waitress and later in 1941 (at the height of the blitz) she moved with her family and settled in London. Ruth became pregnant with her 1st child at the age of 17, the father was a Canadian soldier, who supported ellis for about a year then contact was lost. The son ended up eventually living with ruths mother.

Ruth then got a job as a nightclub hostess through her work as a nude model, this paid considerably more than the variety of other jobs she had held before this. The club manager was well known to have blackmailed his hostess into sleeping with him. After falling pregnant too one of the customers in the early 1950’s she had an illegal abortion when she was 3 months pregnant and continued to work straight afterwards.

Ruth married a 41 year old divorced man she met at her club called George Ellis around November 1950, he was and turned out to be a violent drunk who was very possessive and a deeply jealous man, the marriage obviously deteriorate quickly ironically because George was convinced ruth was having an affair, Ruth attempted to leave this man a few times but she always returned to him and she gave birth to her 2nd child in 1951 – George refused to believe he was the father. This spelt the death throes of their turbulent marriage and they separated soon afterwards, ruth returning to live with her parents, and returning to work as a hostess. Again ruths mother became the primary care giver to this child as well as ruths 1st child. Whilst pregnant with her 2nd child ruth appeared unaccredited, in Lady Godiva Rides Again.

The Crime
Source for this section of the story

Ellis worked hard and, in 1953, became the manager of a nightclub where she met David Blakely. He was a man with public school manners and expensive tastes but also a racing driver with a passion for fast cars and hard drinking. At the time of their meeting, Blakely was engaged to another woman but soon moved in with Ellis, who lived in an apartment above the nightclub. He was smitten and began proposing marriage. Ellis initially desisted, as she was still legally married to George Ellis, but eventually accepted.

Blakely began to show a jealous side and spent progressively more time at the nightclub, where he could keep an eye on Ellis, who enjoyed much male attention from her customers. Blakely’s behaviour began to have an adverse effect on her earnings and his inheritance was all but depleted in the funding of his lavish lifestyle and on developing a racing car. Fuelled by frustration and alcohol, the couple began fighting over money issues and before long these fights became violent. Blakely had been keeping another mistress, which had provoked jealousy in Ellis. She then took another lover, the slightly older Desmond Cussen

0 April 1955, Ellis went to find Blakely at The Magdala public house in Hampstead, London. She waited outside whilst Blakely and his friend, Clive Gunnell, finished their drinks and left the pub. As they were getting into Blakely’s car, Ellis called out his name and then fired four rounds into his body. The fifth bullet, missing its mark, ricocheted off the pavement, hitting the hand of Gladys Kensington Yule, who was on her way into the pub with her banker husband. Ellis knew exactly what she was doing and made no attempt to flee the scene. Instead, she calmly turned to Gunnell and told him to call the police.

The Trial
Ruth didn’t deny killing Blakely and said as much in a statement made to the police and on 11th april 1955 she was officially charged with murder. After a brief appearance at curt she was sent to Holloway prison to await her sentence.

The trial took place at The Old Bailey, London on 20 June 1955. The only question put to Ellis on the stand by Christmas Humphreys for the Prosecution was, “When you fired the gun, did you mean to kill?’. Her reply was simply, “It is obvious that when I shot him, I intended to kill him”. The jury took a mere 14 minutes to reach the conclusion of guilty as charged, for the murder of David Blakely. Ellis was held at the all-female Holloway Prison in Islington, London, to await her sentence of death by hanging, less than a month away.The fact that Ellis had obtained a gun to commit the murder was not explored in the trial and it was not until the day before she was hanged, that any mention was made of it. In a statement, Ellis claimed that her other lover, Desmond Cussen, had provided the gun and had in fact also driven her to the scene of the crime. In a strange twist, the authorities chose to ignore this statement and never followed it up.


Public opinion had it that there were various factors working against Ellis in her sentencing, including her appearance and lifestyle, the fact that she wounded a passer-by and not least, her apparent lack of remorse. It also transpired that the murder and Ellis’ arraignment occurred during the 1955 General Election campaign, which was won by the Conservatives who supported the death penalty. The new Home Secretary could not be seen to be influenced by the public furore and media debate, in granting Ellis a reprieve.Tragedy seemed to surround the deaths of Blakely and Ellis. A few weeks after her execution, Ellis’ younger sister died suddenly at the age of 18, supposedly of a broken heart. Ellis’ husband, George, had been a heavy drinker and after sinking into the depths of alcoholism, committed suicide by hanging in 1958. Ellis’ son, Andrea, was deeply psychologically affected by what had happened and was living in a squalid bedsit when he committed suicide in 1982.

Now after reading all the basic facts of this case im assuming (as I did, with exception to the last excerpt I posted) that this was a case of straight forward murder? But was it? This is the question that arose with me after reading this story in a murder magazine article. I was fortunate enough to find the article so I will share some of it with you.

The following is some extracts from a magazine called True detective, written by MONICA WELLER, she had uncovered new evidence in the case in question and throws into doubt the *facts* surrounding ruth ellis. The article comes in 6 parts altogether and is in depths look at ruth ellies case. I will quote various sections from it – and be forewarned this will be a long read, but all in all I suggest going to the link and reading the article in full.

please read the ruth ellis story in full

I will try and highlight key points in the article aforementioned but as stated to get the full article read the link above.

The name Ruth Ellis, to most of us, conjures up the image of the peroxide blonde, nightclub hostess and part time prostitute who shot dead her playboy, racing car driver lover David Blakely in a jealous rage. She became the last woman to be hanged in Britain.The shooting outside the Magdala pub in Hampstead, London on the evening of 10th April 1955 was described as an open-and-shut case of cold-blooded murder. Ruth Ellis admitted pulling the trigger of the heavy .38 Smith and Wesson British service revolver.
The two-day trial at the Old Bailey was notable for its lack of forensic and ballistics evidence. Christmas Humphreys, counsel for the prosecution set out to prove that Ruth Ellis killed Blakely. Her defence team led by Melford Stevenson did nothing to help her. Jurors took just twenty-three minutes to find Ruth guilty of murder.
Yet the Public Record Office in Kew and the City of London Record Office still keep certain files closed on the matter until 2031. What else was there to hide?(Click on Blogroll: 30-Year rule’)

[ Some years later Albert Pierrepoint, Ruth’s hangman, told Muriel in a secret letter, “She died as brave as any man and she never spoke a single word.” Over a five-year period, Muriel received a total of nine letters from him, occasionally writing under the assumed name of A. Fletcher. Each time Ruth was mentioned in the press, Pierrepoint would be on to Muriel in a flash.

I actually found this part odd, why would the hangman be in constant contact with the sister?
Now the story gets intresting read this

With access to records previously unavailable at the Public Record office in Kew, and new witness statements, I have presented a range of evidence that the court in 1955 never got to hear; evidence pointing to the fact that Ruth Ellis was innocent of the crime she was hanged for. She died for another person’s crime, having lied to protect him.With what I have uncovered, I have sufficient evidence to believe the peroxide blonde killer tag was a carefully constructed cover story involving the British secret services at a time when the cold war was waging between Russia and the West. Ruth was a vulnerable young woman, used by the secret service, murdered by the establishment and whose true identity has been disguised beneath a web of deceit, lies and misinformation.The trumped up murder charge and Ruth’s death by hanging deflected suspicion away from the real Ruth Ellis story.

Did that get your attention? Weres the proof I hear you say.Ron mentioned below was someone else who became fascinated with the mystery of ruth ellis(I should mention that ron knew ruths sister Muriel – who had been campaigning for years to get the conviction over turned, and by chance the writer of this story would meet the sister and the investigation began) The writer of the story was also interested in doing an autobiography hence why she started the investigation to start with

Like many people Ron had an obsession with the Ruth Ellis story. He wanted to know who was called at the trial, so tried to get a copy of the transcript. In 1989 he received a letter from the Lord Chancellor’s Department, saying that the file did not contain a transcript of the trial. They could not help him. “Another senior person phoned and wasn’t so nice: ‘As far as you’re concerned, Mr Fowler, that file lies at the bottom of the Thames.’

Simple fact finding turned out to be more complicated than I thought at first. It became an extraordinary detailed piece of detective work for first hand evidence in my search for the truth. I followed my instincts. I stopped looking for answers and took one step at a time in looking for facts.
Muriel told me about landmarks in her life and recollections of events. I followed up with my own solid research and investigation, comparing new findings with previously published conflicting information.

I stumbled across Dr Stephen Ward’s name linked to Ruth as far back as the late 1940’s, many years before the 1963 Profumo scandal. Ward was the society osteopath-cum-pimp who introduced Christine Keeler to John Profumo the Minister for War in the early 1960’s.
The public is now aware that Ward was involved in spying in 1963. But the Denning Report at the time merely described him as a pimp. Not a word about Ruth’s association with Ward at the beginning of the Cold War has ever leaked out.

From small beginnings a picture developed of Ruth’s life, stripped of fifty years of fictitious opinion. An unseen side of the last woman to be hanged emerged, as I dug deeper in my investigations; something not uncovered at the time of Ruth’s trial, or since.I tracked suspicious addresses, so-called businesses that did not actually exist and incorrect initials on official documents that enabled characters to change their identities and mislead anyone who dared to look for them.It has taken considerable effort to strip fact from fiction. Caught up in a tangle of new connections were clues. I kept an open mind and did not accept things at face value. The real story about Ruth Ellis began slotting into place.

The writer certainly wasn’t giving up that’s for sure and what she uncovered in her investigations was remarkable.

“As a barrister for fifty years I was just putting the facts of the actual murder. I knew nothing of the background and I didn’t care.”This was the opinion that Christmas Humphreys, the prosecuting counsel at Ruth Ellis’s murder trial, was still vehemently defending twenty-seven years later when he spoke to Ruth’s son Andre McCallum. Andre secretly taped their three-hour conversation at the Buddhist Society in London.Just weeks later Andre, aged 38 committed suicide.

As I read the transcript of the trial and police statements it was clear that nobody was interested in witnesses’ backgrounds. In what appeared to be an open-and-shut case of cold-blooded murder, where a prostitute murdered one of her lovers, it didn’t matter about anyone else.But those characters should have been investigated.David Blakely had a darker side. During one of many visits to the Public Record Office (PRO) I was surprised to find buried in a Home Office document, that Ruth’s lover was actually homosexual. It was well known apparently in Blakely’s social circle. What is more, Ruth knew. It didn’t come out in the trial. Mr Bickford, Ruth’s solicitor, had evidence but “felt it unwise to call it.”

It will shock most people to learn that Ruth Ellis fell under the spell of Dr Stephen Ward in the 1940’s. He groomed her; a fact previously unknown to the public. This sensational finding was pivotal in uncovering the real Ruth Ellis story.Most people associate Ward’s name with the 1960’s Profumo scandal. He was the pimp and smooth, society osteopath whose patients included Winston Churchill, Prince Philip and Princess Margaret.
He introduced Christine Keeler to John Profumo, the Conservative Secretary of State for War. The scandal that Keeler was having a simultaneous affair with a Soviet spy led to Profumo’s resignation.
Years later it was revealed Ward had been a double agent, working for MI5 and for the KGB.

And the plot thickens it seems

Ruth fitted the bill for Ward and Beauchamp’s game. She was a gift; she was trying to escape from poverty and abuse; she was uneducated; she had a child to support; she had parents who took every penny she earned; and she had a family secret. Her sister Muriel gave birth to a child through incest with her father, a bully who started sexually abusing Muriel when she was six. He turned his attentions to Ruth when she was 11. Ruth made Muriel promise never to tell anyone about his obscene behaviour.
Ward, the “vice peddler” created Ruth Ellis. She was undoubtedly indebted to him. After all, he transformed her, gave her nice clothes, made her feel special.
Vickie Martin, Ruth’s best friend, was another of Ward’s proteges. She became the lover of the Maharaja of Cooch Behar before being killed in a mysterious car crash in January 1955.

At 11.30 p.m. on 10th April, the night Blakely was murdered, on her arrest Ruth immediately admitted to murdering him. She said, after being cautioned, “I am guilty. I am rather confused.”
In effect she signed her own death warrant.But it’s the circumstances of Ruth’s police statement, in a previously unpublished Home Office file, which were odd.

The writer is convinced after reading statements etc that ruth was to rehersed and had been brainwashed…but by who? She cites that the whole trial was a farce from start to finish.

Official files relating to the trial, including the transcript, have been locked away for much longer than the statutory 30 years. The authorities still keep some files to do with Ruth’s trial closed until 2031. What else was there to hide?
In our book we set out evidence that the court in 1955 never got to hear. Evidence showing that Ruth was innocent of the crime she was hanged for.
We also identify the group of people in Ruth’s circle who conspired against her, planned the murder of Blakely with military precision and left Ruth holding a smoking gun.
The day before Ruth was hanged, having dismissed her solicitor Mr Bickford who represented her at her trial, she was visited in the condemned cell at Holloway prison by Mr Mishcon, now Lord Mishcon, and Mr Simmons, solicitors whom she consulted on domestic matters prior to the murder.
Simmons asked her what really happened on the day of the shooting. Ruth said she hadn’t told the truth because to do so “seemed traitorous – absolutely traitorous.” A loaded phrase, bearing in mind the details that have come to light about Ruth’s double life.

The story about spying and the shadowy characters in Ruth’s circle continued to unravel by an extraordinary twist of fate. It followed my discovery of Desmond Cussen’s signature on a business document in 1964 while he was lying low at a London hotel. This was Cussen’s one and only trail left anywhere since 1955.
After Ruth’s death, Cussen and Ward moved from their Devonshire Street flats where they were close neighbours, to Bayswater addresses in London; Cussen to Lanterns Hotel in Craven Road, Ward to Orme Square. Cussen seemed to be following Ward around. When the names Ward, Keeler and Profumo cropped up later in the Atlantic hotel, I realised that Cussen who’d been staying there for two years was not there by accident. He was perfectly placed when the Profumo fiasco broke in 1963.
This discovery opened up a new line of investigation, which in turn led to the infamous spying activities of Donald Maclean and Guy Burgess.
The convincing story, spun and repeated for fifty years, disguised the real Ruth Ellis. The message reaching the public in 1955 was of the common, peroxide blonde, nightclub manageress who was a part-time prostitute.
The message not reaching the public was about the poorly educated, gullible young woman, desperate for money and who probably unwittingly became involved with spying and died in a dramatic way for her country, in the process.

Now the writer goes on to question who actually did shoot bleakly?

Christmas Humphreys opened the case for the prosecution. He said Ruth took a gun which she knew was loaded, and shot David Blakely dead by “emptying that revolver at him, four bullets going into his body, one hitting a bystander in the hand, and the sixth going we know not where.”
Ruth’s defence counsel, Melford Stevenson, stated categorically that Ruth was guilty. “Let me make this abundantly plain: there is no question here but this woman shot this man….You will not hear one word from me – or from the lady herself – questioning that.”
Looking at the transcript of the trial released over forty years after Ruth’s death it’s clear how Ruth Ellis, who pleaded not guilty, was given scant help by our judicial system. Her trial for murder was pushed through in just over a day. The jury taking 23 minutes to find her guilty. Ruth had a gun hanging from her hand. She was pointing it towards Blakely’s dead body. In the press she had already been portrayed as a peroxide blonde tart. Therefore she was guilty.

There was no need to consider if 28 year-old Ruth, the 5’2,” 7-stone woman with tiny bird-like hands, one gnarled as a result of rheumatic fever, with poor eyesight and suffering the after effects of a recent miscarriage, was physically capable of shooting anyone. Let alone repeatedly pull the trigger on a heavy man-size .38 Smith and Wesson gun that required a 10lb pull for each shot fired; it would have been impossibly large in her hand, its recoil would have knocked her backwards. All these aspects were left unsaid at the trial.
In a Prison Service file, recently opened for public scrutiny, I read that Ruth told the medical officer at Holloway prison hospital that her left hand and ankle had been affected by rheumatic fever.

At about 9 pm on the night of the shooting Moreen Gleeson, a Hampstead resident saw Ruth and Cussen outside 29 Tanza Road in Hampstead, where Ruth believed Blakely was conducting an affair with another woman. In her letter to Muriel Jakubait she wrote, “When Cussen, as I believe he is named, appeared behind her I was frightened. He was definitely intending to take charge….”
Miss Gleeson went to the police twice, and a solicitor, but they disregarded her evidence. It would have been crucial in confirming that Cussen was near to the scene of the crime.
Moreen Gleeson’s encounter with Ruth and Cussen and Ruth’s subsequent hanging, troubled her. She suffered a nervous breakdown and moved to Australia where she later became a midwife. She read something about Cussen and the murder in a national paper but dismissed it as “ill-informed.” She said, “I had been there and knew this was all wrong.”Ruth didn’t murder anybody. Cussen, her “alternative” lover, wound her up like a spring, got her drunk, drove her to the scene of the crime and put a gun in her hand.

After gaining access to police records etc this is what the writer found

I dug deeper into Public Record Office (PRO) documents. As part of my research, I wanted to compare magistrate’s court statements with the trial transcript. However the magistrates court papers were listed as FRUSTRATED (not available) at the PRO in Kew; they could not say where they were.Eventually I was permitted to view the file that contained Christmas Humphreys’ set of magistrate’s court documents at the Royal Court of Justice in the Strand. They’d been housed there since 1996.I was so alarmed at my findings on 9th May 2002, I wrote in my diary, “Papers at the Royal Court of Justice have been adjusted; gun, police, timings.” It was an understatement.Sometime between the committal proceedings at the magistrate’s court in April and Ruth’s trial in June 50 years ago, words had been mysteriously crossed through in key witness statements; other words had been inserted, giving totally different meanings.I only have photocopies of six witness statements. Altogether there are 33 subtle changes.Where did the instructions come from, for Christmas Humphreys to make those changes?It’s obvious now; Ruth was being set up. Before she reached the Old Bailey her fate was determined. The case would be guaranteed open-and-shut.

So records had be tampered with and alternate, the question remains tho, why?

A statement made by Police Constable Thompson caught my eye. He was an off-duty policeman who happened to be in the Magdala that fateful evening. He arrested Ruth after the shooting which happened outside the pub. His words “She was holding the revolver loosely” (crossed out) “pointing it downwards at a slant” (crossed out) became “she was holding the revolver in her right hand pointing it downwards.”PC Thompson was inside the Magdala when he heard “a succession of bangs” outside. Importantly, his statement at the magistrate’s court “No shot was fired after I came out of the public house” was omitted at the trial. This key witness did not see who shot Blakely, “but listening to him being questioned by Humphreys” you’d think he did.All Melford Stevenson had to say was “No questions.”
I noticed this statement made by Clive Gunnell who called himself a Mayfair car salesman. He was Blakely’s drinking companion at the Magdala on the night of the shooting. Originally he described Ruth pursuing Blakely and pointing the gun at his back. The statement was changed to read “The accused was firing the gun into his back,” not the same.Again Stevenson had “No questions.”Stevenson stuck to his word.

The writer cites more *evidence* , witness statements and such which I suggest you go and read in full. She highlights many of the inconsistencies though-out the trial and also many inconsistencies and questions about the people involved!.
Further down the article in part 5 reads

Take the murder weapon, a heavy .38 Smith and Wesson revolver.
When I was compiling evidence for our book, I spoke to John Ross, curator of the Crime Museum at New Scotland Yard. I told him that Muriel Jakubait wished to handle the gun (displayed in the Museum) that was retrieved at the scene of the shooting.At the end of January 2003 Muriel and I met Ross at the Museum to view the weapon used to kill Blakely.
Even I could see that the gun would have been far too large in Ruth’s tiny hands one of which was gnarled as a result of contracting rheumatic fever at age 15. This painful condition stayed with Ruth for the rest of her life.She was 5’ 2″, weighed only 7 stone and would have been physically incapable of firing one shot from a heavy, man-size gun, let alone repeatedly pull the trigger, firing six bullets in quick succession. With her tiny hand she couldn’t have even thumbed the trigger guard back.Furthermore the recoil after each shot would have knocked her backwards.
A professional would know that and hold it with two hands at arm’s length. A firearms expert advised me that accuracy with a .38 Smith and Wesson would have been hopeless except in trained hands.All these aspects were left unsaid at the trial.

Much has been said through- out the previous parts about ruths hands and the heaviness of the gun, I am no gun expert so really I have no idea if any of this is just conjecture or fact.below is moe about the gun *evidence* by the so called expert at trial

Forensic expert Lewis Charles Nickolls, Director of the Metropolitan Police Laboratory examined the revolver and bullets. In his police statement he explained, “In order to fire 6 cartridges, it is necessary to cock the trigger six times, as in the case of a revolver pulling the trigger only fires one shot. To pull a trigger of 10lbs requires definite and deliberate muscular effort.”
But two months later at the Old Bailey when questioned by the prosecuting counsel Christmas Humphreys, Nickolls was economical with his words. He merely said, “To fire each shot the trigger has to be pulled as a separate operation.”
It would appear he deliberately omitted the reference to the effort needed to fire the Smith and Wesson gun.Nickolls also testified at the trial that one bullet had been fired at close range, less than 3″ from the body, the other bullets, he said, were “fired from a distance.”
He explained to the judge Mr Justice Havers that the close range shot had left the usual circle of powder fouling around the bullet hole. He then repeated that the other shots had been fired at a distance.Nickolls did not say what distance. Ruth’s learned defence counsel Melford Stevenson did not ask.
Nickolls’ evidence went unchallenged.I was baffled. Why didn’t he ask Nickolls about the distance from which the other bullets were fired? It was important. One bullet was fired at close range, therefore the other three bullet wounds in Blakely’s body, had been fired accurately from a distance, out of arm’s reach. This could have been a turning point in the trial yet Ruth’s defence gave the prosecution an easy ride.
Extraordinarily Stevenson had, “No Questions.”The procedure for estimating the range of fire of a weapon had been used for some years. The gun is test fired in the lab at different distances using the same type of ammunition

The gun was apparently tested ina firing range but no mentions of the outcomes were made in court.
More about the gun

Another mystery: the Metropolitan Police did forensics on the gun and on Blakely but not on Ruth. There’s no record in any file of fingerprints even being taken or evidence on her fingers or clothing of having fired a gun.It was accepted at the time that the residue from an exploding cartridge is driven backwards on to the hand that pulls the trigger.Why weren’t samples taken from the accused as well as the deceased?
What happened to Ruth’s blood spattered clothes? She allegedly shot Blakely at close range; which is a messy business. Did her light-coloured suit that she was apparently wearing show evidence of oil residue from the bullets? Forensic expert LC Nickolls said in his police statement, but did not repeat at the trial, that the Smith and Wesson he examined was oily.
There are no answers to any of these questions in any police file about the case.

It certainly makes things very suspicious. In the final part of the article is entitled the hanging. Here are some extracts from that section.

I have become even more fascinated by information that I’d not found before. More witnesses from 50 years ago had revealing things to say. New leads and new evidence has emerged, with precise details of Ruth’s movements in the late 1940s and early 1950s, all contradicting the ‘accepted’ Ruth Ellis story that’s been repeated for fifty years.
During the Christmas of 2005 I sorted through information that kept coming in.
Statements from new witnesses had one thing in common. All said Ruth had certain characteristics that had made a deep impression on them: she was a lovely, kind person with grace and style. She was not looked upon as the common peroxide blonde prostitute as she’s been portrayed over the years. That impression was untrue.
Evelyn Galilee was the warder who guarded Ruth in the condemned cell for three weeks before her execution. She remembers Ruth as a “first class woman” whom she liked and says she was not the “troublesome blonde” that warders at Holloway had strangely been told to expect.She told me about Ruth’s last few minutes before her execution.
“Prior to the drop Ruth wanted to go to the toilet. I took her in. These thick padded calico knickers were brought and I was told they had to be put on her. It was against a woman’s dignity. I said, “I’m sorry Ruth but I’ve got to do this.” They had tapes back and front to pull. I blinded my eyes from them as she put them on. “Is that all right?” she said to me. She was very calm. “Would you pull these tapes Evelyn, I’ll pull the others,” They had to be tight. It was in case anything came out. Ruth asked what they were for. I couldn’t tell her.”
Evelyn spoke to me following the publication of our book.A fact challenged by her eyewitness account is the authenticity of letters that Ruth apparently wrote and sent from the condemned cell.
Firstly, all her letters (photocopied from the originals at the Public Record Office) were written in pen. Evelyn told me categorically that “No prisoner in the condemned cell was allowed to use a pen, everything had to be written in pencil and was strictly supervised.”
Also, the “Letter officer” at Holloway prison would have blanked out names on letters that Ruth sent from prison, yet names are clearly mentioned in Ruth’s correspondence.
Finally, in Ruth’s letter dated 12th July 1955, to Mr Simmons, her original solicitor, she refers to remarks made by David Blakely’s brother in a newspaper article following her trial. Evelyn informed me that, “No prisoner in the condemned cell was allowed access to a newspaper or its contents.”

So it appears that letters apparently written by ruth are forgeries? Hmm

Recently released prison hospital records point to the fact that Ruth fabricated the main thread of her defence. Ruth is quoted as saying she shot David Blakely in a jealous rage, believing he was having an affair, the incident happening 10 days after he punched her in the stomach and caused her to miscarry their baby. But on arrival at Holloway prison, following her arrest, and before she had time to get her story straight, she told the prison doctor she had actually had an abortion.
Interestingly on 19th March 1952 a passport, number N9584, was issued to Ruth Ellis.

Were was ruth going I wonder?

In the spring of 1969 Ruth’s widowed mother, Berta Neilson, was found unconscious in a gas-filled room in her flat in Hemel Hempstead; she never fully recovered and did not speak coherently again.Ruth’s sister Muriel found her mother’s handbag, tucked away in a chest of drawers. In it was a small, tatty notebook-cum-address book (now kept safe in a bank vault). Muriel had wondered for years about the names in it.The notebook tells a revealing story of its own.Phone numbers and addresses of Berta and Arthur Neilson’s friends, also notable journalists of the time Peter Grisewood, Jimmy Reid and Duncan Webb and other contacts that she’d scribbled in fifty years ago, became important clues.One London address, in Kensington stood out. After months of research and trawling through electoral registers and directories I realised I hadn’t just found a safe house, I’d found a safe street! I’d uncovered a treasure-trove of spies’ addresses, all in the same Kensington street – some dating back to 1932. As far as I am aware, they have not previously been made public.All the big names in spying were there: Philby, Burgess, Maclean, Menzies, Cowgill, Sinclair, Footman, Burke Trend ……It strikes me as strange, that Ruth Ellis’s mother had this address in her notebook 50 years ago. Had she discovered the shady world in which Ruth was involved?Or was this interesting evidence just another coincidence?An early draft of RUTH ELLIS MY SISTER’S SECRET LIFE contained this information, but our publishers felt it was complicated and the whole section was dropped..

At the end of the article the writer writes

There is a final post script to the Ruth Ellis story. On 21 May 2005 The Mirror newspaper published an exclusive story, NO PARDON FOR ELLIS. “Fifty years on, government turn down reprieve for hanged Ruth Ellis. Hanged killer Ruth Ellis has been secretly denied a pardon by the Government, documents reveal. The decision has been kept under wraps for fear of unleashing protests which could embarrass ministers.”I wrote to Prime Minister Tony Blair for a reaction about the Home Secretary’s decision; and to HM the Queen. Sir Paul Beresford MP wrote to Home Secretary Charles Clarke on my behalf.My enquiries were met with assurances that nobody knew anything.Fiona Mactaggart MP, Parliamentary Under Secretary of State replied to Sir Paul’s letter:“The case of Ruth Ellis has always attracted interest over the years and more particularly in this the fiftieth anniversary of her execution. However, I am unaware of the slowly building campaign to which you have referred. I can confirm that an application for a posthumous free pardon, limited to sentence, was considered and rejected earlier this year.”

please read the ruth ellis story in full

So that my friends is the story of Ruth Ellis. Was she a murderer? Or were more sinister things afoot? It would appear if the findings of the above writer’s investigations prior to her book were correct that this case was certainly not what it seemed. What do you think?

posted on May, 27 2011 @ 12:13 PM
What a mind blowing story.

Thanks for posting this, the stuff they did in the cold war was just as bad as they did in all other wars.

it's a sad story to read.

posted on May, 27 2011 @ 01:21 PM
reply to post by Grey Magic

it certainly was a mind blowing story, which is why i got so hooked into it when i first read this account. at first glance you would say that ellis was definatly a murderer then if you look further into it a hole web of things shoots out of it, the cold war was horrendous.

posted on Oct, 12 2011 @ 12:17 PM
This was an interesting read, but where are the sources? I could just as easily write this story and change it around. Who would be able to tell me I'm wrong if we are to believe all this as true? For example, that mysterious notebook with names.

I'd like to believe it exists, it would certainly bring a lot of sense to this story. Cause I agree she didn't get a fair trial, and something else was going on. I personally just think she was framed by her new lover. The idea of the Secret Service to me would explain the lack of a fair trial, which would make this whole story settle a bit easier with me. I'd rather think a bunch of people were basically forced into giving her an unfair trial, rather than a bunch of people just not giving her a fair trial.

But I can't find any sources for that. Where is this book? In a vault? Well where is the vault? Does reading any of these books on the subject really shed any light into the lack of sources? I don't doubt that they could, I just find it odd that I can't find specific sources.

I think one of 2 things happened. Either her new lover framed her. Or the whole story about the Pimp, that seems believable to me. Take this quote from her "It is quite clear to me that I was not the person who shot him. When I saw myself with the revolver I knew I was another person."

Could this be a reference to her freedom? The pimp telling her, "Do this for me, and you're out of debt to me" thus she felt like a different person. She was no longer the Ruth Ellis she was essential bred to be by this pimp, but was the Ruth Ellis she wanted to be for so long, a free one no longer tied down by the constraints of a pimp.

I'm still open to the idea of this being related to the British Secret Service, I'm just not sure due to the lack of sources. If you know where I can find any, since you seem to be pretty up on the subject. I'd be grateful. Regardless excellent topic, I just feel a bit iffy about it as is.

posted on Oct, 12 2011 @ 12:41 PM
reply to post by MCJustJ

i understand what you are saying, this is an account by a researcher who done the research for herself most of the things she has has been documented in the book, the site quoted from is a well documented crime research site which produces articles for varies crime magazines, the magazine she wrote this particular account for states

“True Detective was just five years old when Ruth Ellis was hanged for shooting her lover in front of the Magdala pub in north London, and Britain’s fascination with the case hasn’t abated since. That’s why, when writer Monica Weller, who co-wrote the bestseller RUTH ELLIS, MY SISTER’S SECRET LIFE with Muriel Jakubait, phoned our editorial office to ask if we would be interested in her writing about the case for us, we jumped at the chance. Monica’s passionate conviction of the truth of Muriel’s story proved to be infectious and so we thought, why not share this startling new evidence with our readers….” From True Detective, April 2006

If you have quiries about what she has i would suggest messaging her here: - the top post will give you her personal email address.

i know how it is when you can find little information that you seek when trying to do your own research into matters, but i would suggest attempting to contact this lady with your questions about it

Alot of questions remain unanswered and i dont think we will ever find the full truth of what exactly went on int his case but what is blatently clear is that an injustice was done
edit on 12/10/11 by ronishia because: (no reason given)

posted on Oct, 12 2011 @ 02:51 PM

Originally posted by ronishia
reply to post by MCJustJ

i understand what you are saying, this is an account by a researcher who done the research for herself most of the things she has has been documented in the book, the site quoted from is a well documented crime research site which produces articles for varies crime magazines, the magazine she wrote this particular account for states

“True Detective was just five years old when Ruth Ellis was hanged for shooting her lover in front of the Magdala pub in north London, and Britain’s fascination with the case hasn’t abated since. That’s why, when writer Monica Weller, who co-wrote the bestseller RUTH ELLIS, MY SISTER’S SECRET LIFE with Muriel Jakubait, phoned our editorial office to ask if we would be interested in her writing about the case for us, we jumped at the chance. Monica’s passionate conviction of the truth of Muriel’s story proved to be infectious and so we thought, why not share this startling new evidence with our readers….” From True Detective, April 2006

If you have quiries about what she has i would suggest messaging her here: - the top post will give you her personal email address.

i know how it is when you can find little information that you seek when trying to do your own research into matters, but i would suggest attempting to contact this lady with your questions about it

Alot of questions remain unanswered and i dont think we will ever find the full truth of what exactly went on int his case but what is blatently clear is that an injustice was done
edit on 12/10/11 by ronishia because: (no reason given)

Fair enough, just knowing shes open to questions already makes me feel shes at least more credible than if she just wrote it and left it at that like many people tend to do. It can't hurt to ask her, and when I do I'll post what I learn in this topic for the sake of discussion, and so others with my same questions to ask, won't have to.

I agree 100% though, there was certainly an injustice, what degree is up for debate, but I don't think anyone could possibly think she got anything near a fair trial. She didn't even get a fair lawyer for her defense. Even if someone would like to believe everyone else did what they were suppose to, its undeniable that she got shafted.


log in