Professor Turi King speaking with Detective Chief Superintendent David Baker (retired), about tracking down double child-murderer Colin Pitchfork. A case that made history for being the first criminal case, in which someone was proven to be innocent, on the basis of genetic evidence. Also, the first time that genetic evidence was used to convict somebody.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
(00:00):
Let's take us all the way back to 1983. What was your role at the time, what was your job?
I was head of CID, head of the criminal investigation department.
Right and Lynda Mann is found raped and murdered by the Black Pad,
a footpath in Narborough and Narborough is a small village, so presumably something like this
(00:23):
was really uncommon. So, talk me through what happened?
Well, the first we knew of this was on the evening of the 20th of November, 1983. Lynda's mother and
father had gone out for the evening, and left Lynda to go to a friend's house in Enderby,
and when they got back, she wasn't there.So, they started to look for her,
(00:49):
visited the friend where she'd been, and she'd not arrived there, and nobody had
seen her. And of course, then they started to search the village and contacted the police.
Bearing in mind by that time it was 12 o'clock, there was very little one could do, except
walk the streets and see if we could find her. And then the next thing was an ambulance man is
(01:15):
riding his bike up the Black Pad, to go to work just before 7 in the morning, and
he sees Lynda's body in the wood, by the footpath. And of course, he's reported it, then,
you know, we're aware of the body's been found.And the interesting thing about the Black Pad is
(01:35):
that it's not really well known, is it? Because it's a footpath in the village,
isn't it? So, you almost have to be local.Yes, there's a footpath between the main A46
Leicester, Coventry Road and a village road going from Enderby to Narborough, by the, what was then
the Carlton Hayes Hospital. I mean, there was iron railings on one side, a tall hedge, and a field on
(02:02):
the other, and behind the railings was woods, and shrubs, and bushes, and trees, and it was dark and
well covered. And of course, it wasn't used a great deal, you know, just by local people that
knew it as a shortcut to get into Narborough.So, I suppose this is starting to indicate to
(02:24):
you that, this might be somebody who knows the area. So, what's the next thing that you do?
I mean I'm called at home, it was just after seven, to say the body had been found and of
course I arrived there about half past seven, quarter to eight, and we find that Lynda has been
dragged into the wood and raped and strangled. And of course, we set a forensic investigation going.
(02:51):
Called the pathologist, he examines the body at the scene, and we then go
to the Royal Infirmary for a post-mortem.So presumably the investigation starts and
what's the first thing you do, do you start house to house inquiries and start taking statements?
Yes, I mean the first thing we do is houses in the immediate vicinity. Once we've got established,
(03:15):
we spread the area to encompass anybody that might be passing. I mean the area determines
the search area if you like, and the area where you're going to make your inquiry. I mean the
ambulance station is nearby and of course the ambulance man was seen and interviewed,
(03:35):
and we did an inquiry at a nearby house. And the only thing that came out of that was,
the occupant heard what was a scream at around about 7pm, which was shortly after Lynda left
her home. She just thought it was children messing about and didn't give it another thought.
(03:57):
Didn't go out to look and they just heard that. And that was the only evidence we got
of anything happening at that time. And, you know, from then on, we went into
the sort of full range of a murder inquiry, house to house inquiries, local suspects,
(04:18):
people with previous convictions, anything that you could think of. But there was an absolute
absence of any sightings of Lynda and there was no information coming in at all, nothing to go on.
We had the forensic people there at the scene, but the only evidence we got was from the body, which
(04:42):
was the perpetrator was a group A PGM1 secretor.I was going to ask you about that, because this is
pre-DNA fingerprinting and is that normal to do that sort of testing on a case like this,
is it something that's standard at the time?Yes, I mean we got semen, you know,
the only thing you could get was blood tests from the semen, and of course
(05:06):
that amounted to about 14% of the population.And you were doing house to house inquiries, so
Colin Pitchfork, who we now know obviously was the perpetrator, was he interviewed as
part of the first round with Lynda Mann?On the first round he hadn't moved in.
He was in the process of buying the house and moving in. He was seen and he
(05:33):
gave an alibi, as much as anybody else could, that he was at home, didn't go out, his wife was at
night school, and he was looking after the child.So, I suppose at this point you've done
everything you can, are there any local suspects? I mean that's the thing about Colin Pitchfork,
we now know that he had previous convictions for flashing essentially, but at this point presumably
(05:55):
you wouldn't know any of this.We weren't aware of the
conviction because the conviction wasn't local, it was out in Market Bosworth area, before the Market
Bosworth court as a juvenile, for indecent exposure. And of course, his age was another
factor of his offense, so I mean it wasn't given the priority that it probably would do today.
(06:24):
I mean we were looking at people with convictions for offenses of indecency and offenses against
women, and all those sort of people, whether they lived in the area or visited the area,
they were all suspects. And of course, they were interviewed and eliminated as far as possible.
So, I suppose at this point the case then goes cold really until 1986,
(06:49):
when a similar thing happens to Dawn Ashworth.That’s right, I mean, we watched every incident
that occurred in the interim period. Anything which cropped up, I mean,
there were numerous incidents involving women reporting seeing somebody or things like that.
They were all investigated to a negative result and eventually, I mean, we just got
(07:13):
two or three officers looking at outstanding inquiries and,
you know, just keeping a watching brief on it. And of course, then on the
31st of July, Dawn Ashworth goes on a similar journey to see a friend, but this time going
from Enderby to Narborough, and of course she never returned home. Parents were waiting for her,
(07:39):
intent on going out that evening at seven o'clock, and she never came. She was reported missing,
and we were immediately told, and of course started a full-scale search.
I mean there was similar thoughts going through our mind, although it was a different time of
the year, different time of the day, there was a young girl, same age missing in the area. And
(08:08):
we looked at it right from the start, as a potential murder,
and then we started to search at the area.So, she was found on Ten Pound Lane, which again,
it's a footpath.It's a footpath yes.
The body was found on the Saturday, she went missing on the Wednesday I think it was. And
(08:28):
the body wasn't found until a police officer, with his dog, was searching around Ten Pound Lane
and he found her black leather jacket, slung under a hedge. And then a little bit later, with a dog,
found a body covered in nettles and straw and hay, and she was in similar state to Lynda.
(08:51):
And you had a suspect fairly quickly didn't you, with that one?
Yes, I mean, we started off with the house-to-house inquiries and the searches etc.
and during the searches a lad named Buckland was seen showing, you know, an interest in the search
parties that were working on the embankment of the motorway, such that he drew attention to himself.
(09:18):
We established who he was, and in fact he'd been interviewed on the previous occasion.
We then established he’d got a motorbike, and a similar motorbike was seen
under the motorway bridge on the A46. Which is not far from Ten Pound Lane, and of course
(09:38):
he couldn't explain why his motorbike was there and where he was. So, he was arrested,
and we found that he was a PGM1 secretor, group A.
But again, it only left us with a percentage of the population and not an individual.
And when you spoke to him, he confessed, didn't he, to Dawn’s?
(10:02):
He did, I mean, we were a little bit careful about him because he wasn't the full shilling.
We wanted to be reasonably fair to him, so I had his interview taped. So,
he was interviewed at Wigston police station, and his interview was taped recorded,
(10:23):
and the solicitor had access to the tape, and he made certain admissions during the interview,
to such an extent that we got to do something with him, either charge him or let him go.
We couldn't question him any further because we'd be oppressive. So, we charged him and
put him before the court, and of course then there was the question of this forensic evidence
(10:50):
that was there which ostensibly was circumstantial, at that stage.
And you had a brain wave, didn't you, at this point?
Well, we questioned him over Lynda Mann, and he's totally denied all knowledge of it,
and we got no forensic evidence to connect him with it. And of course, I was aware
(11:13):
of Sir Alec Jeffreys work with the DNA.So how had you heard of that to begin with?
I'd read it in the Mercury, and this seemed something which we could use forensically,
which had not been used before.So, was this the immigration case, the one that…?
It was the immigration case yes.And you got a brain wave.
(11:34):
Well, it put the individual down, by his blood, to a group of one,
from a percentage of the population to one.So, what did you do, did you ring Alec up?
Yes, well my forensic science man rang him first, to say could he, do it? And he said yes. So,
I rang him and said what we'd got, and he said he thought he could do it.
(11:59):
So presumably you then have to get the samples to him, and he has to…
Yes, that’s when the problems started. I mean, we needed to establish this lad was in contact
with the first girl, because we were ostensibly fine with a second girl, we thought we got enough
to charge you and convict him on that. But we felt the two murders were connected, we needed
(12:23):
to connect that first murder and speaking to Sir Alec, it was a question of getting the samples
to him and getting authority from the Home Office Forensic Science Laboratory, to use the samples,
and of course they were concerned, that if they were used and destroyed, then evidence
was being destroyed and all sorts of problems. Anyway, we sent him the samples in August,
(12:51):
and it was only the sample of Lynda Mann went, and that came back saying definitely not.
And how did Alec break the news to you? So, I've heard a story that he rang you at some ungodly
hour, to give you the results, is that true?We had a conversation and, you know, I accepted
what he was saying, because he said definitely it's not him. And then it was what are we going
(13:17):
do next and I thought right well we better see whether he's done the other one as well.
So, I sent the sample for Dawn Ashworth to him. And of course, that came back in September,
but it came back with a bonus, the fact that the two samples were identical, and that one man was
responsible for both murders. So of course, it strengthened my arm, in as much as I'd got a
(13:42):
double murder, and one man responsible for both murders. And of course, that was irrefutable.
So, I suppose the bad news was that you hadn't got the right man in custody, but the good news was,
is that you did have the DNA fingerprint of the perpetrator for this double murder. So,
it had, kind of, two sides to it really.Yes, I mean, it demonstrated that one man
(14:06):
was responsible for the death of both girls, and he was still at large, and I felt in the area.
Which must be scary really, to think that somebody's still out there?
Yes, and is he going to come again? That was a big thing. A big thing for the people in the
area as well. And of course, it strengthened my arm in what I wanted to do, or what could I do.
(14:29):
That was the other thing, so I remember hearing that you had your next brainwave and that was
to do a dragnet, but I remember hearing that there was a particular case that you remembered,
that made you think about doing that?Yes, I mean, I looked at what we'd done so far,
I mean, we scoured the two villages, we'd interviewed all the men and we got nowhere. So,
(14:51):
it means that something was wrong somewhere, there was somebody that lied. We felt that
the bloke was still in the area and how do we find him? We couldn't do the same thing again.
So, we got to put something else to it. And of course,
we were talking about fingerprints, and of course it came to me that we'd already done fingerprints,
(15:15):
on a previous occasion, where a whole area was mass fingerprinted, looking for a suspect,
and that was successful. So, I thought well if we can do that with the blood, it's the same as the
fingerprint and it'll bring an individual up.So, you have this brilliant idea of doing a
(15:35):
dragnet, how does everyone take it when you suggest this, are people sceptical?
There was quite a few doubters in the interim period of deciding what we were going to do.
It was a question of getting the support for it to be done, and of course I'd got the advantage of
saying well, there’s two girls murdered what are you going to do? Are we going to do this or not?
(15:59):
and of course, you know, you're putting a gun to people's head really.
Because it was a massive undertaking. So, talk me through what did you have to put together?
Well first off, we've got to get the people. Now we’d already got the names
and addresses of all the men in the area, from two lots of house-to-house inquiries.
(16:20):
Then we'd got to get somebody to do the testing, and that was put down to David Wherrett at the
Home Office Forensic Science Laboratory, at Aldermaston, and they said that they could do it.
We’d got to get authority from the Home Office for them to do it. So, there's quite a lot of
to and froing, with getting it done, and getting them to talk to Sir Alec.
(16:46):
And this is where it came in really handy, those first tests that showed that it was somebody PGM1+
positive, if they looked like they were in that 10%, they would then go down the route
to have the DNA fingerprinting test done.No, they’d do that from the blood test. Not
everybody would have to have their DNA. Those that were not group A, would be
immediately eliminated from the testing.So, it was sort of a two-stage process,
(17:10):
so it was quite useful, yeah, having that early knowledge of what the biological background was
to this person. So, you could then, kind of, streamline it a little bit better.
Yes, I mean, it was a bit of a bind because there was Christmas intervening and we decided that
we'd start in the first week in January, and we lined up all the Phlebotomists, Police Surgeons,
(17:35):
and we arranged various venues, but of course we also looked at the people that were coming.
We sent everyone a letter, that we wanted to come in, and we decided it would be initially the men
between 15 and 40. And we sent everyone that we wanted to come in, a letter, when we wanted them
(17:57):
to come and asked them to bring the letter with them and also a form of identification, including
a photograph. So, we would, you know, just have some control over who was coming. So, I mean,
with the letter and then the driving license or a passport or something like that, we could
see who they were, and if we weren't happy when they came, we could go back to their neighbours,
(18:21):
and what have you, with a photograph and check them out. I mean we were aware that there was
a potential for someone to dodge the system.And it was a huge thing, didn't you have over
5000 men eventually take part in it?We had 5508, that we took. 3624
(18:43):
were negative and there were 1800 under examination at the time we caught Pitchfork.
So, it goes on for quite a long time, are you starting to then get pressure to wind it down,
because you haven't found the person yet?Yes, so there was some pressure coming from the
(19:03):
top. How long's it going to take? But of course we were going to take as long as it was necessary.
Was everyone still behind it?Yes, I think the longer it
went on the more people got behind it.Determination just grew, it sounds like.
Well, I could see what was happening, but of course there was also other DNA cases starting to
(19:24):
take off elsewhere. I mean there was one in Liverpool.
Oh, I didn't know about this.It was a murder case and it involved DNA,
but of course it was individual, and they hadn't got to look for him, they knew who he was,
and it was just a question of the comparison, with the debris left at the scene.
(19:44):
So, I remember reading somewhere that at some point you gave a press conference,
and you knowing that somebody would try and slip through, said, what you needed was that somebody
would eventually let slip about what had happened. And it turned out to be very prophetic.
Right from the word, when we set out, we realised that that was a possibility.
(20:07):
And that somebody probably wouldn't be able to keep their mouth shut?
Yeah.So, it was Ian Kelly in the end, wasn't it? So
how did all of that happen? I know that Ian apparently was at a pub, early august in 1987,
and he's out with workmates, isn't he? And he lets slip that Colin Pitchfork has made him go
(20:28):
and take this test for him. He's tried to get lots of different men at his work to do it for
him. Eventually Ian does it, but you don't find out until September. So, what happened there?
This happened in August, Ian Kelly was working at the Hampshires Bakery
and a group of them decided to have a night out, at the Clarendon Arms public house in Stoneygate.
(20:53):
Whilst they were there Kelly is overheard by a girl, who also worked at the bakery, and he said
that he'd taken a blood test for Pitchfork, and Pitchfork had asked him to do it because
he'd already taken it for somebody else, who was frightened of the needle.
Does she ask Ian about it, do you know, or does she…
(21:14):
She was aware of what was going on. She was alert to the
instances on the television and on the paper, and she realises the implications of what she'd heard.
She waited for two or three days to see a policeman that she knew.
So, I think it was on the 18th of August, she spoke to him and told him what had taken place and
(21:42):
he immediately contacted the incident room, told us what she told him, and of course we immediately
sorted out who Pitchfork, and Kelly were.This must have been everything you were
waiting for. So, what happens, this news comes in it must happen quite quickly?
We've got everything all on computer, so immediately they come in with the names,
(22:06):
we knew who Pitchfork was. He’s in the system, he'd been invited, we knew that he'd given blood
ostensibly, turned up with his passport and that was all documented. And of course, we didn't know
who Kelly was, but of course we immediately found out who Kelly was, so it was a question
of then, you know, they've got to come in quick.Do you knock on both doors at the same time?
(22:31):
Same time.What time in the morning was that?
Yes, it's seven o'clock knock. Well, you've got to go early because in case they go out and go
to work, and what have you. So, it was a, you know, early morning knock and he and his wife and
children were in the house. And, I mean, no sooner the officers got to the door and interviewed him
(22:51):
that he put his hands up and said it was him.So, he's confessing pretty much immediately?
Immediately.And is he remorseful or is he just,
I've been caught and that's it or…Well, I mean, it was clearly on his mind,
the fact that he'd done the two murders, and the fact that he'd used Kelly to take his
(23:12):
blood sample for him, on his behalf. So, I mean, he was aware that the game was up pretty quickly.
And then presumably you have to interview him? What was that like, was it fairly straightforward?
What's he like as a person I suppose?No remorse whatsoever, I mean,
Kelly showed some remorse obviously. He got dragged into it and he realised
(23:37):
what the consequences were going to be for him. But Pitchfork, I mean, he showed no remorse
whatsoever and he's quite cold and calculated. He denied a lot of his activities, but of course the
pathological evidence showed what he'd been up to.So, even in the face of this overwhelming
evidence, he's still to some extent not taking responsibility for it?
(24:00):
No, he's admitting that he's killed a girl, but he's not going into any details of what he did or…
So that obviously must have been a massive relief, I mean, you've made history, what was that like?
It's a feeling you never forget, it's not the first,
it wasn't the last, but, I mean, there's a great deal of satisfaction that, you know, you'd won.
(24:22):
And he's been in jail, or he was in jail, for getting him for 30 years, I think.
Yeah.Released and then
brought back in again, though I did read recently that they're talking about releasing him
again, what do you think about all that?I don't think they should. They let him out
on the last occasion, and of course as soon as he got out and he's got a little bit of liberty,
(24:47):
he's chatting up girls again. He's not changed,
he's not likely to change I don't think, he's still sexually active, and he's still thinking
about it, and he's likely to do it again.I forecast this is what would happen,
and it did. It's not just these two girls, there's another girl as well that he also…
(25:08):
Tell me about that because there was another girl who escaped?
Yes, she was a girl that was walking home at Newton Harcourt,
and he was in his car, pulled alongside her, tried to pull her inside and she ran off. And, I mean,
there was another victim there.So, it sounds to me like your feeling
(25:30):
is that he should never be released because he's shown no sign of remorse
and he's still, the behaviours not changed?You know if he'd shown any sign of remorse,
he wouldn't have been chatting up girls again, you know, I think he's in him, he's a psychopath.
There's a huge legacy from this case and it's why I'm writing about it in this chapter,
(25:51):
because it's the first forensic case and it's known for two things. So, one
is that it's the first time that it's used in forensics, and somebody has been released,
who was innocent on the basis of genetic evidence. Also, that it's the first time that genetic
evidence is used to convict somebody. So, there's a massive legacy there, do you feel the legacy?
(26:12):
Yes, I mean, it was something we were aware of, and it was something that we did a lot to try and
publicise, to get it around the world.You've succeeded.
We did, no, I mean, there's a lot of pressure when you're dealing with murders, it's not easy.
Let's take us all the way back to 1983. What was your role at the time, what was your job?
I was head of CID, head of the criminal investigation department.
Right and Lynda Mann is found raped and murdered by the Black Pad,
a footpath in Narborough and Narborough is a small village, so presumably something like this
(00:23):
was really uncommon. So, talk me through what happened?
Well, the first we knew of this was on the evening of the 20th of November, 1983. Lynda's mother and
father had gone out for the evening, and left Lynda to go to a friend's house in Enderby,
and when they got back, she wasn't there.So, they started to look for her,
(00:49):
visited the friend where she'd been, and she'd not arrived there, and nobody had
seen her. And of course, then they started to search the village and contacted the police.
Bearing in mind by that time it was 12 o'clock, there was very little one could do, except
walk the streets and see if we could find her. And then the next thing was an ambulance man is
(01:15):
riding his bike up the Black Pad, to go to work just before 7 in the morning, and
he sees Lynda's body in the wood, by the footpath. And of course, he's reported it, then,
you know, we're aware of the body's been found.And the interesting thing about the Black Pad is
(01:35):
that it's not really well known, is it? Because it's a footpath in the village,
isn't it? So, you almost have to be local.Yes, there's a footpath between the main A46
Leicester, Coventry Road and a village road going from Enderby to Narborough, by the, what was then
the Carlton Hayes Hospital. I mean, there was iron railings on one side, a tall hedge, and a field on
(02:02):
the other, and behind the railings was woods, and shrubs, and bushes, and trees, and it was dark and
well covered. And of course, it wasn't used a great deal, you know, just by local people that
knew it as a shortcut to get into Narborough.So, I suppose this is starting to indicate to
(02:24):
you that, this might be somebody who knows the area. So, what's the next thing that you do?
I mean I'm called at home, it was just after seven, to say the body had been found and of
course I arrived there about half past seven, quarter to eight, and we find that Lynda has been
dragged into the wood and raped and strangled. And of course, we set a forensic investigation going.
(02:51):
Called the pathologist, he examines the body at the scene, and we then go
to the Royal Infirmary for a post-mortem.So presumably the investigation starts and
what's the first thing you do, do you start house to house inquiries and start taking statements?
Yes, I mean the first thing we do is houses in the immediate vicinity. Once we've got established,
(03:15):
we spread the area to encompass anybody that might be passing. I mean the area determines
the search area if you like, and the area where you're going to make your inquiry. I mean the
ambulance station is nearby and of course the ambulance man was seen and interviewed,
(03:35):
and we did an inquiry at a nearby house. And the only thing that came out of that was,
the occupant heard what was a scream at around about 7pm, which was shortly after Lynda left
her home. She just thought it was children messing about and didn't give it another thought.
(03:57):
Didn't go out to look and they just heard that. And that was the only evidence we got
of anything happening at that time. And, you know, from then on, we went into
the sort of full range of a murder inquiry, house to house inquiries, local suspects,
(04:18):
people with previous convictions, anything that you could think of. But there was an absolute
absence of any sightings of Lynda and there was no information coming in at all, nothing to go on.
We had the forensic people there at the scene, but the only evidence we got was from the body, which
(04:42):
was the perpetrator was a group A PGM1 secretor.I was going to ask you about that, because this is
pre-DNA fingerprinting and is that normal to do that sort of testing on a case like this,
is it something that's standard at the time?Yes, I mean we got semen, you know,
the only thing you could get was blood tests from the semen, and of course
(05:06):
that amounted to about 14% of the population.And you were doing house to house inquiries, so
Colin Pitchfork, who we now know obviously was the perpetrator, was he interviewed as
part of the first round with Lynda Mann?On the first round he hadn't moved in.
He was in the process of buying the house and moving in. He was seen and he
(05:33):
gave an alibi, as much as anybody else could, that he was at home, didn't go out, his wife was at
night school, and he was looking after the child.So, I suppose at this point you've done
everything you can, are there any local suspects? I mean that's the thing about Colin Pitchfork,
we now know that he had previous convictions for flashing essentially, but at this point presumably
(05:55):
you wouldn't know any of this.We weren't aware of the
conviction because the conviction wasn't local, it was out in Market Bosworth area, before the Market
Bosworth court as a juvenile, for indecent exposure. And of course, his age was another
factor of his offense, so I mean it wasn't given the priority that it probably would do today.
(06:24):
I mean we were looking at people with convictions for offenses of indecency and offenses against
women, and all those sort of people, whether they lived in the area or visited the area,
they were all suspects. And of course, they were interviewed and eliminated as far as possible.
So, I suppose at this point the case then goes cold really until 1986,
(06:49):
when a similar thing happens to Dawn Ashworth.That’s right, I mean, we watched every incident
that occurred in the interim period. Anything which cropped up, I mean,
there were numerous incidents involving women reporting seeing somebody or things like that.
They were all investigated to a negative result and eventually, I mean, we just got
(07:13):
two or three officers looking at outstanding inquiries and,
you know, just keeping a watching brief on it. And of course, then on the
31st of July, Dawn Ashworth goes on a similar journey to see a friend, but this time going
from Enderby to Narborough, and of course she never returned home. Parents were waiting for her,
(07:39):
intent on going out that evening at seven o'clock, and she never came. She was reported missing,
and we were immediately told, and of course started a full-scale search.
I mean there was similar thoughts going through our mind, although it was a different time of
the year, different time of the day, there was a young girl, same age missing in the area. And
(08:08):
we looked at it right from the start, as a potential murder,
and then we started to search at the area.So, she was found on Ten Pound Lane, which again,
it's a footpath.It's a footpath yes.
The body was found on the Saturday, she went missing on the Wednesday I think it was. And
(08:28):
the body wasn't found until a police officer, with his dog, was searching around Ten Pound Lane
and he found her black leather jacket, slung under a hedge. And then a little bit later, with a dog,
found a body covered in nettles and straw and hay, and she was in similar state to Lynda.
(08:51):
And you had a suspect fairly quickly didn't you, with that one?
Yes, I mean, we started off with the house-to-house inquiries and the searches etc.
and during the searches a lad named Buckland was seen showing, you know, an interest in the search
parties that were working on the embankment of the motorway, such that he drew attention to himself.
(09:18):
We established who he was, and in fact he'd been interviewed on the previous occasion.
We then established he’d got a motorbike, and a similar motorbike was seen
under the motorway bridge on the A46. Which is not far from Ten Pound Lane, and of course
(09:38):
he couldn't explain why his motorbike was there and where he was. So, he was arrested,
and we found that he was a PGM1 secretor, group A.
But again, it only left us with a percentage of the population and not an individual.
And when you spoke to him, he confessed, didn't he, to Dawn’s?
(10:02):
He did, I mean, we were a little bit careful about him because he wasn't the full shilling.
We wanted to be reasonably fair to him, so I had his interview taped. So,
he was interviewed at Wigston police station, and his interview was taped recorded,
(10:23):
and the solicitor had access to the tape, and he made certain admissions during the interview,
to such an extent that we got to do something with him, either charge him or let him go.
We couldn't question him any further because we'd be oppressive. So, we charged him and
put him before the court, and of course then there was the question of this forensic evidence
(10:50):
that was there which ostensibly was circumstantial, at that stage.
And you had a brain wave, didn't you, at this point?
Well, we questioned him over Lynda Mann, and he's totally denied all knowledge of it,
and we got no forensic evidence to connect him with it. And of course, I was aware
(11:13):
of Sir Alec Jeffreys work with the DNA.So how had you heard of that to begin with?
I'd read it in the Mercury, and this seemed something which we could use forensically,
which had not been used before.So, was this the immigration case, the one that…?
It was the immigration case yes.And you got a brain wave.
(11:34):
Well, it put the individual down, by his blood, to a group of one,
from a percentage of the population to one.So, what did you do, did you ring Alec up?
Yes, well my forensic science man rang him first, to say could he, do it? And he said yes. So,
I rang him and said what we'd got, and he said he thought he could do it.
(11:59):
So presumably you then have to get the samples to him, and he has to…
Yes, that’s when the problems started. I mean, we needed to establish this lad was in contact
with the first girl, because we were ostensibly fine with a second girl, we thought we got enough
to charge you and convict him on that. But we felt the two murders were connected, we needed
(12:23):
to connect that first murder and speaking to Sir Alec, it was a question of getting the samples
to him and getting authority from the Home Office Forensic Science Laboratory, to use the samples,
and of course they were concerned, that if they were used and destroyed, then evidence
was being destroyed and all sorts of problems. Anyway, we sent him the samples in August,
(12:51):
and it was only the sample of Lynda Mann went, and that came back saying definitely not.
And how did Alec break the news to you? So, I've heard a story that he rang you at some ungodly
hour, to give you the results, is that true?We had a conversation and, you know, I accepted
what he was saying, because he said definitely it's not him. And then it was what are we going
(13:17):
do next and I thought right well we better see whether he's done the other one as well.
So, I sent the sample for Dawn Ashworth to him. And of course, that came back in September,
but it came back with a bonus, the fact that the two samples were identical, and that one man was
responsible for both murders. So of course, it strengthened my arm, in as much as I'd got a
(13:42):
double murder, and one man responsible for both murders. And of course, that was irrefutable.
So, I suppose the bad news was that you hadn't got the right man in custody, but the good news was,
is that you did have the DNA fingerprint of the perpetrator for this double murder. So,
it had, kind of, two sides to it really.Yes, I mean, it demonstrated that one man
(14:06):
was responsible for the death of both girls, and he was still at large, and I felt in the area.
Which must be scary really, to think that somebody's still out there?
Yes, and is he going to come again? That was a big thing. A big thing for the people in the
area as well. And of course, it strengthened my arm in what I wanted to do, or what could I do.
(14:29):
That was the other thing, so I remember hearing that you had your next brainwave and that was
to do a dragnet, but I remember hearing that there was a particular case that you remembered,
that made you think about doing that?Yes, I mean, I looked at what we'd done so far,
I mean, we scoured the two villages, we'd interviewed all the men and we got nowhere. So,
(14:51):
it means that something was wrong somewhere, there was somebody that lied. We felt that
the bloke was still in the area and how do we find him? We couldn't do the same thing again.
So, we got to put something else to it. And of course,
we were talking about fingerprints, and of course it came to me that we'd already done fingerprints,
(15:15):
on a previous occasion, where a whole area was mass fingerprinted, looking for a suspect,
and that was successful. So, I thought well if we can do that with the blood, it's the same as the
fingerprint and it'll bring an individual up.So, you have this brilliant idea of doing a
(15:35):
dragnet, how does everyone take it when you suggest this, are people sceptical?
There was quite a few doubters in the interim period of deciding what we were going to do.
It was a question of getting the support for it to be done, and of course I'd got the advantage of
saying well, there’s two girls murdered what are you going to do? Are we going to do this or not?
(15:59):
and of course, you know, you're putting a gun to people's head really.
Because it was a massive undertaking. So, talk me through what did you have to put together?
Well first off, we've got to get the people. Now we’d already got the names
and addresses of all the men in the area, from two lots of house-to-house inquiries.
(16:20):
Then we'd got to get somebody to do the testing, and that was put down to David Wherrett at the
Home Office Forensic Science Laboratory, at Aldermaston, and they said that they could do it.
We’d got to get authority from the Home Office for them to do it. So, there's quite a lot of
to and froing, with getting it done, and getting them to talk to Sir Alec.
(16:46):
And this is where it came in really handy, those first tests that showed that it was somebody PGM1+
positive, if they looked like they were in that 10%, they would then go down the route
to have the DNA fingerprinting test done.No, they’d do that from the blood test. Not
everybody would have to have their DNA. Those that were not group A, would be
immediately eliminated from the testing.So, it was sort of a two-stage process,
(17:10):
so it was quite useful, yeah, having that early knowledge of what the biological background was
to this person. So, you could then, kind of, streamline it a little bit better.
Yes, I mean, it was a bit of a bind because there was Christmas intervening and we decided that
we'd start in the first week in January, and we lined up all the Phlebotomists, Police Surgeons,
(17:35):
and we arranged various venues, but of course we also looked at the people that were coming.
We sent everyone a letter, that we wanted to come in, and we decided it would be initially the men
between 15 and 40. And we sent everyone that we wanted to come in, a letter, when we wanted them
(17:57):
to come and asked them to bring the letter with them and also a form of identification, including
a photograph. So, we would, you know, just have some control over who was coming. So, I mean,
with the letter and then the driving license or a passport or something like that, we could
see who they were, and if we weren't happy when they came, we could go back to their neighbours,
(18:21):
and what have you, with a photograph and check them out. I mean we were aware that there was
a potential for someone to dodge the system.And it was a huge thing, didn't you have over
5000 men eventually take part in it?We had 5508, that we took. 3624
(18:43):
were negative and there were 1800 under examination at the time we caught Pitchfork.
So, it goes on for quite a long time, are you starting to then get pressure to wind it down,
because you haven't found the person yet?Yes, so there was some pressure coming from the
(19:03):
top. How long's it going to take? But of course we were going to take as long as it was necessary.
Was everyone still behind it?Yes, I think the longer it
went on the more people got behind it.Determination just grew, it sounds like.
Well, I could see what was happening, but of course there was also other DNA cases starting to
(19:24):
take off elsewhere. I mean there was one in Liverpool.
Oh, I didn't know about this.It was a murder case and it involved DNA,
but of course it was individual, and they hadn't got to look for him, they knew who he was,
and it was just a question of the comparison, with the debris left at the scene.
(19:44):
So, I remember reading somewhere that at some point you gave a press conference,
and you knowing that somebody would try and slip through, said, what you needed was that somebody
would eventually let slip about what had happened. And it turned out to be very prophetic.
Right from the word, when we set out, we realised that that was a possibility.
(20:07):
And that somebody probably wouldn't be able to keep their mouth shut?
Yeah.So, it was Ian Kelly in the end, wasn't it? So
how did all of that happen? I know that Ian apparently was at a pub, early august in 1987,
and he's out with workmates, isn't he? And he lets slip that Colin Pitchfork has made him go
(20:28):
and take this test for him. He's tried to get lots of different men at his work to do it for
him. Eventually Ian does it, but you don't find out until September. So, what happened there?
This happened in August, Ian Kelly was working at the Hampshires Bakery
and a group of them decided to have a night out, at the Clarendon Arms public house in Stoneygate.
(20:53):
Whilst they were there Kelly is overheard by a girl, who also worked at the bakery, and he said
that he'd taken a blood test for Pitchfork, and Pitchfork had asked him to do it because
he'd already taken it for somebody else, who was frightened of the needle.
Does she ask Ian about it, do you know, or does she…
(21:14):
She was aware of what was going on. She was alert to the
instances on the television and on the paper, and she realises the implications of what she'd heard.
She waited for two or three days to see a policeman that she knew.
So, I think it was on the 18th of August, she spoke to him and told him what had taken place and
(21:42):
he immediately contacted the incident room, told us what she told him, and of course we immediately
sorted out who Pitchfork, and Kelly were.This must have been everything you were
waiting for. So, what happens, this news comes in it must happen quite quickly?
We've got everything all on computer, so immediately they come in with the names,
(22:06):
we knew who Pitchfork was. He’s in the system, he'd been invited, we knew that he'd given blood
ostensibly, turned up with his passport and that was all documented. And of course, we didn't know
who Kelly was, but of course we immediately found out who Kelly was, so it was a question
of then, you know, they've got to come in quick.Do you knock on both doors at the same time?
(22:31):
Same time.What time in the morning was that?
Yes, it's seven o'clock knock. Well, you've got to go early because in case they go out and go
to work, and what have you. So, it was a, you know, early morning knock and he and his wife and
children were in the house. And, I mean, no sooner the officers got to the door and interviewed him
(22:51):
that he put his hands up and said it was him.So, he's confessing pretty much immediately?
Immediately.And is he remorseful or is he just,
I've been caught and that's it or…Well, I mean, it was clearly on his mind,
the fact that he'd done the two murders, and the fact that he'd used Kelly to take his
(23:12):
blood sample for him, on his behalf. So, I mean, he was aware that the game was up pretty quickly.
And then presumably you have to interview him? What was that like, was it fairly straightforward?
What's he like as a person I suppose?No remorse whatsoever, I mean,
Kelly showed some remorse obviously. He got dragged into it and he realised
(23:37):
what the consequences were going to be for him. But Pitchfork, I mean, he showed no remorse
whatsoever and he's quite cold and calculated. He denied a lot of his activities, but of course the
pathological evidence showed what he'd been up to.So, even in the face of this overwhelming
evidence, he's still to some extent not taking responsibility for it?
(24:00):
No, he's admitting that he's killed a girl, but he's not going into any details of what he did or…
So that obviously must have been a massive relief, I mean, you've made history, what was that like?
It's a feeling you never forget, it's not the first,
it wasn't the last, but, I mean, there's a great deal of satisfaction that, you know, you'd won.
(24:22):
And he's been in jail, or he was in jail, for getting him for 30 years, I think.
Yeah.Released and then
brought back in again, though I did read recently that they're talking about releasing him
again, what do you think about all that?I don't think they should. They let him out
on the last occasion, and of course as soon as he got out and he's got a little bit of liberty,
(24:47):
he's chatting up girls again. He's not changed,
he's not likely to change I don't think, he's still sexually active, and he's still thinking
about it, and he's likely to do it again.I forecast this is what would happen,
and it did. It's not just these two girls, there's another girl as well that he also…
(25:08):
Tell me about that because there was another girl who escaped?
Yes, she was a girl that was walking home at Newton Harcourt,
and he was in his car, pulled alongside her, tried to pull her inside and she ran off. And, I mean,
there was another victim there.So, it sounds to me like your feeling
(25:30):
is that he should never be released because he's shown no sign of remorse
and he's still, the behaviours not changed?You know if he'd shown any sign of remorse,
he wouldn't have been chatting up girls again, you know, I think he's in him, he's a psychopath.
There's a huge legacy from this case and it's why I'm writing about it in this chapter,
(25:51):
because it's the first forensic case and it's known for two things. So, one
is that it's the first time that it's used in forensics, and somebody has been released,
who was innocent on the basis of genetic evidence. Also, that it's the first time that genetic
evidence is used to convict somebody. So, there's a massive legacy there, do you feel the legacy?
(26:12):
Yes, I mean, it was something we were aware of, and it was something that we did a lot to try and
publicise, to get it around the world.You've succeeded.
We did, no, I mean, there's a lot of pressure when you're dealing with murders, it's not easy.
Popular Podcasts
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Follow now to get the latest episodes of Dateline NBC completely free, or subscribe to Dateline Premium for ad-free listening and exclusive bonus content: DatelinePremium.com
24/7 News: The Latest
The latest news in 4 minutes updated every hour, every day.
Therapy Gecko
An unlicensed lizard psychologist travels the universe talking to strangers about absolutely nothing. TO CALL THE GECKO: follow me on https://www.twitch.tv/lyleforever to get a notification for when I am taking calls. I am usually live Mondays, Wednesdays, and Fridays but lately a lot of other times too. I am a gecko.