- 7 hours ago
Britain's Almost Perfect Murders Season 1 Episode 5
Category
📺
TVTranscript
00:01The perfect murder, the unsolvable crime, does it really exist?
00:07In a TV first, we reveal the cutting-edge technology now used by British police to join the dots
00:15and reveal new evidence in all homicide investigations.
00:19I'm Tim Tate. I've been an investigative journalist for almost 50 years.
00:26I'm Sam Robbins and I'm a criminal intelligence analyst.
00:30For over 20 years, I've worked alongside detectives on major murder investigations.
00:34Together, in this new series, we are going to discover the fatal mistakes
00:39which prevented the perfect murder from ever being committed.
01:17Alfred Arthur Rouse was a clever man, confident, charming.
01:23He was a veteran, some might say a hero, of the First World War.
01:29But Alfred Rouse had a secret, a lethal secret.
01:34He was a shameless philanderer, bigamist and liar.
01:41By the summer of 1931, his double life, he was rapidly catching up with him.
01:50Known as the blazing car murder, I think it's important to stress at the very beginning
01:57that this was an extremely brutal murder.
02:04Alfred Rouse, what struck me is that because this is an historical case,
02:15we have an absolute cornucopia of case papers.
02:22What emerges is a really clear pattern, isn't it?
02:26Yes, absolutely.
02:28It's an amazing thing to do to be able to look at the historic case papers
02:33and provide a really detailed timeline of the events and people
02:38that are associated with Alfred Rouse.
02:40So, what do we know about Alfred Rouse?
02:43We've got this one surviving still of our man.
02:47What does his biography tell us?
02:50So, the tale of Alfred Rouse is one of high sexual appetite,
02:56multiple marriages and illegitimate children
02:58and the racking up of a huge amount of debt
03:03and being chased by the mothers of the children,
03:07which then ultimately ends up in Rouse trying to plan a perfect murder
03:13in order to abscond with no trace of himself.
03:16It's like something out of an Agatha Christie story, isn't it?
03:19This is almost a textbook example of a classic case of English murder.
03:30Alfred Rouse was born in 1894 in London
03:33and typical of young men at that time, left school quite early.
03:37In fact, when he was 14 years old,
03:39he started a career initially in carpentry
03:41and he spent five years working as a furniture manufacturing company.
03:47He was quite an exceptional athlete,
03:51quite good at all sports
03:52and a very good accomplished musician.
03:55He could play the piano, the violin and the mandolin.
04:01In his teenage years,
04:03he became a staunch member of the Church of England
04:06and worked as a sacricant in the local church.
04:10He was a very, very well-respected, well-behaved individual.
04:15And around 1910, when he was around 16,
04:18he met a young lady
04:19and they very quickly formed a relationship.
04:21Obviously, in those days, it's quite common
04:23for people to form an early relationship, get married early.
04:28Alfred meets Lily May Watkins in 1909
04:32and he eventually marries her in 1914.
04:36And in that intervening time,
04:38he joins the war effort as a private
04:41and is sent to Paris
04:44where he fathers an illegitimate child with a Parisian lady.
04:48So he's meant to be fighting in World War I...
04:52And he's got his own little battles going on
04:55in some kind of hotel in Paris.
04:57Yes, very much so.
04:59And this would be a repeating pattern of behaviour,
05:02you know, as we quite often see with offenders,
05:04particularly where motives are sex and money,
05:08you'll see a repeating pattern.
05:10And that one certainly plays out
05:12in the case of Alfred Ralphs.
05:15He was posted to France
05:17and had some unpleasant experiences,
05:20as would be expected in the First World War,
05:23some dreadful events,
05:25which culminated in the Battle of Hesterbert in France.
05:30His regiment was involved quite heavily
05:32and it was during this experience
05:34that Alfred became really sort of a hand-to-hand combat
05:38with a German soldier,
05:39a bayonet attack.
05:41And he stabbed first at the German soldier and missed
05:44and he was waiting for that retaliatory strike back at himself,
05:48which never came.
05:49But it was an experience that sort of haunted him
05:52for the rest of these days.
05:53He'd wake up with nightmares
05:54off this almost hand-to-hand battle
05:57with his German soldier.
06:00On the last day of the Battle of Hesterbert,
06:03Alfred suffered severe injuries to his head
06:05and his legs and other parts of his body
06:08when a bomb exploded quite near to his head, actually,
06:11and he was invalided out.
06:13He spent a year in a military hospital.
06:15When he went home,
06:17he found it very difficult to walk correctly.
06:19His leg wouldn't bend at the knee
06:20and he'd have complained of dizziness,
06:23had headaches.
06:24So he was really awarded quite a good pension
06:27from the army
06:28when he first returned to London.
06:32The effect of the shrapnel,
06:34which was embedded into his head,
06:36caused some sort of personality problem to him.
06:40He became very, very talkative, apparently.
06:43He would laugh for no apparent reason
06:46during conversation.
06:47He complained of dizziness and insomnia
06:50and he suffered with short-term memory loss.
06:53That dreadful incident in the war
06:55certainly affected him mentally.
06:59So there's a very interesting case
07:01of a guy called Phineas Gage in psychology
07:03who suffered a very similar incident
07:06in terms of a brain injury to his frontal lobes.
07:09And he's often cited as a case of somebody
07:13who suffered a very significant brain trauma
07:16but changed his personality quite significantly.
07:19And we see this very similar kind of situation
07:22in terms of Alfred Rouse
07:24in that he's suffered an injury
07:26which to some extent really altered his personality
07:30and made him into a very different character
07:32than he'd previously been.
07:37In terms of his personal life,
07:40everything from the surface looked rosy.
07:43He had a job, he had a house, he even had a car.
07:45He had a very well-paying job
07:47so he was a travelling representative for a company
07:50where he was receiving four pounds a week
07:53which, you know, back in the late 1920s, 1930s
07:57was a really decent wage.
07:59And the fact that he, you know, had his own car
08:02and had his own transport
08:03just goes to show the sort of status
08:05and the life that he was leading.
08:07But unfortunately, the balance was not in his favour
08:10in terms of that wasn't enough money
08:12to keep up with the lifestyle
08:14that he was choosing to leave privately.
08:21Rouse had always had an eye for the ladies
08:23but it seems that after his injury in the Great War
08:26he became more promiscuous
08:28and after he took a job as a travelling salesman
08:32he travelled all over the countries
08:34meeting various ladies
08:36and having affairs with them.
08:39At the point when he's discharged
08:41he's a war veteran.
08:42He is.
08:43He's got a pension.
08:45You might look at him as a respectable war hero.
08:49Yes.
08:50But the reality was?
08:52But the reality was that there was really
08:54a secret life taking place.
08:56He commits bigamy
08:57and marries one of the ladies
08:58that he's involved with
08:59a lady called Helen Campbell.
09:01She was only 14
09:02so that also tells you something
09:05about his background
09:06and his willingness
09:07to have relationships
09:09with very young females.
09:10So he's a predator, isn't he?
09:11Yeah, absolutely, yeah.
09:13And he will do whatever he needs to do
09:16to fulfil his sexual desire
09:19and if that means having relationships
09:21with children
09:23which is essentially what Helen is
09:27then so be it.
09:28That's what he will do.
09:31He got her pregnant
09:32within months of meeting and seducing her
09:35and then in what would become
09:37a familiar pattern
09:38he abandoned her.
09:39He began an affair
09:41with Nellie Tucker
09:43a young domestic servant.
09:46He's married to two women
09:48at the same time
09:48he's married to Lily and Helen
09:50and then he begins the affair
09:52with a lady called Nellie Tucker
09:54and in 1928
09:57she has his baby.
09:59Now at this point
10:00he is juggling
10:01several relationships
10:03with several women
10:04and several children
10:05all of whom
10:06are unknown to each other.
10:10So Nellie
10:11catches on to this
10:13and the fact that
10:13Rouse isn't around
10:14there's been abandonment issues
10:16in terms of
10:17he's not providing
10:17for the child
10:18that he's fathered.
10:19I thought it was quite
10:20an unusual thing
10:21to happen back then
10:22but potentially not
10:23is that Nellie goes to court
10:25for a maintenance order.
10:27She asks the court
10:29to deal with
10:31the errant father.
10:33Yes.
10:33So in order
10:34for him to financially
10:37starts to supply
10:39and take care
10:39of her and her child
10:41and his child.
10:42We often,
10:43when you put together
10:44a timeline like this,
10:46we see something
10:48which could be
10:49a tipping point.
10:50Is that where you see
10:52the tipping point?
10:52I think essentially
10:54the tipping point
10:54comes a little bit
10:55further back here.
10:57I think it's to do
10:58with personalities
10:59and how strong
11:00the women are
11:01really in this case
11:02and the women
11:03that Rouse
11:05potentially thinks
11:06that he's got control
11:07over are the ones
11:08that ultimately
11:08lead to his downfall.
11:10Helen,
11:11he's married to her
11:12whilst being married
11:12to Lily
11:13but Nellie,
11:14yeah,
11:15potentially Nellie
11:15being of a strong
11:16character
11:17and deciding
11:17that actually
11:18she's not going
11:18to stand
11:19for what he's peddling.
11:21I think that is
11:22definitely a tipping point
11:23because obviously
11:24he then has to start
11:26supplying money
11:26which he's now
11:28starting to run out of
11:29because he's got
11:30so many relationships
11:32that he's trying
11:33to juggle
11:34at the same time.
11:36Times were hard.
11:38Obviously,
11:38it was the 1930s.
11:39It was post-war Britain,
11:41First World War
11:42and money was short.
11:45So things were
11:46looking a bit
11:46desperate for Alfred.
11:48He wasn't earning
11:49enough money
11:49to pay the mortgage,
11:51keep his family
11:52at home in London
11:53and support
11:54these maintenance payments.
11:55So he decided
11:56he didn't need
11:57to come up
11:57with a plan
11:58where he could
11:59rid himself
11:59of this pressure
12:01that was building up
12:01on him financially.
12:14A flurry of court orders
12:17began to arrive
12:18demanding Alfred Rouse
12:21pay support
12:22for the children
12:23he'd fathered.
12:25He realised
12:27the position
12:27he had got himself
12:28into was unsustainable.
12:30He needed
12:31to find a solution
12:33and quickly.
12:36He really
12:36must have thought
12:37that this was
12:37the end of the line
12:38really
12:39and what he wanted
12:39to do
12:40was to sort of
12:40wipe the slate clean
12:41and start again.
12:43What we see
12:44in these kind of cases
12:45is that
12:46there's a certain level
12:47of ruthlessness
12:48that people would go to
12:49in order to
12:51get out
12:52of these situations
12:53for most people
12:54they would
12:54face up to
12:55the consequences
12:56of what they've done.
12:58At some point
12:59he hatches a plan
13:00how do I get out
13:01of this ridiculous situation
13:04all these financial
13:05pressures etc.
13:11This is what
13:12struck me
13:13as the next
13:14tipping point.
13:16He takes out
13:18an insurance policy.
13:20He does.
13:22And it's a very
13:22specific one
13:23and when we
13:24look at cases
13:26where
13:28people have
13:29potentially died
13:29in unusual
13:30circumstances
13:31it's always
13:32a red flag
13:33if there is
13:34an insurance policy
13:35that is taken out
13:35shortly before
13:36an incident happens
13:38that's always
13:39a massive red flag
13:40in a murder
13:41investigation.
13:43And lo and behold
13:44Ralph takes out
13:45an insurance policy
13:46here to provide
13:47for Lily
13:48his first wife
13:49which is interesting
13:50it was Lily
13:51but whether he
13:52felt that
13:52that was
13:53the first
13:54relationship
13:54that he'd
13:55cemented
13:56and married her
13:56and maybe
13:57that he owed
13:58it to her
13:59and he wanted
13:59her to be
14:01taken care of
14:02but he takes out
14:03an insurance policy
14:04and it's very
14:05specific
14:05this insurance policy
14:06it's should he
14:07die in a road
14:08accident.
14:09That's a very
14:10unusual wording.
14:11It's very unusual
14:12and very specific.
14:15The plan that
14:16Alfred Rouse came up
14:17with was to
14:18fake his own death
14:20but he took out
14:22this £1,000 insurance
14:23with the intention
14:25of finding someone
14:27to take his place
14:28in the death
14:30in the car
14:30and he would
14:31simply disappear
14:32start a new life
14:33elsewhere
14:34where no one
14:35knew him.
14:37Eventually
14:38he would admit
14:39that his plan
14:39was to disappear
14:40up in Scotland
14:41where he was
14:41unknown
14:42and just start again.
14:45So those kind
14:46of people
14:46who try to
14:47fake their own
14:48deaths
14:48and start
14:51a new life
14:51somewhere else
14:52whether it's
14:52to collect
14:53insurance money
14:54or whether it's
14:55because they've
14:55got an affair
14:56that they want
14:57to continue
14:57it clearly reflects
14:59a certain level
15:00really of fantasy
15:01of daydreaming
15:02they'll go through
15:04these kind of
15:04different scenarios
15:05that they want
15:07to plan out
15:08and how they think
15:09that their life
15:09will suddenly
15:10miraculously change
15:12and they can
15:13just start again
15:14however we know
15:15that it's very
15:15very difficult
15:16to erase your past
15:19and it certainly
15:20brings to light
15:21some kind of
15:22flaws really
15:23in their thinking
15:24and it's almost
15:24this kind of
15:26fantasy belief
15:28that they have
15:28that leads
15:29to their downfall.
15:33On your timeline
15:34we're now at
15:35November 1930.
15:37Yes.
15:37So his planning
15:39is I'm going
15:40to stage
15:42a car accident
15:43bear in mind
15:45the insurance policy
15:46Yes.
15:47And my body
15:49is going to be
15:50found in the car.
15:52Yes but what's
15:53the problem with that?
15:54You have to
15:54find a victim.
15:56Yes.
15:58Alfred Rousey's plan
16:00was to find a man
16:01that was similar build
16:03similar height
16:03to himself
16:04and get him
16:06in the car
16:06that he was going
16:07to destroy
16:08with the intention
16:10that the insurance
16:10people would accept
16:12that he himself
16:13had died
16:13in this car accident.
16:16We're right in the middle
16:18of the two world wars
16:20as it were
16:20when Britain
16:21was in pretty dire straits.
16:23Money was very difficult
16:24to earn.
16:25There were a lot
16:26of impoverished people
16:28of course
16:29pubs and clubs
16:30where people
16:30would go
16:31to sort of
16:32forget their
16:33problems etc.
16:35Any individuals
16:36particularly men
16:37were often
16:38homelands
16:39all living in
16:39sheltered accommodation
16:41etc.
16:42He was in the
16:42perfect time period
16:44to find someone
16:45that would probably
16:46be not noticed
16:47if they disappeared
16:48or quickly forgotten
16:50if they were.
16:52But a few days
16:53before the plan
16:53was put in place
16:54he remembered
16:55that he'd met
16:56this chap
16:57in a nearby pub
16:59that he knew
17:00didn't have any
17:01family
17:02no friends
17:03or family
17:03and he was
17:04very very similar
17:05to Alfred
17:06in appearance
17:06so he went
17:07and sought him out
17:08on the 2nd 3rd
17:10of November
17:10and sure enough
17:11the chap
17:12was still sitting
17:12having a drink.
17:14So to Rouse
17:15he appeared
17:16the ideal victim
17:18so he offered
17:19this chap
17:21the promise
17:21of work
17:22in Leicester
17:23and he'd give him
17:24a lift up to Leicester
17:25so that he could
17:27then get employment.
17:31He really
17:32has planned
17:33what he thinks
17:34is going to be
17:35the perfect murder
17:36by finding a victim
17:38that he thinks
17:39is going to hurt
17:39it's not going
17:40to be missed.
17:41Very sadly
17:41for this individual
17:44we know
17:45that he'd let
17:45Rouse know
17:46that there wasn't
17:47a person in the world
17:48who would care
17:48if he lived
17:50or died
17:50so he'd almost
17:52written his own
17:53fate into that.
17:55Rouse had spotted him
17:56in terms of
17:57physical appearance
17:58and then
18:00that had been
18:01backed up
18:01by no one
18:02was going to
18:02miss this individual.
18:03That's one of the
18:04things that I
18:05took out of
18:05the case papers
18:06this statement
18:08that this
18:11soon to be
18:11victim
18:12said to Rouse
18:13governor
18:15there's no one
18:16going to care
18:16if I live
18:17or die
18:18and it's
18:19heart-rending
18:20isn't it?
18:20It's really
18:20heart-rending
18:21isn't it?
18:22Particularly
18:22if you've gone
18:23to war
18:23and you've
18:24fought for
18:24your country
18:26essentially
18:26you return
18:27from war
18:28a hero
18:29but not
18:30hero enough
18:30that anyone's
18:31going to miss
18:31you
18:31if you die
18:32on your
18:32homeland.
18:33There's a date
18:34which crops
18:35up very
18:36quickly
18:36and it's
18:38in terms
18:38of
18:39Rouse's
18:40perfect
18:41murder
18:42planning
18:42it's a
18:43significant
18:43date.
18:44It is.
18:45Obviously
18:46he has to
18:46get around
18:46the fact
18:47that the
18:47body
18:47the victim
18:48is going
18:49to be
18:49identified
18:50as not
18:50being
18:51Alfred Rouse
18:52so the
18:52idea of
18:53fire setting
18:54starts
18:55with Alfred.
18:57You know
18:57there is no
18:58more perfect
18:59a date
18:59to set a
19:00fire
19:00than the
19:005th of
19:01November.
19:03He had
19:04selected
19:04the 5th
19:05of
19:05November
19:061930
19:07as the
19:08night
19:08that he
19:09would carry
19:10out this
19:10attack
19:11this
19:11murder.
19:13Bonfire
19:13night
19:13fires are
19:14put together
19:15made out
19:15of wood
19:16or whatever
19:16materials
19:17and lit
19:18all over
19:19the country
19:19in gardens
19:20on hillsides
19:22beacons
19:23if you like
19:24and traditionally
19:25fireworks
19:25are set
19:26off.
19:27This
19:27fitted well
19:28in with
19:29his plans
19:29because
19:29when he
19:30set fire
19:31to the
19:31vehicle
19:31people
19:32would
19:32naturally
19:32think
19:33well look
19:33there's
19:34another
19:34bonfire
19:35up on
19:36the lane
19:36there
19:36up the
19:36hill
19:37and so
19:38the fire
19:39in the
19:39vehicle
19:39would
19:39attract
19:40no
19:40attention.
19:42To make
19:43sure
19:43that his
19:44potential
19:44victim
19:44had no
19:45resistance
19:45Alfred
19:46bought
19:46a bottle
19:46of whiskey
19:47in advance
19:48and sure
19:49enough
19:49picked up
19:50the gentleman
19:50they made
19:51their way
19:52up to
19:52supposedly
19:53driving up
19:53from London
19:54to Leicester
19:54and all
19:56the while
19:56this passenger
19:57was drinking
19:57whiskey
19:58so he was
19:58quite insensible
19:59by the time
20:00they got
20:00to Hardingstone
20:01near
20:02Northampton
20:03he was
20:04quite
20:04drunk
20:06Rouse
20:07turned off
20:07the main road
20:08onto a little
20:09side road
20:10leading to the
20:11small village
20:12of Hardingstone
20:13and he pulled up
20:14at the side of the road
20:16and told the man
20:18who was now
20:19very drunk
20:20he said
20:21I'm just getting out
20:22for a pee
20:24it's believed
20:25that Rouse
20:27knocked his
20:28victim unconscious
20:29with a wooden
20:30mallet
20:30that was found
20:32at the crime
20:32scene
20:36Rouse
20:37stuffed
20:37the man
20:38into the
20:39Morris
20:39saloon car
20:40and
20:41pushed his
20:42own wallet
20:43in the man's
20:44trousers
20:44so that
20:45if he were found
20:46it would look
20:47as if it was
20:48Rouse
20:48in the car
20:49he believed
20:50the man was dead
20:52then as part
20:53of the plan
20:54which he'd
20:55thought through
20:55he loosened
20:56the joint
20:57underneath the
20:58vehicle
20:59the petrol pipe
21:00which feeds
21:01the carburetor
21:02from the petrol
21:03tank to the
21:03carburetor
21:04which caused
21:05petrol to flow
21:06into the vehicle
21:07and in fact
21:08underneath the
21:09vehicle
21:09he then set
21:11fire to the
21:11vehicle
21:17and he might
21:18have gone
21:18away with it
21:19his plan
21:20for the
21:20perfect
21:21murder
21:21might
21:22have
21:23worked
21:27now
21:28Rouse's
21:28story
21:30changed
21:31yes
21:31at various
21:32times
21:33but
21:33what we
21:34can
21:35say
21:35with
21:36certainty
21:36is that
21:38he staged
21:39a car
21:39crash
21:40in a
21:40little
21:40lane
21:42off a
21:43little
21:43village
21:43yes
21:44how close
21:45does he
21:45come to
21:45getting
21:45away
21:46with this
21:46very close
21:47very close
21:48he could
21:49have
21:49if he'd
21:50have
21:50chosen
21:50another
21:51route
21:53or
21:53he'd
21:54not
21:55taken
21:56the
21:56actions
21:56that he
21:57takes
21:57next
21:58then
21:58he
21:59could
21:59have
21:59walked
22:00away
22:00the
22:01car
22:02would
22:02have
22:02burnt
22:02to the
22:03point
22:03where
22:03everything
22:04would
22:05have
22:05been
22:05fairly
22:05difficult
22:06to
22:06identify
22:06and
22:07he
22:07could
22:08have
22:08walked
22:08away
22:08into
22:09the
22:09sunset
22:10Lily
22:10would have
22:11been
22:11taken
22:11care
22:11of
22:12and
22:12his
22:12plan
22:12would have
22:13been
22:13carried out
22:14in the
22:14manner
22:14to which
22:14he thought
22:15it was
22:15going to
22:16but
22:17but that
22:18is not
22:18what
22:18happened
22:47Alfred
22:49from
22:49the
22:49little
22:49his
22:51plan
22:51for
22:52the
22:52perfect
22:52murder
22:53might
22:54have
22:54worked
22:57unfortunately
22:58for
22:58Alfred
22:58as he
22:59was
22:59walking
22:59away
23:00from
23:00the
23:00vehicle
23:00back
23:01towards
23:01the
23:01main
23:01road
23:02two
23:03young
23:03men
23:03who
23:04had
23:04just
23:04been
23:04to
23:05a
23:05firework
23:05display
23:06about
23:07half
23:07a
23:07mile
23:07away
23:08met
23:08with
23:09him
23:09and
23:09he
23:10turned
23:10and
23:11said
23:11to
23:11the
23:11two
23:12young
23:12men
23:12oh
23:13look
23:13there's
23:14a fire
23:14up
23:15there
23:15somebody's
23:15having
23:16a bit
23:16of a
23:16bonfire
23:17to try
23:18and make
23:18light
23:18of what
23:19they could
23:20see
23:21and
23:21what
23:22they say
23:22then is
23:22that
23:23this
23:23man
23:23who
23:24they
23:24described
23:25then
23:26walked
23:26off
23:26towards
23:26the
23:27main
23:27road
23:27quite
23:28nonchalantly
23:30these
23:30two
23:31men
23:31then
23:31made
23:31their
23:32way
23:32over
23:32to
23:32where
23:32the
23:33fire
23:33was
23:34and
23:34realised
23:35it
23:35wasn't
23:35a
23:35bonfire
23:36it
23:36was
23:36a
23:36car
23:37in
23:37flames
23:38they
23:39sent
23:39for
23:39the
23:39local
23:40police
23:40officers
23:41and
23:41with
23:41the
23:42aid
23:42of
23:42the
23:42water
23:43from
23:43a
23:43nearby
23:43pond
23:44they
23:44managed
23:44to
23:44douse
23:45the
23:45fire
23:46and
23:46then
23:46they
23:46saw
23:46the
23:47charred
23:47remains
23:47of
23:48a
23:48body
23:48lying
23:49across
23:49the
23:49driver's
23:50seat
23:50and
23:50the
23:50passenger
23:50seat
23:58on
23:59examination
23:59of
24:00the
24:00vehicle
24:01of
24:01course
24:01the
24:01constable
24:02discovered
24:02laying
24:04on
24:04the
24:04front
24:04seat
24:05sideways
24:06with
24:06his
24:06head
24:06on
24:06the
24:07driving
24:07seat
24:07basically
24:08a
24:08charred
24:09corpse
24:09and
24:11he
24:11described
24:11the
24:12head
24:13of
24:13the
24:14victim
24:14as
24:14almost
24:14like
24:15a
24:15burnt
24:15rugby
24:16ball
24:17I
24:18think
24:18Rouse
24:18had
24:19the
24:19right
24:20idea
24:21in
24:21thinking
24:22that
24:22if I
24:23set
24:23light
24:24to
24:24the
24:24car
24:24it
24:24will
24:24burn
24:25the
24:25body
24:25beyond
24:25recognition
24:26it
24:26will
24:26never
24:27be
24:27identified
24:27and
24:28to
24:29that
24:29extent
24:29it's
24:30true
24:30because
24:31to
24:31this
24:31day
24:32the
24:32body
24:32still
24:33hasn't
24:33been
24:34identified
24:34there's
24:35no
24:35name
24:35to
24:36it
24:36but
24:37unfortunately
24:38for
24:38now
24:38Rouse
24:38he
24:39left
24:39far
24:39too
24:40many
24:40clues
24:41behind
24:41that
24:42gave
24:43the
24:43police
24:44evidence
24:44to
24:45suggest
24:45that
24:46another
24:47person
24:47had
24:48been
24:48involved
24:48in
24:49that
24:50arson
24:50and it
24:51wasn't
24:51simply
24:52Rouse
24:53laying in
24:53his own
24:54car
24:54having
24:55been
24:55burnt
24:55to
24:55death
25:01so
25:02inside
25:02police
25:03can
25:04see
25:05that
25:05the
25:05fire
25:07hasn't
25:07taken
25:08as
25:08much
25:09as
25:09Rouse
25:09probably
25:10anticipated
25:10it
25:10would
25:11there's
25:12a
25:12body
25:12in
25:13the
25:14car
25:15it's
25:16badly
25:16burnt
25:17but
25:18also
25:18the
25:19number
25:20plate
25:20of
25:21the
25:21vehicle
25:21hasn't
25:22completely
25:22melted
25:22so
25:23there's
25:24a
25:24partial
25:24number
25:25plate
25:25available
25:26to
25:26the
25:26police
25:26as
25:27well
25:27today
25:27you
25:28know
25:28we
25:28take
25:28number
25:29plate
25:29recognition
25:30ANPR
25:30we take
25:31it for
25:31granted
25:31don't
25:32we
25:32yes
25:32this
25:33is
25:331930
25:34yes
25:34yeah
25:35I was
25:36quite surprised
25:36by this
25:37I've got
25:37to say
25:37yeah
25:38I was
25:38surprised
25:39that they
25:39were
25:39that there
25:40was a
25:41database
25:41and it
25:42was
25:42checked
25:44and
25:45very quickly
25:45that car
25:46was identified
25:47as belonging
25:47to Alfred
25:48Wells
25:50senior
25:51officers
25:51were involved
25:52were called
25:52in
25:53on the
25:53murder
25:54scene
25:54was sealed
25:56it was
25:57then discovered
25:57by forensic
25:58examination
25:59that in fact
26:00the nut
26:01underneath the
26:02petrol tank
26:03had in fact
26:04been loosened
26:05purposely
26:05and that was
26:06proven by a
26:07scientist
26:07which of course
26:08allowed the petrol
26:09to ignite
26:10beneath and inside
26:11the vehicle
26:12this is a fascinating
26:14case from a
26:15forensic science
26:16perspective
26:17because it
26:18happened in the
26:191930s when
26:21forensic tests
26:22as we know
26:23them today
26:24were simply
26:24not available
26:25in the investigation
26:26and so
26:27we have a
26:28situation
26:29where an
26:30individual
26:30is found
26:31in a
26:32burned out
26:33car
26:33and the
26:35identification
26:36of that
26:36individual
26:37obviously
26:38is paramount
26:39to the
26:40investigation
26:42once an
26:43individual
26:44has been
26:45subject to
26:47a fire
26:48then it
26:48makes
26:48identification
26:49very difficult
26:50because the
26:51things that we
26:51might rely upon
26:53such as
26:53fingerprints
26:54or facial
26:55recognition
26:56are no longer
26:58available
26:58and we
26:59have to
27:00rely on
27:02the traditional
27:04identifying marks
27:06such as
27:06dental records
27:07and or
27:09any sort
27:10of surgical
27:10intervention
27:11that they
27:11may have
27:12sustained
27:13in life
27:14that leads
27:15the investigators
27:16to that
27:17individual
27:17so we
27:18don't have
27:19the things
27:20that are
27:20available to
27:21us now
27:22such as
27:23DNA technology
27:24which we
27:24can apply
27:25to even
27:27samples
27:27that have
27:28been
27:28extremely
27:29degraded
27:30as a
27:30result
27:31of fire
27:31so although
27:33the police
27:34called in
27:34forensic experts
27:35with regards
27:36to the
27:37motor car
27:37they were
27:38able to
27:38see that
27:38it had
27:39been tampered
27:39with and
27:40thereby a
27:41deliberate
27:41fire rather
27:42than an
27:43accident
27:44their attempts
27:45at identifying
27:46the victim
27:46were much
27:47less successful
27:48they tried
27:50dental records
27:51with no luck
27:52because the
27:52gentleman who
27:53had been
27:53picked up in
27:54the pub by
27:55Rouse
27:55didn't have
27:56anything about
27:57him which
27:58could be
27:58identified
27:59and Rouse
28:00had obviously
28:00planted some
28:01of his own
28:02clothing and
28:03his wallet
28:04on the man
28:05when he
28:06left him
28:06in the car
28:06so there
28:07was very
28:07very little
28:08police to
28:08go on
28:08and in fact
28:09he was
28:10never identified
28:11at the time
28:12although they
28:13did take
28:13the precaution
28:13before he
28:14was buried
28:14at Hardingstone
28:16Cemetery
28:16of taking
28:17a tissue
28:18sample
28:19to go
28:20into the
28:20archive
28:23but a post
28:24but a post-mortem
28:24on the victim
28:25showed that
28:26there had been
28:27trauma to the
28:27head
28:28it showed
28:29injuries
28:29which of course
28:30was caused
28:30by Alfred
28:32striking the
28:33victim with
28:33the wooden
28:34mallet
28:34on the head
28:36and in fact
28:37the mallet
28:38was found
28:38nearby
28:39at the scene
28:40thrown
28:41on the ground
28:44within really
28:45a day
28:46both the press
28:47and the police
28:48thought that
28:49they needed
28:50to find
28:51Rouse
28:51because these
28:52two chaps
28:53that were walking
28:53back to
28:54Hardingstone
28:54were able
28:55to give a
28:56description
28:56that matched
28:57Rouse
28:58so they thought
28:58he was likely
28:59still alive
29:00and needed to
29:01get an account
29:01from him
29:02as to what
29:03had happened
29:03and how
29:04someone had
29:04come to be
29:05dead
29:05in his car
29:06and how
29:07his car
29:07caught light
29:08At that point
29:14in Rouse's
29:15mind
29:15does he still
29:17think he's
29:17got away
29:17with it
29:18Yes
29:18100%
29:19I think
29:20he has
29:22in order
29:22to ensure
29:23that his plan
29:24is foolproof
29:25he leaves
29:27his wallet
29:27so to all
29:29intents and
29:29purposes
29:30the police
29:30have arrived
29:31they've found
29:31this scene
29:33they've found
29:34a body
29:34that isn't
29:35wholly identifiable
29:36but is a male
29:37clearly of a
29:38certain age
29:39and in the
29:40pocket
29:40they find
29:41identification
29:42belonging to
29:43Alfred Rouse
29:44and they also
29:45have been able
29:47to trace the car
29:48back to him
29:49so
29:51the police
29:52then take
29:52the wallet
29:52to Lily
29:54Lily Watkins
29:55who is his
29:56first wife
30:00Alfred Rouse's
30:01plan had been
30:02thwarted
30:03he planned
30:03to go from
30:04Northampton
30:05on the train
30:05to Scotland
30:06but he realised
30:06had he been
30:07seen by two
30:07men
30:08and they'd
30:09caught a good
30:09description
30:10of him
30:10he realised
30:11that his idea
30:13that it was
30:13his body
30:14in the car
30:14wouldn't be
30:15believed
30:16so he
30:17thought up
30:17on the spot
30:18almost
30:18another plan
30:19that his car
30:21had been
30:21stolen
30:21and it was
30:22nothing to do
30:23with him
30:23the fact
30:23it had ended
30:24up in
30:24Northamptonshire
30:25this is
30:26something
30:26that criminologists
30:27recognise
30:28as a pattern
30:30routinely
30:32killers
30:33who think
30:34they've
30:34committed
30:34the perfect
30:35murder
30:35sabotage
30:36their own
30:37plans
30:37by doing
30:38something
30:39foolish
30:42he decided
30:43to make
30:44his way
30:44back to
30:44his home
30:45at London
30:46going to
30:46Scotland
30:46the people
30:47would realise
30:48it wasn't
30:48him
30:49that died
30:49in the car
30:50and they'd
30:50be looking
30:51for Alfred
30:51Rouse
30:52so instead
30:53he made
30:54his way
30:54back to
30:54London
30:54he arrived
30:55back about
30:55six o'clock
30:56in the morning
30:56he'd hitched
30:57a lift
30:58back there
30:58he came in
31:00without saying
31:01a word
31:01to his wife
31:01he was in
31:02the house
31:02about half
31:02an hour
31:03and then
31:03he disappeared
31:04again
31:04Lily was
31:05asked
31:06at one
31:06point
31:07to
31:07identify
31:09the body
31:10of
31:10the victim
31:11but it was
31:12felt that
31:13it was in
31:14such
31:14poor condition
31:15because it
31:16was badly
31:17burnt
31:17and charred
31:18that that
31:18wouldn't be
31:19right to
31:19show her
31:20a dead
31:21person
31:21of that
31:22nature
31:22which is
31:23understandable
31:23but she
31:24was able
31:25to identify
31:26positively
31:28Alfred's
31:28wallet
31:29which was
31:30in the
31:30pocket
31:31of the
31:31victim
31:31and also
31:33describe
31:34the clothing
31:34worn by
31:35the victim
31:35as similar
31:41Ralph's
31:42true to
31:42form
31:44couldn't
31:44resist
31:45going
31:45and seeing
31:46one of
31:46his
31:47female
31:47interests
31:48so he
31:49travelled
31:50to Wales
31:51to see
31:52Phyllis Jenkins
31:53who was
31:54surprised
31:54that he'd
31:55turned up
31:55without his
31:56car
31:56and he
31:57said
31:57oh
31:57it
31:57broken
31:58down
31:58and he
31:59had
31:59come
31:59by
31:59the
31:59means
32:00to
32:00come
32:00and
32:00see
32:00Phyllis
32:01in
32:01Wales
32:01she
32:02wasn't
32:02that
32:03happy
32:03with
32:03that
32:04story
32:05and
32:06then
32:06newspapers
32:07had
32:07started
32:07to
32:08report
32:08the
32:08fact
32:09that
32:09a
32:09male
32:10had
32:10been
32:10found
32:11burnt
32:11out
32:11in
32:12a
32:12car
32:12and
32:13Phyllis
32:13puts
32:14two
32:14and
32:14two
32:14together
32:15and
32:16challenges
32:16Ralph
32:17and says
32:17I think
32:19that you've
32:19staged
32:19a
32:20murder
32:20Ralph
32:21leaves
32:22Phyllis
32:22and he
32:23starts
32:23to head
32:24back
32:24to
32:24London
32:24and
32:25Phyllis
32:26goes
32:26to
32:26the
32:26police
32:27and
32:27says
32:27this
32:28newspaper
32:28article
32:29here
32:29I think
32:30it's
32:31Alfred
32:31Rouse
32:32and I
32:32think
32:32he's
32:32alive
32:33and well
32:33We're in
32:341930
32:35Yes
32:35You know
32:36communications
32:37in 1930
32:38weren't quite
32:40as they are
32:40now
32:41and yet
32:42by the time
32:43Rouse arrives
32:44in London
32:45Scotland Yard's
32:46waiting for him
32:47Yes
32:47I mean
32:48it's a
32:49it's a
32:49staggeringly
32:50good piece
32:51of
32:51old
32:52school
32:53detective
32:54work
32:54detective
32:55work
32:56and luck
32:56and luck
32:57in terms
32:58of
32:58obviously
32:59finding a
33:00really good
33:01witness
33:01in Phyllis
33:02finding really
33:02good witnesses
33:03with the
33:03two males
33:04that find
33:05the car
33:05in the
33:06first place
33:06so yes
33:08by the time
33:08Rouse
33:09gets back
33:09to London
33:09detectives
33:10from Scotland
33:11Jard are
33:11waiting for him
33:13Rouse
33:13is arrested
33:14He is
33:15and he tells
33:16the first
33:17of a number
33:18of tall stories
33:23Now initially
33:24when Rouse
33:25was arrested
33:25he stuck
33:26to his story
33:27that his car
33:28had been stolen
33:29but then
33:30on arrival
33:31at the police
33:32station
33:32he gave a
33:33different statement
33:33he changed
33:34his story
33:34this time
33:35he said
33:36he had been
33:36in the car
33:37he must have
33:37realised
33:38there'd be
33:38evidence
33:39that would
33:39incriminate him
33:40of being
33:40inside the car
33:41his wallet
33:42for instance
33:42was recognised
33:43as being
33:44in there
33:44so he
33:45then said
33:46well actually
33:47he had been
33:47the driver
33:48but it had
33:49been a complete
33:49accident
33:50and he'd
33:50panicked
33:51in disappearing
33:51he'd been
33:52given a lift
33:53to a hitchhiker
33:55He'd stopped
33:56in Hardingstone
33:57Lane
33:57in order
33:58to relieve
33:59himself
33:59and as he
34:01left the car
34:02he asked
34:02the hitchhiker
34:03that he'd
34:03picked up
34:04if he would
34:05refill
34:06the petrol
34:08in the car
34:09with a canful
34:10of petrol
34:10that was in
34:11the back
34:12and he'd
34:13also given
34:13this chap
34:14a cigar
34:15to smoke
34:16The car
34:17had burst
34:17into flames
34:18it's too late
34:19to do anything
34:20and in a panic
34:20he'd just walked
34:21away from the
34:21scene of the crime
34:22and he stuck
34:23with this story
34:24that it is an
34:24accidental fire
34:25for the rest
34:26of his incarceration
34:33Once again
34:34what is surprising
34:35about this case
34:36is given
34:37the timing
34:37of it
34:38is how good
34:39the forensics
34:39were
34:40so the forensics
34:41obviously
34:42came through
34:44and said
34:45and suggested
34:46that actually
34:47the male had
34:48been beaten
34:49so he hadn't
34:50died standing
34:51outside the car
34:52which was another
34:54tall tale
34:56of Rouse's
34:57but actually
34:58he'd been beaten
34:59so it was clear
35:01that the male
35:01had been beaten
35:02which we know
35:02that Rouse
35:03had done
35:03with the mallet
35:05and very sadly
35:07that they could
35:08tell that
35:08the victim
35:10was alive
35:10when he set
35:11fire to the car
35:12and it's possible
35:13to tell that
35:14having worked
35:15jobs where
35:17exactly
35:17this scenario
35:19has happened
35:19it's possible
35:21to know
35:21that they were
35:22alive at the time
35:23that the fire
35:23was set
35:24because
35:25smoke is inhaled
35:27very hot smoke
35:28is inhaled
35:29and it damages
35:30and blackens
35:31the windpipe
35:32and down to the lungs
35:33so that's how
35:33they know
35:34that somebody
35:35is alive
35:36when a fire
35:36has been set
35:37there was another
35:38piece of forensic
35:39detection
35:40which you've
35:41identified
35:44which undermined
35:46Rouse's
35:46tall story
35:47completely
35:48yes
35:49so the story
35:50about
35:50the vehicle
35:52accidentally
35:52catching light
35:53simply wasn't
35:54true
35:54and the vehicle
35:56even in its
35:57bad state
35:58had been examined
35:59and it was clear
36:00that the fuel pipe
36:01of the car
36:02had been tampered
36:04with
36:04so obviously
36:05by Rouse
36:06hoping that
36:06it was going to
36:07help ignite
36:08and keep the fire
36:09burning long enough
36:10to destroy any evidence
36:11that a crime
36:12had taken place
36:16well of course
36:17by examining the vehicle
36:19by the pathology
36:20by the forensics
36:21etc
36:21by the evidence
36:23of the witnesses
36:23the story was
36:25quickly dismantled
36:26absolute nonsense
36:27and he was charged
36:29with the murder
36:30of a then
36:31unknown male person
36:34Alfred Rouse
36:35may have tried
36:36to talk his way
36:37out of trouble
36:38but he didn't succeed
36:40he was charged
36:42with murder
36:44and put on remand
36:46to await his trial
37:01Alfred Rouse's trial
37:04at Northampton Assizes
37:05in January
37:061931
37:07lasted
37:08four days
37:09Rouse
37:10insisted
37:11on giving evidence
37:12in his own defence
37:14it's a mark
37:14of his arrogance
37:16that he believed
37:17even then
37:18he could talk
37:19his way out of trouble
37:20the trial
37:21attracted quite a bit
37:23of media attention
37:24not least because
37:25it was a trial
37:26with an unknown victim
37:27I think that's why
37:29it became
37:29quite well documented
37:31in the local press
37:33and certainly
37:34also the national press
37:36at the time
37:37he got to the trial
37:37it was big
37:38newspaper coverage
37:39there was
37:40a lot of
37:41big factors there
37:42iconography
37:43of a blazing car
37:44photographs
37:45of that car
37:46an unknown victim
37:47and despite
37:48Rouse being
37:49constantly quizzed
37:50as to the identity
37:51of the man
37:52he stuck
37:53with his story
37:54that he was
37:55a hitchhiker
37:56he never asked
37:57the name
37:57I think the time
37:59he showed most nerves
38:01was when
38:02he was handed
38:03the actual car
38:03bretta
38:04from the car
38:05that the prosecution
38:07alleged had been
38:08tampered with
38:08in order to
38:09help start the fire
38:11and with that
38:12in his hand
38:13he did appear
38:14quite nervous
38:15it didn't take
38:16very long
38:17for the jury
38:17to find him guilty
38:18and he was
38:19sentenced to be
38:20hung
38:21and when the judge
38:23pronounced the guilty
38:24verdict
38:24he merely said
38:25please your honour
38:27I am innocent
38:28and my appeal
38:29will prove this
38:33once the execution
38:34at Bedford jail
38:35was set
38:36Rouse seems
38:37to have had
38:37a change of heart
38:38and although
38:39he didn't make
38:40a statement
38:41confessing his guilt
38:42he did write
38:42a letter
38:43to a newspaper
38:43the Daily Sketch
38:45in which he outlined
38:46the events
38:46actual events
38:47that took place
38:48on the night
38:49of the 5th
38:50of November
38:52quite bizarrely
38:53he admitted
38:55everything
38:56in the letter
38:56he confessed all
38:58explaining how
38:59he had planned
39:00the whole thing
39:00planned to
39:01fake his death
39:02claimed the
39:03£1,000 insurance
39:04and that he had
39:06set fire to the
39:07vehicle using petrol
39:08that he had
39:08loosened the pipe
39:09and all these issues
39:10that were suspected
39:11at the time of his trial
39:12he fully admitted
39:16and also why
39:18he never revealed
39:19the identity
39:20of the victim
39:21because he simply
39:22said
39:22it never occurred
39:24to me
39:24to ask
39:24what his name was
39:29there was one
39:32really sad
39:34little coda
39:35to this story
39:36yeah
39:37and it's very sad
39:38actually
39:38when you think
39:39about it
39:39so
39:39the victim
39:41so the man
39:42who said
39:42that
39:43no
39:43would he care
39:44if he lives
39:45or dies
39:45or goes missing
39:46it seems
39:47that really
39:47is the case
39:48and that
39:49he was never
39:50identified
39:51there was a twist
39:53to this
39:54sad little tale
39:5680 years
39:57after Rouse
39:58went to the
39:59scaffold
40:01DNA techniques
40:02had come in
40:03and had advanced
40:04at that point
40:06there was an
40:07attempt
40:08to try and find
40:09out
40:09who this
40:10unknown
40:11victim
40:11was
40:14in 2012
40:15a family
40:16of a man
40:17who'd gone
40:17missing
40:18in 1930
40:19came forward
40:20saying
40:21this man
40:22might be
40:22our relative
40:25they'd always
40:26been told
40:26they were
40:27growing up
40:28that William
40:29Briggs
40:29was
40:30Rouse's
40:31victim
40:32and they
40:33wanted to know
40:34if the police
40:34could do
40:35anything
40:36with advances
40:37in DNA
40:38technology
40:38to try
40:40and identify
40:41the victim
40:42and show
40:43once and for
40:44whether it was
40:44or wasn't
40:45William Briggs
40:46by that time
40:48I'd retired
40:48from the police
40:49so Northamptonshire
40:51police forward
40:51the inquiry
40:52to me
40:52at the
40:53University of
40:54Leicester
40:55The thing
40:56about forensic
40:57science
40:58is that
40:58it can be
40:59applied to
41:00samples that
41:01have been
41:01taken today
41:02or decades
41:03ago
41:04and so
41:05in any case
41:06if material
41:07is retained
41:08then it is
41:10amenable
41:10and available
41:11for testing
41:14further down
41:15the line
41:16this is an
41:17interesting case
41:18for forensic
41:19science
41:19because
41:20we're working
41:21with DNA
41:22that was
41:24deposited
41:25nearly a hundred
41:26years ago
41:27now
41:27it's stretching
41:28what we can
41:29actually do
41:29with current
41:30DNA technology
41:32in 1930
41:33the post-mortem
41:35of the victim
41:36was carried out
41:36by a very
41:37eminent pathologist
41:38Sir Bernard
41:39Spilsbury
41:40and the
41:41London Hospital
41:42Archive
41:43has a number
41:44of specimen
41:46microscope
41:46slides
41:47from
41:47Sir Bernard
41:48post-mortems
41:49and amongst
41:50those
41:50was a number
41:51of slides
41:51from his
41:52post-mortem
41:53of the
41:54victim
41:54of
41:55Rouse's
41:56murder
41:56and what
41:57we want
41:58to do
41:58is extract
41:59from that
42:00cellular
42:00material
42:01in order
42:02to obtain
42:03a DNA
42:03profile
42:06we've got
42:07a full
42:07male profile
42:09from the
42:09sample
42:10and it
42:11was compared
42:12against
42:13the mitochondrial
42:14DNA
42:14of the
42:14descendants
42:15of William
42:16Briggs
42:17but there
42:18was no
42:18match
42:19so the
42:21relatives
42:22unfortunately
42:22were no
42:24longer
42:25able to
42:26think that
42:27William Briggs
42:28had been
42:28Rouse's
42:29victim
42:29and were
42:30left not
42:31knowing
42:31what happened
42:33to him
42:33back in
42:331930
42:36since then
42:37there's been
42:37a total
42:37of eight
42:38families
42:38have come
42:39forward
42:40saying that
42:41their relative
42:42had gone
42:42missing around
42:43that time
42:43and offering
42:44DNA samples
42:45against this
42:46tissue
42:46so although
42:48to date
42:49the man
42:49has never
42:50been identified
42:50and he lies
42:51in a grave
42:53recently rededicated
42:54in Hardingstone
42:56Cemetery
42:56he's an
42:57unknown
42:58victim
42:58but because
42:59this DNA
43:00sample
43:01exists in
43:01the archives
43:02there's hope
43:02that he may
43:03one day
43:04be identified
43:06I think
43:07it's only
43:07right and
43:08proper
43:08that
43:09that man
43:10who lays
43:11in an
43:12unknown grave
43:13at
43:14Hardingstone
43:15Cemetery
43:16near
43:16Northampton
43:17deserves to
43:18have his
43:18name
43:19put on
43:19the
43:20tombstone
43:23so whether
43:24Rouse
43:24suffered from
43:25personality
43:26disorder
43:26or psychopathy
43:28it's open
43:28to some
43:28debate
43:29certainly
43:29people who
43:30go on
43:31to kill
43:31other people
43:32have a
43:33certain level
43:34of ruthlessness
43:35that we might
43:36link with
43:37something like
43:38psychopathy
43:39however
43:39in my opinion
43:40there's an
43:41underlying
43:41brain
43:42dysfunction
43:43some physical
43:44situation
43:45that's led
43:46to him
43:46committing
43:46these crimes
43:47and it's not
43:47necessarily
43:48just down
43:49to his
43:49personality
43:53here you
43:54have
43:54an
43:55excellent
43:56example
43:56of an
43:57individual
43:57Alfred Rouse
43:58planning this
43:59murder
43:59down to
44:00the last
44:00detail
44:01taking his
44:02time to
44:03think it
44:03through
44:04pick the
44:05right
44:05victim
44:05pick the
44:06right
44:06time
44:07pick the
44:08right
44:08location
44:09to carry
44:09out the
44:10murder
44:10he's
44:11thought it
44:12all through
44:12the method
44:13how he
44:13would do
44:13it
44:14up to
44:14the point
44:15of walking
44:15away from
44:16the vehicle
44:16had it
44:17been
44:17completely
44:18destroyed
44:18and had
44:20disappeared
44:21possibly it
44:22would be
44:23we could
44:23call it
44:24a perfect
44:24murder
44:25people would
44:26have thought
44:26his family
44:27would have
44:27thought
44:27his friends
44:28poor old
44:29Alfred
44:29has died
44:30accidentally
44:31in a fire
44:32in his car
44:35in terms
44:36of
44:37the criminology
44:38of almost
44:39perfect murders
44:41what does
44:42that tell
44:42you about
44:44how to
44:45commit
44:46a
44:46perfect
44:47murder
44:48goodness
44:49is there
44:50such thing
44:50as a
44:50perfect
44:51murder
44:51personally
44:52I don't
44:53think there
44:53is
44:54for several
44:55reasons
44:55the likelihood
44:56of you
44:57being
44:57witnessed
44:58taking
44:58some
44:59form
44:59of
44:59action
45:00that
45:01can
45:01ultimately
45:02be linked
45:02back to
45:03an offence
45:03is very
45:04strong
45:04I think
45:05the other
45:06reason
45:06is that
45:07quite often
45:07offenders
45:08who think
45:08that they've
45:09planned
45:09an almost
45:10perfect murder
45:11don't allow
45:12for the fact
45:13that police
45:15forces are
45:15vast
45:16and in
45:16amongst them
45:17they have
45:18people who
45:19have dealt
45:19with hundreds
45:21of murders
45:21and hundreds
45:22of cases
45:23and have
45:25the ability
45:25to take
45:26those expertise
45:27and come
45:28together as
45:28a unit
45:29to work
45:30out what
45:31has happened
45:32in an
45:34incident
45:34and I
45:35think
45:35that gets
45:37underestimated
45:37by murderers
45:39on a regular
45:39basis
45:42he concocted
45:43this plan
45:43to escape
45:44from all
45:44his pressures
45:45and he
45:46almost got
45:46away with
45:47it
45:47if it
45:48hadn't
45:48been for
45:48the two
45:48young men
45:49that had
45:49been walking
45:50towards the
45:50blaze
45:51as he
45:51was going
45:51away
45:52and they
45:52recognised
45:52him
45:53if it
45:53would have
45:53made
45:54his way
45:54to
45:54Northampton
45:55station
45:55without
45:55being
45:56seen
45:56and got
45:57his way
45:57to
45:57Scotland
45:58to live
45:58out
45:58a life
45:59unidentified
46:00it
46:00would have
46:01been
46:01the
46:01perfect
46:01murder
46:30done
Comments