GUILTY UK - Helen Bailey, 51, Royston, 11 April 2016 #4

[Powertool]

The last witness will be someone from IS's schooldays who will testify that whenever he wanted to get out of a tight spot, he said Joe and Nick had done it.

Hi Everyone, new to posting on here but been reading since the start of the trial.
This comment persuaded me to register. I went to school with IS (Letchworth Grammer School, Sept 1972 thru June 1979) and there was no Joe or Nick in our class.

 

[MillyM]

Hi Everyone, new to posting on here but been reading since the start of the trial.
This comment persuaded me to register. I went to school with IS (Letchworth Grammer School, Sept 1972 thru June 1979) and there was no Joe or Nick in our class.

Hello P!

So, tell us: did you know him well? Did you like him? Was he bright academically? What was he like as a young teen? Was he weird, was he popular, did he have a girlfriend?

 

[Florrie]

Hi Everyone, new to posting on here but been reading since the start of the trial.
This comment persuaded me to register. I went to school with IS (Letchworth Grammer School, Sept 1972 thru June 1979) and there was no Joe or Nick in our class.

Welcome to the forum.

Did you just know Ian at school or have you had any other dealings with him over the years?

Am just flummoxed by the descriptions of him as a lovely man who walks away from conflict etc. And the evidence against him at this stage which seems to suggest the opposite.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[Moll]

I feel a bit embarrassed by my earlier flippancy but glad Powertool has joined us.

Florrie, I don't think walking away from conflict is necessarily a quality at odds with this murder. 'Lovely' is harder but loveliness can be put on, evidently.

 

[neteditor]

<snip> Anyway, fascinating. Don't watch it, Neteditor, you clearly have enough to do already!

Goshdarnit, too late, binge watched it last night I was already very familiar with the Malcolm Webster story, being a transplanted Scot and still reading news from home regularly. I didn't know about this TV series though, so thanks everyone for bringing it to attention. MW personifies my theory that the boys who are really cute, are the ones who don't wear well into middle age.

 

[Cherwell]

I feel a bit embarrassed by my earlier flippancy

Don't be! This is clearly the equivalent of "Some big boys did it and ran away".

 

[DollyDiamond]

Whilst I agree with you largely, DD, in that no way should his sons inherit anything (no need, they're grown adults in full-time work, let them do what other young people have to do and rent a place if they can't afford, and save up for a deposit; no doubt they have been living rent free for the last years), until I hear something in this trial to the contrary, I am having a hard time believing neither knew nothing or had any suspicions that they could have divulged to the police. And if they had known, would they have grassed on their own father, even given the seriousness of the matter? I also wonder how they really felt about HB especially since they seemed quite unconcerned about her disappearance - OS even flying off to Australia - and in evidence after her death, showed no particular warmth or detectable feelings towards this woman with whom they had shared a home with for years. It sounded more like that: just someone they happened to share a house with.

MillyM - Bravo, I agree with every word! When I first joined this forum around ten days ago I was shot down in flames by one member for expressing the same view regarding IS' sons. Their accounts of Monday 11th April and beyond don't ring true to me. It simply isn't credible they had no discussion whatsoever with their father about the whereabouts of Helen and Boris on Monday 11th April. Even the absence of little Boris running around would, I'm sure, have prompted such a conversation. Maybe their father did give them an explanation, which he contradicted with a different story on Tuesday 12th. I felt the prosecution didn't press them and perhaps decided not to, as it wouldn't serve any useful purpose?

I also have the impression Helen was somewhat taken for granted by IS and the boys in the million pound mansion they were living in thanks to her. She didn't seem to be especially missed by IS and the boys - obviously we know IS had killed her but there haven't been any indications his sons were worried about or missed her. The fact she ended up murdered and dumped in human excrement with her beloved dog in that home she did so much to create screams that she was neither loved nor respected by those closest to her.

 

[Tortoise]

What I find interesting is how IS memory of events starts to fail exactly one week after he phoned to report Helen missing, during his first recorded police interview, the day the search dog had been in the house.

I don't know if this is a known phenomenon. Retrograde amnesia where there has been no precipitating event or injury to cause it. I mean Pistorius used it often in court, citing trauma and PTSD. In IS' case, there was no traumatic event, he came home and found a note and thought Helen was fine. He had perfect recall when he phoned the police and when they came to see him that evening.

What was he thinking when he asked whether self harming would improve his memory? It shows there really are no bounds to his deviousness. A man who sees everyone as prey.

How is he going to weave this memory failure into his version now I wonder. Is he going to say he can't remember the day, but can remember Joe and Nick?

I am expecting a lot of can't remembers.

 

[Tortoise]

MillyM - Bravo, I agree with every word! When I first joined this forum around ten days ago I was shot down in flames by one member for expressing the same view regarding IS' sons. Their accounts of Monday 11th April and beyond don't ring true to me. It simply isn't credible they had no discussion whatsoever with their father about the whereabouts of Helen and Boris on Monday 11th April. Even the absence of little Boris running around would, I'm sure, have prompted such a conversation. Maybe their father did give them an explanation, which he contradicted with a different story on Tuesday 12th. I felt the prosecution didn't press them and perhaps decided not to, as it wouldn't serve any useful purpose?

I also have the impression Helen was somewhat taken for granted by IS and the boys in the million pound mansion they were living in thanks to her. She didn't seem to be especially missed by IS and the boys - obviously we know IS had killed her but there haven't been any indications his sons were worried about or missed her. The fact she ended up murdered and dumped in human excrement with her beloved dog in that home she did so much to create screams that she was neither loved nor respected by those closest to her.

Regarding the line I've bolded, I wish I could agree with you, but I really do feel it is just sloppy work by the crown. It would have served a very useful purpose, showing how IS changed his story.

We know Oliver leaves for work at 7:15am. I think it very unlikely that he works 8am to 5pm, and more likely that he finishes work at around 4pm, with an early start. Even if he dropped in to his girlfriend's house to pick up his satnav on the way home, he could have been home by 5pm. Which is when IS says he arrived home and found the note. Who got there first? If he was first, was the alarm not set and is that normal? Boris didn't greet him, wasn't that unusual? Where did he think Helen and Boris were?

Just a few simple questions, to get to the truth, which is what the court needs to know.

 

[DollyDiamond]

Regarding the line I've bolded, I wish I could agree with you, but I really do feel it is just sloppy work by the crown. It would have served a very useful purpose, showing how IS changed his story.

We know Oliver leaves for work at 7:15am. I think it very unlikely that he works 8am to 5pm, and more likely that he finishes work at around 4pm, with an early start. Even if he dropped in to his girlfriend's house to pick up his satnav on the way home, he could have been home by 5pm. Which is when IS says he arrived home and found the note. Who got there first? If he was first, was the alarm not set and is that normal? Boris didn't greet him, wasn't that unusual? Where did he think Helen and Boris were?

Just a few simple questions, to get to the truth, which is what the court needs to know.

Excellent post - interesting isn't it that neither son appeared to be pressed on these questions regarding April 11th by the prosecution. After all, as the only other people living in the house/crime scene with Helen and IS, they have to be the most important witnesses of all!

 

[snoopydog]

I do think it's possible that they went easy on the boys... if only on the facts they have already lost their mother, their soon to be step mother was murdered and their father is undoubtedly a murderer. I'd go easy on them myself tbh. I think if the trial was going to come down to their testimonies it might be different but I reckon IS has dug himself a big enough hole....


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[DollyDiamond]

I forgot to thanks Tortoise for that hugely helpful timeline of events, which was such a useful aide memoire for me and I'm sure all of us at this stage in the trial.

Without meaning to sound trite, you know what could have made me wonder if IS was innocent after all? If even one witness had said he adored Boris! To my mind, that alone would have been powerful evidence that he was not a dangerous psychopath, and that he was incapable of killing and dumping Helen and Boris like that. But in fact all we have heard on the subject of IS relationship with Boris (I think - please correct me if I'm wrong), is that according to his son he liked the dog and would take him for walks (not exactly fulsome) and one of Helen's friends said she got the impression Ian was 'not a pet person'. I know I'm a crazy dog lover but I strongly maintain that a person who adores an animal, as Helen adored Boris, would be incapable of an evil premeditated crime like this.

* Just want to add, having re-read this post, that I realise I have applied a huge generalisation to a very complex subject! I'm sure there are examples of murders owning pets of which they are apparently fond (serial killer Dennis Nilsen lived with his dog for example). But I still maintain IS couldn't have cared a jot about Boris, just as he didn't care for Helen - if any witness had stated that he adored Boris, played with him, cuddled him etc, it would have made me think twice about the man).

 

[Alyce]

I have found it strange that the sons are referred to as the boys. Yes, of course they are ISs boys but they are also adult males, in their early / mid 20s.
Child witnesses sometimes have to give very painful and distressing evidence. But they are asked the necessary questions, with great sensitivity on the part of Counsel and Judge.
Asking two adults to give a few more details about their movements on April 11 and clarify timings, would not seem to be creating undue distress and would help to validate ISs story. ( or not of course ).

 

[Alyce]

I forgot to thanks Tortoise for that hugely helpful timeline of events, which was such a useful aide memoire for me and I'm sure all of us at this stage in the trial.

Without meaning to sound trite, you know what could have made me wonder if IS was innocent after all? If even one witness had said he adored Boris! To my mind, that alone would have been powerful evidence that he was not a dangerous psychopath, and that he was incapable of killing and dumping Helen and Boris like that. But in fact all we have heard on the subject of IS relationship with Boris (I think - please correct me if I'm wrong), is that according to his son he liked the dog and would take him for walks (not exactly fulsome) and one of Helen's friends said she got the impression Ian was 'not a pet person'. I know I'm a crazy dog lover but I strongly maintain that a person who adores an animal, as Helen adored Boris, would be incapable of an evil premeditated crime like this.

Jamie evidence
He said his dad was also fond of the dog, Boris, and both Helen and Stewart would go on walks with him.



ISs statements re Boris, from the week end of April 9 and 10
Saturday April 9
“[Helen and I] would have got up, had breakfast, then walked the dog.

Sunday April 10
On the Sunday we went out for a dog walk in the morning, because I was trying to get fitter. I’m still trying to get fitter.”


I may be wrong, but all the above sounds to me as though IS accompanied Helen when she was out walking Boris - doesn't sound as though IS took Boris out on his own at all.

And, that final statement is more that he was walking to help himself, not Boris.

 

[Tortoise]

He wasn't very fond of the police dog.

Who could fail to love them?

:waitasec:

 

[neteditor]

I think if you were worming your way into someone's life, the first thing you'd do is pretend you loved their dog as much as they did.

 

[Duchy]

If anyone's interested I've got a timeline here. It doesn't include everything like all the phone contact with friends and others, but it's got the main events after reporting Helen missing.


Fri 15[SUP]th[/SUP] April
3:37pm IS phoned 101 to report Helen missing.
7pm to 10pm Police went to house and conducted a search of house and garden. On her macbook Helen&#8217;s email page was open but her browser history was blank. Her iPad was locked and IS couldn&#8217;t find the password. Jeep in driveway. Declined publicity of Helen&#8217;s disappearance, said she would be angry. Said she was likely to be in a hotel that takes dogs. Said he&#8217;d been unconcerned until he spoke to John Bailey on 13th. Shocked that police found Helen&#8217;s passport. Followed police everywhere, watched their every move, questioned everything they were doing.
Midnight IS emailed Helen stating his undying love for her.

Sat 16[SUP]th[/SUP] April
IS drove to Broadstairs. Helen's phone connected with the router. Said clothes may be missing. Later agreed with John B that police could go public. Posted a message on Facebook saying Helen missing.

Mon 18[SUP]th[/SUP] April
IS told nurse @9:45am Helen had gone missing on Friday.
IS drove to Leatherhead to see Tony Hurley. Spoke to Karen Cotter, distressed.
Christopher Priest went round for a couple of hours.
IS phoned Tony Hurley that evening.

Tues 19[SUP]th[/SUP] April
9:30am 14 police officers arrived at house and search of house and garden commenced at 10:30am (no dogs).
IS asked if their presence was necessary because the house had already been searched. Dismissive & throwing his hands up in the air. Following police around. Wider Royston area also searched. Jeep had been moved by this date into garage. Vehicles were not moved out of the garage during this search. At 3:10pm they became aware of the cesspit in the garden. It was full. IS told officers he was not aware of the tank. Fresh grass was trapped under the manhole cover, showing it had been recently lifted. Booked to have it drained on 22[SUP]nd[/SUP].

Weds 20[SUP]th[/SUP] April
IS posted on FB complaining about police intrusion, saying no news. He called Karen Cotter again wanting to know if Helen could access her money and asking if police had contacted her because he&#8217;d given them her number. IS&#8217; friend Pamela Charles called him and he ended the call abruptly.
Police looked at IS&#8217; phone.
9:30pm night - police searched the wooded area opposite the house.

Thurs 21[SUP]st[/SUP] April
IS very emotional @ nurse appointment. IS saw his GP for beta-blockers.
Police visited Broadstairs cottage and examined wireless router.
Police also went back to Royston house. IS called Christopher Priest and asked him to be there with him. Police asked IS to do a recorded interview. He would not agree. Said he couldn&#8217;t be bothered, snapped at them & kept cutting them short. Finally agreed to do one the next day.

Fri 22[SUP]nd[/SUP] April
3:31pm Margaret Holson received a missed Facetime call from Helen&#8217;s email account.
Police returned at 10:00am to drain the cesspit in the garden.
At 1pm a search of the house and garden was conducted with victim recovery dog. IS was not happy about it, and called out an officer from Major Crime Unit to the house to express his feelings. Police who had arrived to do his recorded interview were told by IS again he wouldn&#8217;t be able to be interviewed, he didn&#8217;t know police were going to be searching there again today, upset about dog being there, restless, pacing, looking out at back garden, worried about ornaments being broken. Dog indicated in several areas inside the house.
Police returned at 4:15pm, after the search team had left. He was interviewed for 2 hours starting at 4:40pm, not happy about recording equipment. Said Helen had loaded his car with large duvet. He didn&#8217;t remember driving anywhere, didn&#8217;t remember being at the doctors or the dump, couldn&#8217;t remember sequence of things, couldn&#8217;t remember what clothes he&#8217;d been wearing. Said the last time he remembered seeing Helen for definite was when she asked him to change his doctor&#8217;s appointment to the afternoon. Half way through interview he asked &#8220;Are we done then? I&#8217;m hungry.&#8221; At the end of the interview when the camera & machines were off IS asked if he was still the main suspect. Police asked him if he wanted to do a media appeal and he said no because the media would twist his words. He then eased up & started to crack jokes. He told police he felt he should be informed if they intended to search his house.

Sat 23[SUP]rd[/SUP] April
IS texted the police to say &#8216;any news?&#8217; He asked to be re-shown a CCTV image of a woman in Morrisons but the police officer didn&#8217;t know anything about it. He said he&#8217;d found an old iPhone 5 of Helen&#8217;s, that a cream was missing and Boris&#8217; yellow collar. Police returned to the house to see IS. He was there with Jamie. Keys to Broadstairs were returned to him. They asked general questions about things that could be missing for example Boris&#8217; toys and leads. Police found him to be rude and dismissive.

Tues 26[SUP]th[/SUP] April
Police major crime unit took over the investigation.

Thurs 28[SUP]th[/SUP] April
Police returned to the house to collect anything of Helen&#8217;s with her DNA on it.

Sat 30[SUP]th[/SUP] April / Sun 1[SUP]st[/SUP] May
IS & Jamie in Sheffield for snooker.

Mon 2[SUP]nd[/SUP] May (bank holiday)
Police again had contact with IS

Weds 4[SUP]th[/SUP] May
Police 2[SUP]nd[/SUP] recorded interview. IS said he couldn&#8217;t remember when he&#8217;d last seen Helen&#8217;s phone &#8211; an iPhone 6, but not since she went missing. He said no one else would use Helen&#8217;s Facebook acct. He&#8217;s asked if her phone would connect to his BMW &#8211; says he thinks so. Says he asked Helen to marry him 3 ½ years ago (which commutes to Nov 2012) &#8211; about a year after her husband died (which commutes to Feb 2012). She didn&#8217;t want to tell anyone. He says they both still have ashes to deal with. Said Helen hadn&#8217;t been to see Arsenal play for 2 years &#8211; he would go with one of his sons.

Fri 6[SUP]th[/SUP] May
Police had contact with IS again. Community psychiatric nurse Sarah Tooley saw IS for 1[SUP]st[/SUP] time at 1pm, at her place of work. He had referred himself. He told her Helen had been missing for 10 days (actually 26 days, was this to prove his memory problems?) He told her about losing his wife too, 6 years ago and said he wasn&#8217;t coping. He said he couldn&#8217;t remember anything due to stress. He asked if self-harming would improve his memory of events. Said he was suicidal and he was stressed by police questioning him. Also seen by psychiatrist that day.

Sat 7[SUP]th[/SUP] May to Tues 10[SUP]th[/SUP] May
IS went to Broadstairs.

Mon 9[SUP]th[/SUP] May
Sarah Tooley spoke to IS by phone. He said he was in Broadstairs and had felt like jumping off a cliff but his father had supported him and he no longer felt like that.

Tues 10[SUP]th[/SUP] May
IS spoke to a colleague of Sarah Tooley&#8217;s by phone and said he was fine.

Weds 11[SUP]th[/SUP] May
John Bailey attended a press conference to make an appeal
IS released a written appeal

Thurs 12[SUP]th[/SUP] May
Arsenal emailed Helen saying her season tickets were due to expire. IS renewed them by phone on 16[SUP]th[/SUP] May 10:50am, @ £1577 each, using joint bank account but Helen&#8217;s card details.

Fri 13[SUP]th[/SUP] May
IS rang Sarah Tooley and said he was back in Royston and feeling better. He told her he had declined a police interview because he thought it would be too stressful. (I think he must be talking about the live appeal). He asked if he could give her details to police. Said he was having thoughts of self-harm.

Sun 15[SUP]th[/SUP] May
Helen&#8217;s online account last accessed. Not sure if this was her bank account or email account. (disclosed during &#8216;Arsenal tickets&#8217; evidence, trial date 27[SUP]th[/SUP] Jan)

Weds 18[SUP]th[/SUP] May
9:30am IS refused to allow police search team to return to house. IS phoned his GP about not being able to sleep &#8211; GP increased medication.
IS told police that he had sought psychiatric help for suicidal thoughts. He said he had not tried to access Helen&#8217;s bank account, when told about the two log in attempts on 11[SUP]th[/SUP] April. Police wanted to look in the house and garage for electronic devices. Scenes of crime photographers turned up at the door. He said he was fed up with it and became very anxious. Said if Helen came back he wouldn&#8217;t want to be with her any more. Officers asked for the key to the garage but he wasn&#8217;t happy. He wouldn&#8217;t consent to a search of the garage but consented to photographs of it. His parents arrived. After being reassured that police hadn&#8217;t lifted the floorboards in Broadstairs he became calmer. But he declined to give them his phone &#8211; saying he needed it for his mental support team and if Helen tried to contact him.

Fri 20[SUP]th[/SUP] May
IS phoned and asked police if there was any news. He was calm but said he was angry with Helen for not letting anyone know she was alright.

Sun 22[SUP]nd[/SUP] May
Dog walk on Royston Heath to raise awareness.

Thurs 2[SUP]nd[/SUP] June
IS asked Helen&#8217;s solicitor for a copy of the power of attorney. He asked how he could invoke it.

Fri 3[SUP]rd[/SUP] June
IS phoned Sarah Tooley and asked if she thought he should go to Palma on pre-booked holiday planned for June 12th. She said she could not make that decision for him. He sounded more jovial.

Tues 7[SUP]th[/SUP] June
Police returned to Broadstairs and discovered wireless router missing from cottage.

Fri 10[SUP]th[/SUP] June
IS phoned Helen&#8217;s friend Jay (who had helped organise the dog walk) and said he was going to carry on with the holiday because he couldn&#8217;t get a refund and his mental health adviser had said he needed the break. He texted her to say not to make it public.

Sun 12[SUP]th[/SUP] June
IS flew to Palma.

Weds 15[SUP]th[/SUP] June
IS emailed police and told them he needed his phone. (I think this date has been reported incorrectly and should be Sat 25[SUP]th[/SUP] because he was in Palma on 15[SUP]th[/SUP])

Thurs 16[SUP]th[/SUP] June
IS emailed Helen&#8217;s friend Jay and said the holiday might not have been a good idea.

Fri 17[SUP]th[/SUP] June
IS told police by email he lost his phone while he was carrying two phones, in Cambridge. He didn&#8217;t even know the sim number and it was switched off when he lost it. (Again I think this should be Mon 27[SUP]th[/SUP] because that&#8217;s when he was declared a suspect and he was in Palma on 17th)

Sat 25[SUP]th[/SUP] June
6[SUP]th[/SUP] anniversary of the death of his wife, IS posted a message on FB saying he failed with CPR.

Mon 27[SUP]th[/SUP] June
IS was declared a suspect.

July - IS tried to progress the sale of the flat by going to see solicitor. He also said he would register the POA. He wasn&#8217;t happy.

Mon 4[SUP]th[/SUP] July
IS&#8217; last contact with Sarah Tooley. Said he&#8217;d been on holiday and felt ok and was happy to be discharged.

Mon 11[SUP]th[/SUP] July
7:02am IS arrested at his home on suspicion of murder, taken to police station and interviewed. He denied murder/body disposal/stealing money, and then refused to answer further questions. House search began. Cars still in the garage as they were on 19[SUP]th[/SUP] April. Cars were moved to assist the cadaver dog handlers. Dogs did not react over cesspit hatch but did react in the room above. The dogs searched all the vehicles, including the BMW.

Tues 12[SUP]th[/SUP] July
IS released on bail to a hotel. Police lifted the manhole cover and replaced it. Re-tasked to drain the pit.

Fri 15[SUP]th[/SUP] July
Helen&#8217;s body discovered (with Boris) in the garage cesspit. (Not actually drained until 20[SUP]th[/SUP].) Excavation was started. IS re-arrested at 12:52pm at hotel he had been bailed to. Seen at police station by police nurse at 3:10 pm. He told her he had been suicidal about a month ago.

Sat 16[SUP]th[/SUP] July
IS charged with murder. Excavation continued most of day. Forensic dentist confirmed Helen&#8217;s identity.

Oct 12[SUP]th[/SUP] IS pleads not guilty

Dec 12[SUP]th[/SUP] IS serves his defence statement.

Brilliant Tortoise thank you :websleuther:

 

[icemaiden65]

He wasn't very fond of the police dog.

Who could fail to love them?

:waitasec:

The 'pointing' of the sniffer dog is more evidence I keep forgetting - wonder if the irony of a dog helping to convict him will actually dawn on IS?

 

[Tortoise]

Thank you.

Another interesting detail is that he emailed Helen on the night of 15th April.

What was he trying to do there? Set up an electronic trail that police could read, because they wouldn't ever recover her phone? He wouldn't know at that stage that they would ask for his phone.

 

[DollyDiamond]

As it's a Sunday and our last break before proceedings resume (Please God), I hope you won't object if I share a true story with you about my grannie's love affair with a serial killer. On the subject of our perception of murderers, I think it's pretty interesting.

My grannie Florence was a private State Registered nurse in Eastbourne in the 'sixties, when she took a job working with a GP called Dr John Bodkin Adams. I won't elaborate too much here suffice to say he was the predecessor of Dr Harold Shipman and suspected of killing around 160 elderly patients - many of whom had favoured him generously in their will! He was found Not Guilty of murder at a high profile trial in 1957, escaped the gallows and returned to general practice in Eastbourne. Despite many believing him a murderer he continued to engender fierce loyalty in his friends and patients.

My grannie was at the time a glamorous blue eyed brunette divorcee in her fifties, from Northern Ireland (as was Dr Bodkin Adams), and they hit it off and started dating. Grannie said he was charming, kind and attentive both to her and her teenage son (who he gave driving lessons to in his Rolls Royce!) Though of course she knew of his past, (he was something of a celebrity in Eastbourne), she struggled to reconcile the warm-hearted man she knew with the crimes of which he had been accused. When they did talk of his murder trial, he proclaimed his innocence and said the patients who died were all at death's door and he was only helping them get to heaven in a wholly kind, painless and benevolent way. That was how he justified it to her, and perhaps to himself.

Having read up on Dr Bodkin Adams in recent years, it was clear he was utterly ruthless and prolific in his manipulation and murder of wealthy patients for financial gain - and not in the least bit like the lovely man my Grannie described!

When Dr Bodkin Adams proposed to her, she faced a dilemma and asked him to let her think about it. She was extremely fond of him and he adored her and promised a happy, loving and financially secure future. She had struggled since her divorce, as a working single parent. But in the end she turned him down, there were just too many questions in her mind about his past.

Myself and her other granddaughters would tease her about this when she was an old lady living alone and say she should have married him for his ill-gotten gains! She lived the rest of her life alone, and died, a happy woman of modest means, in an armchair in her cosy rented cottage for retired nurses in Brighton. I was amused recently to read he was gay and firmly in the closet - perhaps that was just another of the secrets he kept from my lovely grannie!

Thanks for indulging me!