UK UK - Janice Weston, 36, Murdered, A1 Layby, Brampton, Cambs. / London, 10 September 1983

[davidt]

I've suggested in earlier posts that JW collected the tyre as she had someone else offer to fit it for her later. That person was the killer. The bottle of wine a thank you. She left her half eaten meal and cheque book and cards because she wasn't going far or for long. There was blood in the car but she could have been killed beside her car in a location not far from her home and office, and her body and murder weapon moved in another vehicle to the disposal site. Her car could have remained in London the whole time and possibly only moved a short distance from where it was found. This could have been an arranged killing with her husband conveniently out of the country with a water tight alibi. Murder by proxy.

The number plate may be a red herring. I've not read that there is physical evidence for a new plate only a recollection that it was the same registration. Perhaps it was only similar.

MOO!

Sorry to pick up on this but according to this

about 7 minutes in the half eaten meal was found in the boot of her car. I've seen comment on this elsewhere too. That's why I asked if anyone knew one way or another for certain as it seems very odd to me.

 

[davidt]

Agree.

I have read that several witnesses said they saw a man “standing by the car” and/or “a man standing with his head under the boot of the car”, but I haven’t read that anybody actually saw a man kneeling down and changing a tire.

It probably doesn’t matter (and I guess if you see somebody bent over with their head in the boot of a car, one logical assumption might be that they are changing a tire - but they could also have just been looking for a murder weapon..). Just seeking clarification on what witnesses saw. I did read that the man appeared to be fairly well dressed, whatever that means.

As you pointed out, I don’t think any of the witnesses reported seeing a second car or a woman standing nearby the car or seated or silhouetted inside the car.

Apparently there was at least a little oil or grease of some type found on Janice’s fingers, seeming to indicate that she was changing a tire. Would that mean though that she started to change the tire - but then somebody showed up and took over the job for her? Or did she and the killer change it together? But if that’s were the case, how come no witness saw two people changing a tire? It’s a bit odd .. if witnesses saw a lone man changing a tire, and she wasn’t helping, why were Janice’s hands dirty?

And I’m still not clear which tire Janice picked up from the tire repair place? If it was one of the Alfa’s four regular tires with logo on the hub, I don’t understand why the repair place didn’t put that repaired regular tire on the car for her, and put the spare in the boot. Why would you “save” the installation of the tire for some other person later? Nobody likes changing /installing a tire, and it wouldn’t have taken the shop more than a few minutes on (or with) a lift? it’s just odd

I think I read that there were chalk or grease pen markings on the inside of the tire (when the car was found in N London) - which had apparently been put there by the repair place to identify it as belonging to TW and JW’s Alfa.

I don’t know why I think the tire is such a big deal. It’s just very strange. Why would the killer take one of the tires (whether the regular or spare)? If the killer was not TW, did the killer also own an Alfa Romeo?

It can’t be just because the killer was concerned about fingerprints, as his prints would probably be on both tires to the same extent. If he could wipe down the tire he just put on the car, he could just as easily wipe down the one in the boot. And since no tire was found at the lay by, it had to - at least for some period of time - have been in the boot as he drove away (apparently turning around and heading back south).

Jmo

I've always assumed it was an original tyre and wheel she picked up. Like you I'm a bit surprised she didn't have it put back on there and then. Perhaps she was in a rush? It's guesswork what happened afterwards. Did she stop to change the tyre and then she was attacked. Was the spare tyre left in the lay by and perhaps picked up by another passing motorist. Did the killer drive off with it in the car and dispose of it somewhere else. Or is it possible the wheel had been changed earlier and that the spare was never in the car that night to start with.

I did also read that one witness described the man as "well dressed". You'd think that would tend to rule out a hitchhiker or random stranger. It was a dark night and by all accounts the weather was poor. I may be wrong but I doubt if a wheel was being changed that Janice would stay in the car whilst it was happening. As you say there do not appear to be any reports of a woman being seen or of a second vehicle being in the layby.

 

[davidt]

Just to go back to the half eaten meal which bugs me a bit. If she did take it with her it does seem odd given the circumstances. The wine, bread etc, I can understand. That's stuff that can be consumed at any convenient time. If she was heading to Clopton I guess the journey would be a couple of hours? The ready meal would not be in a fit state to be eaten.

She had apparently told friends she intended to stay in London all weekend. To me the scene looks all the world to me like she was settling in for the evening. Then a friend calls her and says why don't you come over and stay with me tonight. I could understand the meal, overnight bag and so on much better then. The one problem with my theory though is that she did take the keys to Clopton Manor with her. As a bloke I probably don't understand but I find it very strange she didn't take her handbag with her that night. If she knew she was going to Clopton and staying overnight, its not a short trip. I'd have thought you would take your bag with credit cards etc in case of emergency, a breakdown, needing a hotel or something. If I was doing such a trip I know I would take my wallet and cards with me "just in case".

To me her behaviour looks more like she was only intending to pop out locally somewhere. I wonder if something happened earlier and she was driven towards Clopton rather than driving herself? Or perhaps she was persuaded to drive there. Given it was an unpleasant night weather wise I struggle to see why she would set off on such a drive (and after consuming wine) unless she felt no option. An isolated property in the dark with few facilities on your own doesn't seem to be something that appealing unless you have no choice. Could it be she was lured or persuaded to do so? Went to meet someone locally and then was persuaded or forced to drive towards Clopton? Still wouldn't explain why she took the keys in the first place though.

If the overnight bag found in the car was indeed packed and put there that night its again odd she had time to do that but not time to finish her ready meal. It's possible the overnight bag had been packed previously and was either already in the car or in the house but ready for use at any given time. My partner has a heart condition and keeps a bag ready in case she is ever taken ill and needs to go to hospital for example.

I think mobile phones had only just about launched at that time so I doubt she had one. I don't know what sort of records would have existed for landlines back then but doubtless they would have been checked.

 

[tes1984]

I've suggested in earlier posts that JW collected the tyre as she had someone else offer to fit it for her later. That person was the killer. The bottle of wine a thank you. She left her half eaten meal and cheque book and cards because she wasn't going far or for long. There was blood in the car but she could have been killed beside her car in a location not far from her home and office, and her body and murder weapon moved in another vehicle to the disposal site. Her car could have remained in London the whole time and possibly only moved a short distance from where it was found. This could have been an arranged killing with her husband conveniently out of the country with a water tight alibi. Murder by proxy.

The number plate may be a red herring. I've not read that there is physical evidence for a new plate only a recollection that it was the same registration. Perhaps it was only similar.

MOO!

I may be mis remembering things, but I thought the garage had a receipt for the number plates transaction.

I also seem to recall that the police were confident that Janice was killed in the lay by. I can't remember if this was just based on the oil under Janice's fingernails, or if there was forensic evidence from the lay by.

 

[tes1984]

To me her behaviour looks more like she was only intending to pop out locally somewhere. I wonder if something happened earlier and she was driven towards Clopton rather than driving herself? Or perhaps she was persuaded to drive there. Given it was an unpleasant night weather wise I struggle to see why she would set off on such a drive (and after consuming wine) unless she felt no option. An isolated property in the dark with few facilities on your own doesn't seem to be something that appealing unless you have no choice. Could it be she was lured or persuaded to do so? Went to meet someone locally and then was persuaded or forced to drive towards Clopton? Still wouldn't explain why she took the keys in the first place though.

Clopton Manor was under development, but at least one of the flats there was finished/habitable. IIRC Janice and Tony had stayed there in the past, so Janice wouldn't have been heading to a property without lighting, running water etc

 

[davidt]

Clopton Manor was under development, but at least one of the flats there was finished/habitable. IIRC Janice and Tony had stayed there in the past, so Janice wouldn't have been heading to a property without lighting, running water etc

That's fair enough. Still think something triggered her to go and in a hurry if indeed that was her original destination.

 

[Rush4087]

Just to go back to the half eaten meal which bugs me a bit. If she did take it with her it does seem odd given the circumstances. The wine, bread etc, I can understand. That's stuff that can be consumed at any convenient time. If she was heading to Clopton I guess the journey would be a couple of hours? The ready meal would not be in a fit state to be eaten.

She had apparently told friends she intended to stay in London all weekend. To me the scene looks all the world to me like she was settling in for the evening. Then a friend calls her and says why don't you come over and stay with me tonight. I could understand the meal, overnight bag and so on much better then. The one problem with my theory though is that she did take the keys to Clopton Manor with her. As a bloke I probably don't understand but I find it very strange she didn't take her handbag with her that night. If she knew she was going to Clopton and staying overnight, its not a short trip. I'd have thought you would take your bag with credit cards etc in case of emergency, a breakdown, needing a hotel or something. If I was doing such a trip I know I would take my wallet and cards with me "just in case".

To me her behaviour looks more like she was only intending to pop out locally somewhere. I wonder if something happened earlier and she was driven towards Clopton rather than driving herself? Or perhaps she was persuaded to drive there. Given it was an unpleasant night weather wise I struggle to see why she would set off on such a drive (and after consuming wine) unless she felt no option. An isolated property in the dark with few facilities on your own doesn't seem to be something that appealing unless you have no choice. Could it be she was lured or persuaded to do so? Went to meet someone locally and then was persuaded or forced to drive towards Clopton? Still wouldn't explain why she took the keys in the first place though.

If the overnight bag found in the car was indeed packed and put there that night its again odd she had time to do that but not time to finish her ready meal. It's possible the overnight bag had been packed previously and was either already in the car or in the house but ready for use at any given time. My partner has a heart condition and keeps a bag ready in case she is ever taken ill and needs to go to hospital for example.

I think mobile phones had only just about launched at that time so I doubt she had one. I don't know what sort of records would have existed for landlines back then but doubtless they would have been checked.

Great points

Jmo

 

[Melquiades]

This is an utterly baffling case with so much unexplained behaviour by the victim and so many incredibly confusing clues.

The car ending back up in West London in the area of the victim's home/work feels very significant. If she picked up a north-bound hitchhiker and the hitchhiker attacked her, it would presumably have ended up somewhere north of the attack. And if someone pulled into the layby while she was fixing the tire, they would have had their own car and both the car and the victim would have been left.

The car was taken from the crime scene, almost certainly, because the attacker needed it. You don't risk getting caught driving a murder victim's car unless you have no choice. And it ended up in West London because they needed to get back to West London, where the journey started. And this doesn't speak to a random attack.

The whole tire situation is also bizarre. I'd love to know the circumstances of the original tire puncture (the one that was repaired/picked up on the day of the murder) as it seems very strange/unlikely that the same car had two unconnected flat tires in the span of only a couple days. Was there a previous car sabotage/murder attempt that didn't quite go off as intended for some reason?

Certainly it seems like the police thought the husband was responsible based on their comments at the time and based on the fact that he was held for 60 hours at one point, but just couldn't pin a case on him. And his movements are unaccounted for in France for a big chunk of time. You wonder if he could have made the 90 minute flight from Paris to London on a fake passport, 'surprise I'm home!' and told the victim there was an emergency at the Cambridge property and they needed to meet the developers Saturday morning, both get in the car, he commits the murder, drives back, hops back on a plane and nobody is the wiser.

But this seems a bit farfetched (more mystery novel plot than real life), it doesn't explain the weird number plate thing that I'm not even going to try and guess at, and the awkward car jack being used as the murder weapon does suggest an unplanned attack in contrast to almost all the other evidence. Ugh.

The number plate thing might be the single strangest clue I've ever come across in a true crime case. It seems totally legit - apparently he went into one shop, was referred to the shop next door and both accounts jive - but I cannot think of any possible explanation for why anyone would want extra plates for a murder victim's car after the fact. And I don't believe that the murder victim had even been identified at that point, nor was any significance to the car realized. So weird.

 

[Rush4087]

I may be mis remembering things, but I thought the garage had a receipt for the number plates transaction.

I also seem to recall that the police were confident that Janice was killed in the lay by. I can't remember if this was just based on the oil under Janice's fingernails, or if there was forensic evidence from the lay by.

I’m in US. Can anybody explain to me how the plate procurement process works in UK? I am puzzled how anybody could just walk into an auto shop (even one that had was capabile of manufacturing a plate), hand the person behind the counter a piece of paper with a plate number written on it, and walk out with one (or maybe two, I’ve read both) new plate(s). Also, can you request a specific color? Seems I’ve read something about that as well

Over here, to get a new physical tag (rather than the annual renewal sticker) you’d have to bring photo ID with address proving you currently reside in that county, proof of ownership / title, possibly proof of prior / active registration, and proof of insurance to a local county tag office.

You can request a custom tag (specific numbers/letters if they are not already taken) and one of about five background options, but you cannot request a specific color.

It used to be that you then had to wait a week or so for the tag to arrive in the mail. I think that process may have been expedited by now though, and you can probably leave with your new plate.

But surely, just anybody can’t walk into an auto shop and order a plate (especially a specific plate) without providing ID and proof of ownership and residency. The perp in this case wouldn’t have been able to show any of the above (unless the title was in the glove box, but even then, he’d have to show photo ID, wouldn’t he? I’m sure he looked nothing like Janice. Tia

Jmo

 

[Rush4087]

This is an utterly baffling case with so much unexplained behaviour by the victim and so many incredibly confusing clues.

The car ending back up in West London in the area of the victim's home/work feels very significant. If she picked up a north-bound hitchhiker and the hitchhiker attacked her, it would presumably have ended up somewhere north of the attack. And if someone pulled into the layby while she was fixing the tire, they would have had their own car and both the car and the victim would have been left.

The car was taken from the crime scene, almost certainly, because the attacker needed it. You don't risk getting caught driving a murder victim's car unless you have no choice. And it ended up in West London because they needed to get back to West London, where the journey started. And this doesn't speak to a random attack.

The whole tire situation is also bizarre. I'd love to know the circumstances of the original tire puncture (the one that was repaired/picked up on the day of the murder) as it seems very strange/unlikely that the same car had two unconnected flat tires in the span of only a couple days. Was there a previous car sabotage/murder attempt that didn't quite go off as intended for some reason?

Certainly it seems like the police thought the husband was responsible based on their comments at the time and based on the fact that he was held for 60 hours at one point, but just couldn't pin a case on him. And his movements are unaccounted for in France for a big chunk of time. You wonder if he could have made the 90 minute flight from Paris to London on a fake passport, 'surprise I'm home!' and told the victim there was an emergency at the Cambridge property and they needed to meet the developers Saturday morning, both get in the car, he commits the murder, drives back, hops back on a plane and nobody is the wiser.

But this seems a bit farfetched (more mystery novel plot than real life), it doesn't explain the weird number plate thing that I'm not even going to try and guess at, and the awkward car jack being used as the murder weapon does suggest an unplanned attack in contrast to almost all the other evidence. Ugh.

The number plate thing might be the single strangest clue I've ever come across in a true crime case. It seems totally legit - apparently he went into one shop, was referred to the shop next door and both accounts jive - but I cannot think of any possible explanation for why anyone would want extra plates for a murder victim's car after the fact. And I don't believe that the murder victim had even been identified at that point, nor was any significance to the car realized. So weird.

Another great post! As supportable a theory as I’ve heard - but still, with some clues that seem not to fit - at all.

As you pointed out, the purchase of the plate(s)…if it were the husband, the plate purchase makes absolutely no sense whatsoever (no reason I can think of anyway!).

For those in UK, would it have been possible for the husband to have driven back in some different vehicle and still been there in time to spend the night in the hotel? But even then, why would he need new plates with the same number? Very strange indeed

Jmo

 

[Melquiades]

I’m in US. Can anybody explain to me how the plate procurement process works in UK? I am puzzled how anybidy could just walk into an auto shop (even one that had capability to manufacture a plate), hand the person behind the counter a piece of paper with a plate number written on it, and walk out with one (or maybe two, I’ve read both) new plate(s). Also, can you request a specific color? Seems I’ve read something about that as well

Over here, to get a new physical tag (rather than the annual renewal sticker) you’d have to bring photo ID with address proving you currently live in that county, proof of ownership / title, possibly proof of prior / active registrarion, and proof of insurance to a local county tag office.

You can request a custom tag (specific numbers/letters if they are not already taken) and a background (but not a specific color) from about 5 that are options.

It used to be that you then had to wait a week or so for the tag to arrive in the mail. I think that process may have been expedited now though, and you can probably leave with your new plate.

But surely, just anybody can’t walk into an auto shop and order a plate (or especially a specific plate) without providing ID and proving ownership and residency. The perp in this case wouldn’t have been able to show any of the above (unless the title was in the glove box, but even then, he’d have to show photo ID, wouldn’t he? I’m sure he looked nothing like Janice. Tia

Jmo

I'm in Canada and this seems weird to me, too.

But UK plates I don't believe are 'government issue' and government-created in the same way as NA, and trusty Wikipedia says that providing identification to obtain a new plate was only put into law in 2008 (!!!) and shops only had to obtain a license to create plates starting in 2001 so it seems like you could actually just wander into a shop and get plates made for any random car back in 1983.

Vehicle registration plates of the United Kingdom - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

The UK Government introduced on 1 August 2008 regulations requiring the production of personal identification and vehicle registration documents when having number plates made by a retailer.

Number plates were initially made by the motor vehicle's original supplier, and replacement plates meeting standards could be made by anybody. Some people had street address numbers made up to motor-vehicle standards for their houses. From 2001 plates sold in England and Wales had to be provided by a supplier on the DVLA's Register of Number Plate Suppliers (RNPS) as specified in British Standard BSAU145d. The supplier needs to confirm that the customer is the registered keeper or other authorised person and verify their identity.

 

[davidt]

I’m in US. Can anybody explain to me how the plate procurement process works in UK? I am puzzled how anybidy could just walk into an auto shop (even one that had capability to manufacture a plate), hand the person behind the counter a piece of paper with a plate number written on it, and walk out with one (or maybe two, I’ve read both) new plate(s). Also, can you request a specific color? Seems I’ve read something about that as well

Over here, to get a new physical tag (rather than the annual renewal sticker) you’d have to bring photo ID with address proving you currently live in that county, proof of ownership / title, possibly proof of prior / active registrarion, and proof of insurance to a local county tag office.

You can request a custom tag (specific numbers/letters if they are not already taken) and a background (but not a specific color) from about 5 that are options.

It used to be that you then had to wait a week or so for the tag to arrive in the mail. I think that process may have been expedited now though, and you can probably leave with your new plate.

But surely, just anybody can’t walk into an auto shop and order a plate (or especially a specific plate) without providing ID and proving ownership and residency. The perp in this case wouldn’t have been able to show any of the above (unless the title was in the glove box, but even then, he’d have to show photo ID, wouldn’t he? I’m sure he looked nothing like Janice. Tia

Jmo

Frustratingly I had a number plate made up for my mini in the 1980s. But for the life of me I can't remember what the process was back then. I'm sure these days you can't just walk in and ask for one though. The one thing I do remember is that it wasn't instant and I had to wait a few days. One podcast I heard said that the person ordering the plates gave the shop the number on a piece of paper.

 

[Melquiades]

Another great post! As supportable a theory as I’ve heard - but still, with some clues that seem not to fit - at all.

As you pointed out, the purchase of the plate(s)…if it were the husband, the plate purchase makes absolutely no sense whatsoever (no reason I can think of anyway!).

For those in UK, would it have been possible for the husband to have driven back in some different vehicle and still been there in time to spend the night in the hotel? But even then, why would he need new plates with the same number? Very strange indeed

Jmo

It doesn't make any sense no matter who the murderer is.

In general, there are really only two reasons to order new plates for a specific vehicle :

1) the 99.9% reason, which is that the original plates on the car had been lost/destroyed.
2) the 0.1% more nefarious reason, which is to make another car look like the car that actually bears that registration.

We know that the car still had its correct plates. The killer would have known this. So it has to be (2).

If the plate request had happened *before* the murder, you could actually construct some sort of far-fetched but plausible mystery novel scenario where the murderer planned to leave an alternate car outside the home of the deceased while making off with her in the actual car and murdering her. Or something like that. Create confusion with a 2nd car.

But again : far-fetched. And there are multiple witnesses for the plate purchaser so I doubt both got the date wrong.

Plus the victim's car wasn't exactly a Ford Escort with thousands around London - it was an Alfa Romeo Alfetta which is a fairly expensive/rare Italian car. There were 518k Fords sold in the UK in 1983 as opposed to 7k Alfa Romeos, for perspective. Alfa was the 23rd most popular car brand in the UK for that year.

UK Car Sales By Brand : 1980-84

This was a time of change in the UK, with a recession in 1981. Car sales hit a low that has not been seen since. Out of that sales soon pick...

raycee1234.blogspot.com

It's so weird. The murder is done. You just get as far away from the body and the car as quickly as possible at that point. Doing *anything* to stay in contact with either makes no sense.

The only other thing I can think of is if the murderer wanted to get some false plates for the car (ie some totally random number) in order to make it easier to hide/delay identification and then somehow panicked and couldn't remember the UK number conventions for plates or something and just gave the correct number. And then ran out of the store and never came back. But yet again : far-fetched.

 

[davidt]

I haven't checked myself yet but one podcast says if you look at the picture of the car when it had been recovered the front spotlights look misaligned as if the car had suffered a bump or something. If that's correct perhaps the licence plate got damaged as well. Still think, like you do, that the natural reaction would have been to get as far away as possible as quickly as possible. The killer had no idea how quickly Janice may be found or indeed how quickly she would be missed unless they knew her. To hang around overnight in the vicinity shows either confidence she wouldn't be missed quickly or arrogance/stupidity.

 

[Rush4087]

I haven't checked myself yet but one podcast says if you look at the picture of the car when it had been recovered the front spotlights look misaligned as if the car had suffered a bump or something. If that's correct perhaps the licence plate got damaged as well. Still think, like you do, that the natural reaction would have been to get as far away as possible as quickly as possible. The killer had no idea how quickly Janice may be found or indeed how quickly she would be missed unless they knew her. To hang around overnight in the vicinity shows either confidence she wouldn't be missed quickly or arrogance/stupidity.

The above photo from Hunt’s Post shows the Alfetta in London. There does not appear to be any damage to the front of the car, though the left (from driver view) fog light is pointing up a touch (or the one on his right is pointed slightly down..).

Note the difference in tires. It would appear that the spare is on the right front (again, from driver view). If it is in fact the spare, it would appear to mean that the spare was the tire that was being repaired (and had the chalk grease marks on the inside), and was simply put into the trunk/boot by the tire repair shop.

Here is another photo (from The Times) of investigators going over the car. Note that the windshield wipers appear to have been lifted up away from the windshield.

 

[CSIAngus]

I may be mis remembering things, but I thought the garage had a receipt for the number plates transaction.

I also seem to recall that the police were confident that Janice was killed in the lay by. I can't remember if this was just based on the oil under Janice's fingernails, or if there was forensic evidence from the lay by.

I've not read that there is a receipt for the number plate but I'd be happy for that to be confirmed.

I'm not aware of any forensic evidence in the layby other than the body and murder weapon nearby. It has been said that it was raining that night so blood evidence might have been washed away, which I don't find convincing for an absence of forensic evidence at the assumed murder scene.

How much oil/grease was under her nails? Could that not have resulted from dropping off or picking up the repaired tyre?

 

[CSIAngus]

Sorry to pick up on this but according to this

about 7 minutes in the half eaten meal was found in the boot of her car. I've seen comment on this elsewhere too. That's why I asked if anyone knew one way or another for certain as it seems very odd to me.

The half eaten meal was found in her flat according to most of the accounts I've read. I've randomly selected this account Janice Weston murder: Police re-open file after 35 years. I've not read that it was found in the boot of her car.

 

[CSIAngus]

Just floating this theory. MOO obviously. Her husband arranges her murder whilst he's out of the country as a perfect alibi. He has the spare wheel tampered with so that it needs JW to have it repaired. He confects an issue with the rear nearside tyre necessitating the change and tells his wife to take the repaired spare to someone he knows locally late on Saturday to have it fitted at a location within the catchment of her flat, office and where her car was eventually found. She's not going far so leaves her handbag. She's then dispatched while the wheel is being changed, hence the blood evidence on the car. Her body is bundled into another vehicle and transported fast out of London, the quickest route from that catchment being the A1 north bound. Her body and the murder weapon are dumped at a suitable layby on the A1 in the dark where approaching vehicles could be avoided during the transfer. Her car is then moved later from the murder scene to a public location within the same catchment.

The one character that do not know much history about is the husband before and after the murder. He seems to have moved on pretty quickly IMO, and no public appeals that I have seen.

 

[davidt]

The half eaten meal was found in her flat according to most of the accounts I've read. I've randomly selected this account Janice Weston murder: Police re-open file after 35 years. I've not read that it was found in the boot of her car.

One of the problems with articles and podcasts etc, is that various things are said or repeated from elsewhere as fact without any links or verification. The Unseen podcast seems pretty accurate in the rest of the information but there's no way of knowing where they got the information on the meal from. It does seem an unlikely thing to have happened.

 

[davidt]

View attachment 545425

The above photo from Hunt’s Post shows the Alfetta in London. There does not appear to be any damage to the front of the car, though the left (from driver view) fog light is pointing up a touch (or the one on his right is pointed slightly down..).

Note the difference in tires. It would appear that the spare is on the right front (again, from driver view). If it is in fact the spare, it would appear to mean that the spare was the tire that was being repaired (and had the chalk grease marks on the inside), and was simply put into the trunk/boot by the tire repair shop.

Here is another photo (from The Times) of investigators going over the car. Note that the windshield wipers appear to have been lifted up away from the windshield.

View attachment 545430

May just be the angle but the spotlights in the second photo look more out of alignment than in the first one to me. Of course that could have happened at any time.