The film does not tell the truth
-
Jack_1515 — 16 years ago(May 30, 2009 08:23 AM)
You have no idea what you're talking about. Ligature use was Cristie's trademark, it shows premeditation. Beryl Evans was strangled with a ligature, as were 6 other women in that house, but in your narcissistic, wet dream, fantasy world it's just a coincidence right? Evans MUST be guilty because the establishment says so, not because there is any physical evidance to support you.
Serial killers do not change their MOs. What were the clippings of the torse murder get in the apartment when Evans couldn't read? Cristie was the only one in that building who kept clippings. Cristie admitted killing Beryl and all the evidance supports that FACT.
How did the body get in the wash house with the workers discovering it? How did a little runt like Evans move the body without anyone noticing? The only thing that retard Evans was capable of was acting in a moment of passion. Cristie was left with the child and he murdered the poor thing.
I don't know what your agenda is, but it is clear you don't know what you're talking about. You're probably related to the morons who put Evans to death for a crime he didn't commit.
Smarter people than you have tried to pin the murders on Evans and it didn't stand the test of history or decades of scrutiny. Evans may have been an illiterate, retarded, wife beater, but he didn't kill his wife or child and you dishonor the victims and the criminal justice system by asserting otherwise.
John Reginald Cristie would be proud of you. -
investideal — 16 years ago(August 10, 2009 02:42 AM)
My God I have only just read this. Evans could read somewhat, his job was a delivery man he would need to read road names.The film shows Christie raping Beryl - no traces of semen were found in her at the PM. I have looked at copies of the workmens timesheets to work out the various dates etc. Beryl was not even at home when she was supposed to have been murdered. The couple had been seen and heard fighting on a number of occasions - Evans threatened to kill her. Evans killed the baby, basically because he didnt know what to do with it.She was strangled with a sash cord whereas Christie had his own equipment.If I were you I should check things out before you make sweeping statements just because you have seen a stupid movie. Next you will be telling Braveheart was all true as well. Ah well at least you have learned something today
-
harland-ncl — 16 years ago(September 04, 2009 04:51 AM)
The baby had a man's tie round her neck when her body was found in the wash house (not Christie's trade mark), and Timothy Evans eventually told the Police that the baby's crying had got on his nerves.
My understanding from various reports on the case is that Timothy Evans was semi-illiterate, not totally illiterate. He also had a speech impediment.
It has been suggested that the newspaper article on the torso murders (whatever they were) found in Evans' flat was planted by Christie since Timothy Evans probably wouldn't have been able to read them. -
melora72 — 16 years ago(December 07, 2009 12:26 PM)
The women were killed for sexual thrills. The baby was killed to get rid of her. That would explain the MO being different with the baby. False confessions are not uncommon, especially if the person who confesses has the disadvantage of youth or low intelligence. It's possible Evans killed them, but I doubt it.
-
PurpleProseOfCairo — 15 years ago(July 21, 2010 06:05 AM)
I read The Two Killers of Rillington Place some years ago and as a result have always kept an open mind on this case. I agree that the debate here has become unnecessarily intemperate - we're not discussing The Dark Knight, we're talking about actual murders that occurred around sixty years ago.
Hurt's performance is brilliant, but in my opinion not accurate. The Evanses are depicted as a sweet-natured, simple minded couple - Timothy Evans, at least, was a drunk with a liking for violence towards women. We sympathise with Hurt's portrayal, therefore we are more disposed to believe he was innocent.
I don't know the truth, and am not convinced by either argument. I do believe it's a fascinating topic, worthy of a calmer discussion than is going on here. -
lornamd-1 — 14 years ago(May 11, 2011 07:40 AM)
I read about this case before seeing the film so I do not base my opinions on it. My view has always been it was an unsafe conviction but nobody could ever know for certain what happened. I'm aware of Evans domestic violence but that was nothing unusual in those times and a violent man can still be wrongly accused of a crime Gary Dotson being an example of this.
The book arguing Timothy Evans is guilty sounds interesting and I might read it someday but an Evening Standard review of it seemed to be saying that the main reason to think he was guilty was that he confessed and "No one could sound so precise and circumstantial if he was innocent". People with learning disabilities have been pressured into confessing to crimes they didn't commit before now and if he sounded that precise it is likely the wording was by police officers as one thing nobody disputes about Evans is that he was inarticulate.
The only statement on this thread that casts doubt on Evans innocence is the different wrapping of the body but that is made by someone who also says that Christie only killed untraceable women when he killed his wife and the wrapping similar to settys could just be coincidental.
I welcome differing viewpoints from the accepted truth and debates about cases like these but the "everyone who thinks differently from me is stupid" attitude of the OP is childish and unnecessary.
Also its a few years since I watched the film so I may be incorrect but I remember Christie forcing a kiss on Beryl not raping her. -
franzkabuki — 12 years ago(April 09, 2013 02:11 PM)
I read through the Crime Library article of the Evans murders and although no conclusive evidence seems to exist either way, it is clear that the conduct of both the investigating police as well as Evanss legal defence was so superficial as to essentially amount to professional neglect. Had they done their job properly, its likely Evans would have escaped the conviction, considering how many contradictions and unexplained loose ends existed.
"facts are stupid things" - Ronald Reagan