Innocents

That sleep remained in short supply for Lesley’s family. The strain at last told on Julie, and problems developed with her pregnancy which required immediate hospital attention, but by Wednesday morning she was ignoring medical advice, and returned to be with her family once more. She telephoned Fred Anderson to come and collect her, and for a brief moment, the family rejoiced that the baby was well. It was Wednesday, 8 October 1975.

As dawn broke over Rishworth Moor, David Greenwell stirred from sleep and threw open the rear doors of his yellow 1965 BMC Mini van, which was parked in a lay-by off the A672 Oldham to Halifax Road at Ripponden, West Yorkshire. A night’s sleep behind him and the early morning urge to relieve himself caused him to scramble upwards until the land became flat, changing from craggy hillside to moor.

Who was this man, who had spent the night sleeping in a lay-by? Why did he look up into the bleakness? What was it that first caught his eye, to draw it to the terrace twenty-five feet above his head, to see the folds of a blue raincoat, flapping in the air currents and swirling winds which never seem to abate across this grassy embankment.

David Arthur Greenwell, a joiner by trade, was at this time working for a firm of Birmingham shopfitters who were engaged in a jewellery shop refit in Rochdale. It was simply too far for him to travel daily from his Nottingham home, and, although he was paid an allowance to cover overnight expenses, Greenwell’s tiny van sometimes became his home-away-from-home, with sleeping bag and mattress, kettle and primus stove, cup and plate. But no toilet.

And so at around six forty-five, rising to wash and cook breakfast, he first scurried upwards to find a secluded spot, where he could not be seen. After his task was completed, he turned and made his way back down the moorside. The wisp of cloth that had caught his eye on the ascent could be seen again as he headed back to his van, but this time he looked a little closer. The wisp then seemed part of a bundle of clothes. He took another pace towards it, then reeled backwards at the sight of what was clearly human flesh. The body of a child, of a little girl, face down on the grass. Still fully clothed, the Bay City Rollers socks visible, the blue canvas bag revealing the incomplete errand that had set her on the route which brought her here. But the trappings of childhood innocence were obscured by the obvious and appalling injuries, the bruising and the stab-wounds, and by the terrible stillness of the child, from whom all life had now departed.

For a moment only, he stood, transfixed, somehow unable to absorb the enormity of this sight. Then, slowly, he began to recall news reports over the previous weekend of a young girl missing from the Rochdale area, and that recollection sent him running to his van. The wash could wait, the breakfast was abandoned as shock turned to panic. He hurriedly drove to his work site and told his foreman, Michael McClean, and fellow employees of his grim discovery, and they in turn advised him that he must report the finding to the police.

Within the hour the grisly find had been reported at Rochdale Central Police Station to the desk officer, Constable Michael Roberts. The duty detective from Rochdale criminal investigations department required Greenwell to repeat his story, as he would be asked to repeat the story many times over the next few days.

Then DC Roberts asked Greenwell to accompany him back to the scene, to retrace his steps. Once more the Nottinghamshire shopfitter embarked on the climb up the moorside, this time with far more trepidation, followed by the officer. Did Greenwell hope that the body would have gone? That he had imagined it? That the nightmare would then be over? Had he yet realised that he would not be allowed simply to carry on with the day’s work, before returning to the lay-by to sleep again that night? Could he comprehend that he was already being ear-marked, not merely as a witness, but as a suspect, a position he would have to hold until he could be, in the jargon, eliminated from police enquiries?

It was a matter of moments before he and the detective stood within sight of the child. Neither approached the body, it was obvious that the child was dead, and it was equally obvious to Roberts, who by this time had engraved on his mind the description of the frail 11-year-old child who had been missing since Sunday, 5 October, that he had found the body of Lesley Susan Molseed. The ‘child missing from home’ investigation had become a murder enquiry.

In April 1974 a major restructuring of the British police service had reduced the 115 county, city and borough forces to fifty-one larger forces covering England, Scotland and Wales. The series of amalgamations which took place created Greater Manchester police and West Yorkshire Metropolitan police as two of the largest police forces in the country. Rishworth Moor, remote and desolate, was situated between the Halifax and Huddersfield divisions of the West Yorkshire force, although it also bordered the Rochdale division of the Greater Manchester police area.

A radio message from Roberts’ police car to senior officers at Rochdale was quickly relayed on to West Yorkshire police, on whose ground Lesley had been found. West Yorkshire officers were immediately dispatched to the location, and by 9 a.m. Detective Chief Inspector Richard (Dick) Holland of Halifax division, and Detective Chief Inspector John Stainthorpe of Huddersfield division were at the scene, trying to determine on whose ‘patch’ the body lay.

The murder enquiry fell within the jurisdiction of Detective Chief Superintendent Jack Dibb, head of West Yorkshire number one crime area, and his junior officer from the Halifax division, Dick Holland. And because all major murder enquiries in West Yorkshire were at that time handled by the Home Office Forensic Science Laboratory at Harrogate, near Leeds, the principal forensic scientist in the case would be one Ronald Outteridge.

Holland’s immediate task was to establish an ‘exclusion zone’, the borders of which would preserve any evidence deposited at the scene by the offender or the victim. Within those borders fingertip searches would be made for clues. Within those borders the story of Lesley Molseed’s death would begin to be told.

The extent of the crime scene, including any possible routes taken by the killer to or from the place where the body had been found, was also marked out. This would be a larger area than the exclusion zone and would include the lay-by and any vantage points from where witnesses might have overlooked the scene of Lesley’s death. This, too, was taped off and guarded by local officers. It would be into these areas that there would come, first, the forensic scientists and the pathologist.

While waiting for the scientists and medical men, Holland began the task of structuring the major investigation, the early stages of which comprise time-honoured routines and procedures which remain common practice today. One key procedure is to attempt to establish the sequence of events at the immediate scene, including the identification of all movements of people (and, essentially, vehicles) and occurrences prior to, during and after the commission of the crime, up to the moment of the discovery of the body so that the exclusion zone can be established. In this way no evidence is lost or contaminated, the value of potential clues is identified and any unconnected material is correctly eliminated.

The experienced police officer, who had attended many, many murder scenes, was able to speculate, quite reasonably, on the circumstances which had brought Lesley to this moor. She had clearly been driven from the back-streets of Rochdale to the moors overlooking the M62 motorway, only twenty yards from the A672 Oldham to Ripponden Road. The frail child had been dragged or carried up forty feet of moorside, to a bracken and heather terrace where she was ultimately found. Had her journey to this final place been non-stop, or had the man taken her elsewhere first? That question would have to wait for an answer. Lesley had undoubtedly been alive when her killer laid her down on the damp ground, but for how long had she been kept there, terrified, before her so-short life was brought to such an unmerciful end?

The forensic scientists and pathologist would soon confirm that, mercifully, she had not been sexually abused, but that, although she had not been interfered with, her last companion had undoubtedly obtained some sexual pleasure from her final hours on earth. Upon her underwear forensic scientists were to find semen, but whether the man had ejaculated in some private, quiet place, or up in the winds and mists of the moors, whether he had done so when she was alive or dead, would also remain unknown. It is known only that the killer had masturbated on to Lesley, and that he had killed her, brutally, stabbing her twelve times in the chest and neck with a small knife, before wiping the blade on her thigh and leaving her, uncovered, to the elements.

The Rochdale police would soon receive many accounts of sightings of Lesley as she walked from her home to the shops, and then at various locations in Rochdale and the surrounding areas. In the initial stages Dick Holland only worked on those sightings of the child which clearly could be relied on, in the hope of piecing together Lesley’s last movements and identifying the moment when her abduction took place. The first witness to confirm that Lesley had left Delamere Road at the time her mother claimed was a young girl called Dianne Reeves, who knew Lesley well. Dianne had seen Lesley turn from Delamere Road into Stiups Lane, passing right by her as Dianne swung on the garden gate at her own home. Mark Conroy, a schoolboy friend of Lesley, saw her further along Stiups Lane as he walked from Kingsway playing-fields across Stiups Lane into a snicket or walkway towards Ansdell Road. Four girlfriends of Lesley’s were heading towards Kingsway playing-fields at this time, and noticed her as she walked along. They and Mark also saw a young ginger-haired girl with a scruffy grey dog, who was so close to Lesley that Mark had thought the two girls were together.

Bernadette Hegarty also saw Lesley walk towards Ansdell Road. She was swinging the blue shopping bag and Bernadette, a 10-year-old neighbour of Lesley’s, thought that she was ‘dilly-dallying’. Bernadette was also heading for the Spar, but took an alternative route which ran parallel with Stiups Lane. She visited the Spar shop, but she did not see Lesley there.

Fifteen-year-old Stephen Tatters, who knew Lesley well, also visited the Spar shop at the same time as Bernadette, but he did not see Lesley there.

John Cooper, a newcomer to the area but one who recognised Lesley, remembered seeing her at twelve fifteen walking towards him on her way to Ansdell Road. He was sure of the time, because he had just asked it of an elderly lady who had been walking in the road ahead of him.

At that time, Anita Owen, aged 13, visited the Spar shop and, having bought some sweets, headed back to her home on Turf Hill Road. She walked along Ansdell Road and was just about to turn right into the snicket leading to Buxton Crescent when Lesley came out of the snicket opposite and to her left from Stiups Lane. The two girls were seen by Jane Jeffreys, a school friend of Anita, who described Lesley’s clothing – especially her socks – with great accuracy. Anita and Lesley said hello. Anita walked on towards Buxton Crescent and last saw Lesley approaching the Spar shop.

Robert and Marion Ellidge, the proprietors of the Spar, were interviewed at 3 p.m. on the Sunday of Lesley’s disappearance. They had closed the shop at 2.10 p.m., and had not seen Lesley all day. Steven Ellidge had worked in the shop with his parents until 12.30 p.m. that day, and had then gone to work on his blue Ford Escort car in a garage on Buxton Crescent. He had seen Danny Molseed searching for his stepdaughter at 2 p.m., and had shortly afterwards gone into the shop and asked his parents if they had seen her. Like them, he was unable to help the police, although he had been backwards and forwards across Ansdell Road several times between 12.30 and 3 p.m.

Frank and Edith Jones owned the tobacconist/confectioner’s shop at 65 Broad Lane, known locally as Margaret’s. Lesley was a regular visitor to that shop, particularly on a Sunday when most other shops were closed. Initially the Joneses said they believed Lesley had not been in the shop that afternoon, but after seeing a photograph of the child they changed their minds, saying that she might have been in around 2 p.m., but that they were not certain whether it had been on the Saturday or the Sunday.

Thus, almost all the sightings of Lesley which were to come to the attention of Dick Holland were for around twelve fifteen on the Sunday, and between Lesley’s home address and the Spar shop. There was one further sighting, by Jacqueline Reilly, who saw Lesley from her kitchen window as she walked along Stiups Lane. Jacqueline Reilly had also seen a small yellow van which appeared to be following behind Lesley, and this fact was noted with some interest since there had already been a number of reports of a yellow van on the Turf Hill Estate acting suspiciously near to young children, in particular at the Kingsway Youth Club on the Friday night prior to Lesley’s disappearance.

DC Roberts was debriefed to ascertain what, exactly, David Greenwell had told him, how both men had approached the scene, and whether either of them had touched or moved the body. But Greenwell could not, yet, be considered only as a witness, since it is not uncommon for the person ‘finding’ the body of a murder victim to be the perpetrator of the crime he claims to have discovered.

With this common occurrence in mind, and the knowledge of the description of Greenwell’s van, Dick Holland ordered that the man be interviewed at length, and his movements between Friday, 3 October and Wednesday, 8 October checked and corroborated. Greenwell explained how he had been working in Rochdale for three weeks on the shopfitting job, saving money by sleeping in his van Monday to Thursday, before returning to his home in the Clifton area of Nottingham for the weekend. He had a perfect alibi, confirmed by his parents, Arthur and Siegrid, with whom he lived, who told the police that Greenwell had spent the relevant weekend at home with them, mostly working on the repair of his mobile home. Neighbours of the Greenwells, Iris Dennis, who lived next door, and George McClean, who lived opposite, also supported the man’s account. The police also checked with the tyre company and scrap yard where Greenwell claimed to have gone that weekend to buy spare parts for his van.

Anthony Stych, a workmate, confirmed that Greenwell had given him a lift to his home in Sheffield on the Friday, and had picked him up again at 10.10 a.m. on the Monday. Together with the foreman, Michael McClean, he was able to vouch for Greenwell’s whereabouts from the time he began work in the early morning through to the early hours of the next morning, for it was common practice for the six employees to work late, and then go out for a meal and a drink together, usually until about 1 a.m., since each of them was working away from home. The only exception to this routine had been the Tuesday night, when Greenwell had gone straight from work to his ‘home’ in the lay-by.

McClean described how Greenwell had arrived on site at about eight twenty on the Wednesday morning, looking shaken, pale and worried. He had immediately spilled out his terrible experience, and both Stych and McClean had urged him to report his find to the police.

The above accounts, coupled with reported sightings by passing motorists of the van in the lay-by between Monday night and Wednesday morning and with the information from his home town and his workmates – not least of which were descriptions of him as a good worker, though quiet and nervous – were sufficient to satisfy the police as to Mr Greenwell’s movements. The alibi was accepted, and Mr Greenwell was no longer regarded as a suspect.

That said, there remained the question mark over the sightings of the yellow van; and, of course, Greenwell himself, although absolved of any part in the death of Lesley Molseed, remained a crucial witness in the case. This was not merely because of his discovery of the body, but because he had spent many hours at and around the area in which the police were interested, including hours when the child’s body could have been dumped. He was interrogated further, in the hope of gleaning from him any strand of evidence which could later be woven into the rope with which the killer would be caught. The clothes he was wearing at the time of the discovery of the body and his small yellow van were also taken for forensic examination to eliminate any particles or traces which he might have left at the scene or, of equal importance, to obtain anything which he might inadvertently have removed from that terrible place.

Then, and only then, could the habitually nervous shopfitter go from the police station, free to resume his normal everyday life the best he could after what he had seen.

On the Turf Hill Estate enquiries were being made by officers anxious to achieve a result, but their questioning also revealed the effect which Lesley’s disappearance had had on the local community and, in particular, the anguish being suffered by the parents. The community’s desire to have the killer apprehended was based only in part on feelings of sympathy towards the Molseed family. It was also founded on the fear that an outsider had intruded into the communal safety of the estate, putting each of their own children at risk.

Turf Hill was once a rural farming area adjoining the mill town of Rochdale, but as the town became swollen with the increasing population which accompanied industrial expansion, the growing need for accommodation sent tentacles of urbanisation into the readily available and easily accessible land which lay, untouched, nearby.

It was a typical council housing estate, with brothers in every town and city of substance in Great Britain. Rows of (then) modern three-bedroomed terraced houses with small front and rear gardens were joined by a series of connecting roads and the intersecting walkways known as snickets. Two main roads, Broad Lane and Turf Hill Road, serviced the estate, giving access to a major arterial road in and out of Rochdale. The remaining farmland that surrounded the estate stretched towards the neighbouring town of Oldham, running along the edge of the M62, between junctions 20 and 21 of that great cross-country motorway, which served as the boundary line between the two towns.

The community of Turf Hill, not atypically, was self-contained and close-knit. Most of the children knew each other, as did their parents. The local availability of schools, shops and a youth club brought parents and children into regular contact with each other. Many socialised together, making use of the various pubs, clubs and sporting facilities available in the area.

A feature of such a community was that news, whether bad or good, travelled with great speed. Rumour and gossip mingle with fact and hard news, and exaggeration and distortion are inevitable features in the retelling. In the Molseed enquiry this feature was repeatedly to cause problems for the police, who were constantly required to sort fact from fiction, evidence from rumour, credible witnesses from gossip mongers. Conversely, out of the community spirit came the positive feature of the residents’ willingness to help each other and the police (who were not the natural friends of many in that community) to find Lesley and, later, to find and catch the child’s murderer.

Within hours of the discovery of the child, the grim mechanism of murder was grinding into action, starting with the knock on the door of 11 Delamere Road that the occupants had hoped would never come. As gently as possible, the parents were notified of the finding of a body, and before that shock had penetrated minds and hearts, they were taken on a journey, by police car, to a mortuary at Halifax Royal Infirmary, to identify the child, hoping against hope that it would not be Lesley, that a mistake had been made.

It was a duty for a mother to perform alone. Although she had steeled herself for the task ahead, April’s nerves were strained by a delay in proceedings, and she and Danny waited together in a small room. But she became claustrophobic and left the room to pace up and down the corridor, leaving Danny alone with his thoughts.

At last, a policeman’s footsteps on the hard, Victorian hospital floor, followed by ‘They’re ready for you now, Mrs Moleseed,’ and she is escorted, one officer beside her and two behind. Inside the room are more policemen, in plain clothes. But while the uniformed officers had seemed considerate and caring, these men seemed to be avoiding her, or certainly avoiding her eyes. And then it became clear for her. There was no need to look. They had found Lesley, and these men knew it.

The mother has to be the one to speak: it is her duty. Words are hard to find and April struggles to make a sound, until she whispers, ‘I’d like to hold her,’ But as April steps forward to embrace the tiny frame, she is stopped from doing so. ‘Don’t touch her!’ The command is barked, breaking the solemnity of the room, but instilling immediately the importance of not disturbing the child.

Lesley was no longer April’s daughter, but police evidence, which must not be touched.

‘Is this your daughter, Mrs Molseed?’ speaks an unknown voice, and she does not look to find the speaker, but replies ‘It is, but she doesn’t belong to me any more.’ And then and only then the resolve of the woman is gone, the strength she had shown or tried to show throughout the three-day ordeal, disappears. At last she weeps, and her eyes blur with tears. She turns away.

April rejoined Danny. He did not have to ask her and she did not have to tell. He had ‘inherited’ Lesley as a 1-year-old, and she was the favourite of his four foster children. He had lost his own daughter, he felt, and his tears flowed down his face, its expression as desolate as that of his wife.

CHAPTER THREE

Of Science and Pounding Feet

In terms of the investigation of homicides, there are only two primary types. The first is where the killer is immediately identified or identifiable, and apprehended at or shortly after the event, and where the legal issues at any subsequent trial narrow down to those concerning state of mind at the time of the killing. The second is where the killer is completely unknown. In such a case, of course, the first task on the lengthy path to securing a conviction is ascertaining who is responsible for the killing. Obviously the investigation of the latter type is far more onerous than that of the first, because the police start, in effect, with a completely blank sheet of paper.

In any homicide it is necessary to establish a number of facts:

 identity of the victim;

 manner and cause of death (for example, asphyxiation by strangulation);

 time and place of death;

 weapon used, if any;

 identity of killer;

 motive;

 state of mind of killer.

These facts must be determined in order that the investigation of the case be complete. Even if some of the facts (such as motive) do not, as a matter of law, require proof for a successful prosecution, it is obvious that they are each of great importance in the quest to establish how the victim died and at whose hand.

Once it is established that the police are concerned with a suspicious death and, more particularly, once the suspicion becomes that of an unlawful killing, the investigative process begins. Of the seven factors listed above, the identity of the killer becomes the most pressing. All other matters will be investigated as the enquiry proceeds, but the search for the killer must begin immediately, and before the trail begins to cool.

Whilst the public face of a murder investigation is the television news reports, showing police officers searching fields on hands and knees, scouring for the most minute of clues, and the further reports of house to house enquiries, there is, from the moment the body is discovered, a far more private aspect of the investigation. It takes place in the clinical sterility of the laboratory and in the case of Lesley Molseed, it was a side of the investigation which was to have substantial and profound implications.