The Criminal Cases Review Commission and the case of Dr Crippen

Could anyone possibly have imagined that one day even the case of Dr Hawley Crippen would be the subject of an application to the Criminal Cases Review Commission? How far back should we go in the search for the truth?

The application made earlier this year by American James Patrick Crippen, now 73, and a second cousin three times removed from the infamous Dr Hawley Harvey Crippen is interesting for a number of reasons.  It serves as a dramatic reminder of the potential of new DNA evidence. At the same time, and perhaps not for the first time,it also raises the question of whether there are any limits imposed on how far we can go back in our quest for justice.

Dr Hawley Crippen, was executed in London in 1910 for murdering his wife, Cora. Dr Crippen hid his wife's remains under a cellar, and then tried to escape to Canada on the SS Montrose with his lover Ethel Le Neve, who was disguised as a boy.

James Patrick Crippen made the appeal after scientists from Michigan State University claimed to have obtained DNA evidence in 2007.

It is claimed that the scientists had tracked down three of Mrs Crippen's grandnieces and compared their DNA with samples from the body which had been kept on a microscope slide since the Old Bailey trial.

This new evidence has enabled the distant relative to argue that the remains found at Crippen's home were not those of his wife, casting serious doubt over his ancestor's conviction.

James Crippen has been fighting for years not just for an appeal, which would reopen the case, but also for a royal pardon as well as the release of Dr Crippen's remains.  At present Dr Crippen's remains are buried in the grounds of Pentonville Prison, London.

The Criminal Cases Review Commission (CCRC) have refused to send the case back to the Court of Appeal.  The basis of their decision being that the applicant was not a "properly interested person".  It seems as though, in cases where the person whose conviction is to be appealed against is dead, the application must be made by someone "approved" by the Court of Appeal.

A CCRC spokesman has been reported as saying that that person should be the widow or widower, "personal representative", or a relative who has a "substantial financial or other interest" in the appeal, adding "Without an individual who has a real possibility of being approved by the Court of Appeal, there could be no court hearing and so no purpose would be served by the commission carrying out a review of the case."

It is not enough to argue that the person may have been innocent. It also seems as though respect for the family name and reputation may not be enough unless of course the CCRC are prepared to give a wide definition of what is meant by 'or other interest'.

Finally, returning to the manner in which Dr Crippen was arrested.  He was identified by the Captain of the SS Montrose, the first ship to carry Marconi's new telegram system and Crippen became notorious as the first criminal in history to be arrested using such new communication equipment. The use of the telegram enabled a British police Inspector to take a faster ship and arrest Dr Crippen on his arrival in Canada.  Crippen was then brought back to Britain to stand trial at the Old Bailey.





Related Items

The items below list this Article as being related in some way.

Amazon's recommended Books

RSS Feeds


Recent Posts

The latest posts from the blog archives.

Caparo three part test – revisited

In Robinson the Supreme Court laid to rest the proposition that there is a Caparo test which applies to all claims in the modern law of negligence.

Statutory interpretation - penal legislation is construed strictly

The Supreme Court reminded everyone per Lord Reed and Lord Hughes that 'Penal legislation is construed strictly, particularly where the penalty involves deprivation of liberty'.

Court of appeal gives judgment acknowledging unmarried woman's rights

The claim related to bereavement payments under the Fatal Accidents Act 1976 as amended.

European union law – in the case of conflict between national law and european law

Walker (Appellant) v Innospec Limited and others (Respondents) [2017] UKSC 47 On appeal from [2015] EWCA Civ 1000

Vicarious liability is alive and well

This decision extends the doctrine of vicarious liability in respect of foster carers for the fist time and it represents another example of the potential for the expansion of this form of liability.

Supreme court busy - make sure you are geared up for your course

The Supreme Court has been especially busy lately.

Gina miller v secretary of state for exiting the eu 2016 as an example of the importance of judicial independence

Law students are now required to take note of how the independence and work of the judiciary has been reformed

Policing and crime bill and provisions for bail after arrest but before charge

The clear intention is that decisions on pre-charge bail should come under scrutiny.