Speaker 1: Hi, and welcome back to The Unseen Podcast, a podcast
Speaker 1: dedicated to missing people, unresolved cases, and UK true crime.
Speaker 1: Today we're going to be exploring the nineteen eighty one
Speaker 1: murder case of Caroline Harris Reid, who was killed in
Speaker 1: Lamberth in South London. Her death was so out of
Speaker 1: the blue and unnecessary that it shocked the local community,
Speaker 1: as did the trial that came as a result of
Speaker 1: the police investigation. This episode contains descriptions that some listeners
Speaker 1: may find distressing, including some discussion, while not graphic, of
Speaker 1: sexual assault, so listener discretion is advised. On the evening
Speaker 1: of April eighth, nineteen eighty one, twenty two year old
Speaker 1: Caroline Harris Reid made the over two hundred mile journey
Speaker 1: from her home in Exeter in Devon, Southwest England, to
Speaker 1: South Lambeth Road in London. Caroline was a second year
Speaker 1: English student at the University of Exeter and was traveling
Speaker 1: to London to visit her friend Catherine, who lived in
Speaker 1: the city. Caroline had grown up in the Yorkshire town
Speaker 1: of Harrogate until she was eleven years old, when her
Speaker 1: father Michael and mother Jean had inherited some farmland in Northampton.
Speaker 1: The family moved down to Northampton before eventually settling in
Speaker 1: the area of Great Missingdon in Buckinghamshire, where they owned
Speaker 1: two hundred acres called Prestwood Farm. Growing up, Caroline was
Speaker 1: known as a kind and intelligent young woman who did
Speaker 1: well in her studies. She passed her A levels and
Speaker 1: then decided to go on to take part in a
Speaker 1: secretarial course in London. After this, Caroline decided that she
Speaker 1: would continue her studies at the University of Exeter, and
Speaker 1: by night tineteen eighty one, she was in her second year.
Speaker 1: She shared a cottage and a very small village around
Speaker 1: four miles from the city itself. Caroline had met Catherine
Speaker 1: when they both went on a skiing holiday to Italy,
Speaker 1: and they had become friends, along with a male friend Andrew,
Speaker 1: that they met on this same holiday. They were all
Speaker 1: meeting at Catherine's flat that evening on April the eighth.
Speaker 1: While she was there, Caroline had also told people that
Speaker 1: she was going to look for a holiday job. During
Speaker 1: the easter break from university, Caroline pulled up to the
Speaker 1: converted Victorian semi detached house on South Lambeth Road where
Speaker 1: Catherine lived, and the plan was that their friend Andrew
Speaker 1: was also on his way to meet them. This evening
Speaker 1: would not pan out the way that any of them
Speaker 1: had thought, and it would end with tragedy. The alarm
Speaker 1: was raised a few hours after Caroline's arrival at Catherine's
Speaker 1: home would be by Catherine herself. She alerted the police
Speaker 1: that something had happened to Caroline in her home and
Speaker 1: that they needed assistance. Catherine herself was clearly upset and
Speaker 1: disturbed by what she'd witnessed. She recounted the events that
Speaker 1: had led up to the police being called. She explained
Speaker 1: that her and Caroline had been in her home on
Speaker 1: South Lambeth Road and had been waiting for their other friend, Andrew,
Speaker 1: to arrive. It was at this point that the intercom
Speaker 1: to get into the flat had buzzed. The pair had
Speaker 1: assumed that this was Andrew arriving, and Catherine said she
Speaker 1: pressed the button and heard a male voice say hello.
Speaker 1: There are two versions reported of what happened with the intercom.
Speaker 1: One report states that the intercom system was not working
Speaker 1: properly and that this man did not need to identify
Speaker 1: himself to come through the door, and the other implies
Speaker 1: that Catherine believed that this man was Andrew to let
Speaker 1: him up to the flat. Catherine then states that the
Speaker 1: man came up to the flat, but when they opened
Speaker 1: the door for him, they realized it was not Andrew.
Speaker 1: The man barged through the door and retrieved a seven
Speaker 1: inch knife and a potato peeler from the kitchen and
Speaker 1: ordered the two women to strip naked at knife point.
Speaker 1: He discussed his sexual fantasies with the two women and
Speaker 1: asked them to become intimate with one another. During this assault,
Speaker 1: Catherine stated that Andrew had turned up at the flat
Speaker 1: and rang the doorbell and threw stones at the window,
Speaker 1: but this did not deter the attacker. After a while,
Speaker 1: Catherine stated that she feigned illness and the man shut
Speaker 1: her into another room. At this point, she said she
Speaker 1: heard a gasp from Caroline in the other room. Not
Speaker 1: long after, the man came into the room where Catherine
Speaker 1: had been left. She noticed that he was holding a
Speaker 1: blood stained knife. She said. He left the room for
Speaker 1: a few seconds and she hid the knife from the attacker,
Speaker 1: hoping that this would perhaps slow him down. When he
Speaker 1: came back in and couldn't find the knife, he went
Speaker 1: for Catherine's throat at which point she started screaming. She
Speaker 1: explained that the man tried to put his hand down
Speaker 1: her throat to stop her from screaming, but it didn't work.
Speaker 1: When he couldn't get her to be quiet, the man
Speaker 1: decided to leave the flat. The story was harrowing and terrifying,
Speaker 1: and police immediately went to the flat to assess the scene.
Speaker 1: Police later described Catherine's room as looking like a butcher's shop.
Speaker 1: Pathologist Ian West stated that Caroline had a six inch
Speaker 1: deep knife wound and that it appeared that the knife
Speaker 1: had been twisted when it went in. This knife was
Speaker 1: found to have a serrated edge and was found at
Speaker 1: the scene. Caroline was lying in the bedroom on her back,
Speaker 1: with a tweed coat lay on top of her. It
Speaker 1: was found that the position of the coat indicated that
Speaker 1: Caroline had been dragged to that position by someone who
Speaker 1: had bloody hands. It truly was a vicious and unprovoked attack,
Speaker 1: and the brutality of it shocked everyone on the case.
Speaker 1: There was another element of the scene which was certainly
Speaker 1: picked up by newspapers at the time. That was the
Speaker 1: fact that an open bible was found at the scene.
Speaker 1: This was thought to be Catherine's Bible from her home,
Speaker 1: but it was the page that it was open at
Speaker 1: that caught the investigator's attention. It was open at chapter
Speaker 1: five of the Book of Micah. This chapter has been
Speaker 1: described as violent and uses many incendiary words such as
Speaker 1: cut off and vengeance, anger and fury. This spiked the
Speaker 1: theory that this could have been committed by quote a
Speaker 1: religious maniac. This was something that was stated in articles
Speaker 1: in tabloids very soon after Caroline's murder. Whether this was
Speaker 1: true or just sensationalist reports is something to take into account.
Speaker 1: Another theory that was noted in the press soon after
Speaker 1: the murder was that this could have been the work
Speaker 1: of a peeping tom who lived in the area. There
Speaker 1: had been reports of this type of suspect spying on
Speaker 1: couples on Clapham Common, and there was a possible link
Speaker 1: suggested to this. Scotland Yard issued a photofit of the killer.
Speaker 1: He was described as in his late twenties, with mousy
Speaker 1: hair and about five feet six inches tall. He was
Speaker 1: wearing a white T shirt, gray trousers and a light
Speaker 1: colored jacket. It was hoped that this photo fit would
Speaker 1: resemble someone and that information would come in as a
Speaker 1: result Caroline's family was said to be deeply shocked and
Speaker 1: upset by what had happened to Caroline and wanted privacy.
Speaker 1: Those that knew both Caroline and the family in Great
Speaker 1: Missenden expressed their shock and horror at the news of
Speaker 1: what happened, with one neighbor of the family saying everyone
Speaker 1: here stunned. Caroline was a lovely girl and the Harris
Speaker 1: Reeds are a marvelous family. What has happened to them
Speaker 1: couldn't be more unjust. Police stated that Catherine was quote
Speaker 1: absolutely heartbroken and too upset to return to the flat.
Speaker 1: This was completely understandable given what she had been through,
Speaker 1: and no doubt her information about the suspects was invaluable
Speaker 1: to the officers working on the case. Catherine was involved
Speaker 1: in the investigation given that she had got a very
Speaker 1: good look at the killer for several hours, including body
Speaker 1: type expressions and his features. Despite quite a thorough investigation
Speaker 1: with an eye witness, the case appeared to be moving
Speaker 1: slowly and little progress was made in the months following
Speaker 1: the murder. This is how it appeared on the outside. However,
Speaker 1: around eleven months after the murder occurred, an arrest was
Speaker 1: made twenty one year old Frank Harvey lived on South
Speaker 1: Lambeth Road, almost opposite Catherine, in a row of masonet houses.
Speaker 1: His flat was said to be on level with Catherine's
Speaker 1: on the other side of the road. At the time
Speaker 1: of the murder, he worked as a storman at a shop,
Speaker 1: and his arrest came off the back of two positive
Speaker 1: identifications by Catherine. Is reported that in April, just two
Speaker 1: days after the murder, Catherine had pointed out Frank Harvey
Speaker 1: as possibly being the man who had killed Caroline. Seven
Speaker 1: months later, during an identification parade in November nineteen eighty one,
Speaker 1: she again pointed him out. During the trial, which took
Speaker 1: place in May nineteen eighty two, Inspector David Hewitt told
Speaker 1: the court how Catherine reacted during the identification in November.
Speaker 1: He said that she was shaking when she pointed out
Speaker 1: Frank Harvey, saying that it was him. He said, I
Speaker 1: remember it very clearly, being very dramatic and the most
Speaker 1: clear identification I've seen. Catherine told the court that she
Speaker 1: recognized the man due to what she called a deformed nose.
Speaker 1: She stated that as soon as she saw him in
Speaker 1: the original parade in April. She noticed it. She said,
Speaker 1: after I looked at him, I just burst into tears.
Speaker 1: It was so similar, it could have been the same person.
Speaker 1: One nostril was closed up and it did not look
Speaker 1: as if he could breathe through it. I noticed his
Speaker 1: nose when he was leaning over me on the bed.
Speaker 1: It was stated at trial that when Catherine took part
Speaker 1: in the second parade in November, the men all had
Speaker 1: their noses covered with plasters. Catherine again pointed out Harvey
Speaker 1: in the line up. She said she knew even without
Speaker 1: seeing his nose. The prosecution asked her if there was
Speaker 1: the possibility that she was wrong, She said, I knew
Speaker 1: it was him. Frank Harvey explained that he had an
Speaker 1: alibi for that night. He said he was at the
Speaker 1: local pub but had felt unwell, and he'd returned home
Speaker 1: that night to his bed. In his summing up, the judge,
Speaker 1: Justice mac Cowan, q C issued caution to the jury
Speaker 1: when coming to a decision based solely on just witness
Speaker 1: identification evidence. He explained that while Catherine had seen the
Speaker 1: killer for over two hours in the flat and got
Speaker 1: a look at him at several angles, they still had
Speaker 1: to consider if this evidence is enough. He explained that
Speaker 1: a witness might be honest and convincing but still mistaken.
Speaker 1: The quality of the identification evidence was what mattered, not
Speaker 1: the volume. It may be good even if you only
Speaker 1: have one witness, he said. You test whether it's good
Speaker 1: or poor by examining closely the circumstances in which it
Speaker 1: came to be made. He told the jury to do
Speaker 1: their job and decide whether it has been proven in law.
Speaker 1: The jury retired and deliberated for seven hours before returning
Speaker 1: with a message for the judge. They stated that they
Speaker 1: couldn't come to a decision in the case and couldn't
Speaker 1: agree on a verdict. The judge decided that as a result,
Speaker 1: a retrial would have to be ordered. This meant that
Speaker 1: the trial would have to start all over again in
Speaker 1: the hope that this time a verdict would be reached.
Speaker 1: It also meant the jury were unsure about the evidence
Speaker 1: against Frank Harvey that had been presented. He would remain
Speaker 1: in custody during this time, where it was reported that
Speaker 1: he'd been in voluntary solitary confinement. The second trial took
Speaker 1: place in October nineteen eighty two. Around five months later,
Speaker 1: at the end of this second trial, a verdict was reached.
Speaker 1: Frank Harvey was found not guilty of the murder of
Speaker 1: Caroline Harris Reid. The second trial was not reported on
Speaker 1: by the press. This was down to a judge ruling.
Speaker 1: It would turn out that there was another charge against
Speaker 1: Frank Harvey that was also making its way through the courts.
Speaker 1: The other charge was connected in some ways to Caroline's murder.
Speaker 1: On the twelfth of November nineteen eighty one, eighteen year
Speaker 1: old Amanda Marshall was walking her dog near South Lambeth
Speaker 1: Road at around eight thirty pm when a man came
Speaker 1: up behind her. He put his arm around her neck
Speaker 1: and his other hand on a bottom. He held her tightly,
Speaker 1: and at one point he put his arm inside his
Speaker 1: coat as though to imply he had a knife. She
Speaker 1: turned and got a look at his face. The man
Speaker 1: said to her, if you scream, you're dead, I won't
Speaker 1: hurt you if you do what you're told. Another man
Speaker 1: approached them as this was going on, and the man
Speaker 1: told Amandan to not say anything. Amanda's dog was barking
Speaker 1: and the man eventually ran off. This was a terrifying
Speaker 1: assault an Amanda had got a look at the man's face.
Speaker 1: During an identification parade, she had picked out Frank Harvey. This,
Speaker 1: along with the identification of Harvey by Catherine a second
Speaker 1: time in November, had added to the suspicion that he
Speaker 1: was a sexual predator that was prowling around the South
Speaker 1: Lambeth Road area. Due to this connection to this other case,
Speaker 1: the judge had ordered that the press not report on it.
Speaker 1: At the end of October nineteen eighty two, Frank Harvey
Speaker 1: was in court again for the assault on Amanda Marshall.
Speaker 1: This time he pled guilty to the charges of indecent assault.
Speaker 1: The judge described the assault as a nasty and frightening offense,
Speaker 1: but stated that the maximum sentence he could impose would
Speaker 1: be two years. He explained that due to the murder charges,
Speaker 1: Harvey had already spent around ten months in prison and
Speaker 1: due to good conduct, his sentence would be reduced to
Speaker 1: one year anyway, which the judge felt he had already served.
Speaker 1: Amanda's family were angry about this sentence, with mun Patricia
Speaker 1: storming out of the public gallery saying there is no
Speaker 1: justice in this land. The judge asked her to stay quiet,
Speaker 1: saying your intervention is understandable. Missus Marshall spoke to the
Speaker 1: press outside the Old Bailey, saying the judge was talking
Speaker 1: about the effect on Harvey, his family and his girlfriend.
Speaker 1: What about the victim. My daughter has been frightened to
Speaker 1: go out at night ever since this happened. It may
Speaker 1: have been a minor offense, but it's not minor to
Speaker 1: a girl standing there finding a big man with his
Speaker 1: arm around her neck and touching her intimately. Frank Harvey's defense,
Speaker 1: led by Michael Hill, QC, explained after the decision the
Speaker 1: consequence of his arrest in connection with this matter was
Speaker 1: that he found himself charged with a quite appalling murder
Speaker 1: committed in April of the same year. He also stated
Speaker 1: that Harvey had been kept in quite poor conditions due
Speaker 1: to his decision to go into voluntary solitary confinement. He
Speaker 1: said the conditions in which he was kept were far
Speaker 1: more onerous than usual. As a consequence of these matters,
Speaker 1: he suffered a penalty due it is true to the
Speaker 1: allegation of murder, which more than compensates for the crime
Speaker 1: in which he has admitted. In this case, the defense
Speaker 1: appeared to be saying that he was connected to the
Speaker 1: murder as a result of the assault which he had admitted,
Speaker 1: and that due to the fact that he had been
Speaker 1: imprisoned for those months on the suspicion of murder, he
Speaker 1: had already paid his dues for it. This argument, however
Speaker 1: accurate in terms of law, would have been no solace
Speaker 1: Romander's family and I'm sure Caroline's family, who were back
Speaker 1: to square one with her case and investigation. It was
Speaker 1: now back to being an unsolved crime with no justice.
Speaker 1: In nineteen eighty three, it was reported in the paper
Speaker 1: that a Scotland Yard spokesman commented on the case. They said,
Speaker 1: the file on the case is technically still open, but
Speaker 1: I think it would be a fair bet that nobody
Speaker 1: will be charged. It's unlikely that we shall be looking
Speaker 1: for anyone else in connection with this matter. This is
Speaker 1: an extremely hard thing for anyone to hear, and the
Speaker 1: fact that they believe that they got their man and
Speaker 1: just could not prove it beyond a reasonable doubt is
Speaker 1: difficult in any case. This is such a tragedy and
Speaker 1: I feel so sad that Caroline has still not had
Speaker 1: justice for what happened to her. If you know anything
Speaker 1: about the murder of Caroline Harris Reid in nineteen eighty one,
Speaker 1: then please contact police on one oh one. Thank you
Speaker 1: for listening to today's episode. If you'd like to support
Speaker 1: the podcast further, then you can on Patreon and contribute
Speaker 1: to exclusive polls to get extra bonus episodes every month.
Speaker 1: You can also get access to new episodes early in
Speaker 1: ad free. You can use the link in the show
Speaker 1: notes to visit Patreon and see what we offer. You
Speaker 1: can also support us be reviewing the podcast wherever you listen,
Speaker 1: including Spotify, and also just share the episodes. You can
Speaker 1: subscribe on YouTube and follow us on social media. As always,
Speaker 1: I'm Caprice and this has been unseen six