Speaker 1: Hi, and welcome back to The Unseen Podcast, a podcast
Speaker 1: dedicated to missing people, unresolved cases, and UK true crime. Today,
Speaker 1: we are going to be looking at the nineteen ninety
Speaker 1: six murder of twenty year old Janet Murger Tride in Preston.
Speaker 1: Janet had been on a night out like any other
Speaker 1: university student on a warm night in June. Her evening, however,
Speaker 1: ended in tragedy, and despite a murder trial, her case
Speaker 1: remains unsolved. This episode contains descriptions that some listeners may
Speaker 1: find distressing, so listener discretion is advised. The River Ribble
Speaker 1: runs through North Yorkshire and Lancashire, and notably flows through Settle,
Speaker 1: Clithero and Preston. Many people live in the area of
Speaker 1: the Ribbel Valley, with around sixty one thousand people living
Speaker 1: there in twenty twenty one. The area of Penwortham is
Speaker 1: located in South Ribble, close to the city of Preston,
Speaker 1: around two miles away from the center. Twenty year old
Speaker 1: Janet Murgatroyd lived in Penwortham with her mum Mary in
Speaker 1: nineteen ninety six. Janet was an only child and her father, David,
Speaker 1: was well known in football circles, having been the chairman
Speaker 1: of Charlie FC and a great supporter of the club
Speaker 1: for many years. Janet grew up in a loving and
Speaker 1: close knit family, and she was known as a strong
Speaker 1: and caring person growing up. Everyone that knew her described
Speaker 1: her as an intelligent, friendly person who knew what she
Speaker 1: wanted and worked hard to achieve it. As she reached
Speaker 1: her teenage years, she decided that she wanted to pursue
Speaker 1: a career in law and began her studies at the
Speaker 1: University of Central Lancashire. By nineteen ninety six, Janet had
Speaker 1: already completed her first year as a law student and
Speaker 1: was ready to enjoy her summer. In addition to her studies,
Speaker 1: Janet also had a part time job working as a
Speaker 1: clerk for Lancashire Police. She worked in the Crime Input
Speaker 1: Bureau and this role fitting very well with her law studies.
Speaker 1: Her boss at Lancashire Constabulary, Superintendent Karen Hives, said about Janet,
Speaker 1: she was a very energetic and confident young lady who
Speaker 1: knew what she wanted to do in life. This seems
Speaker 1: to be the overarching description of Janet by everyone she knew.
Speaker 1: She was a bubbly and happy person, with the future
Speaker 1: ahead of her. Janet was very much looking forward to
Speaker 1: the summer of nineteen ninety six as she had planned
Speaker 1: to go traveling with her friend Fiona. The pair had
Speaker 1: made plans to travel to Greece and then on to
Speaker 1: Italy with the aim of seeing as much as they
Speaker 1: could during their ten weeks abroad. Neither of the women
Speaker 1: had ever done anything like this before. Fiona later said,
Speaker 1: we couldn't have been happier. We were both on top
Speaker 1: of the world that day. We thought nothing was going
Speaker 1: to stop us from here on. In Saturday, June fifteenth
Speaker 1: was an exciting day for Janet and her friend Fiona,
Speaker 1: as they were having their last day out before setting
Speaker 1: off on their travels. Their plan was to have a
Speaker 1: shopping day and get all of the last minute things
Speaker 1: ready that they might need. It was later reported that
Speaker 1: Janet had originally had plans to travel to Manchester to
Speaker 1: go shopping, but had changed her mind. This seemed like
Speaker 1: an opportune choice when at eleven seventeen am a bomb
Speaker 1: detonated in Manchester City Center, destroying a third of the
Speaker 1: retail space in the city center and injuring two hundred
Speaker 1: and twelve people. This attack had been orchestrated by the
Speaker 1: IRA and was the largest peacetime bomb ever detonated in
Speaker 1: Great Britain. The crowds in the city center were larger
Speaker 1: due to the fact that England was hosting the nineteen
Speaker 1: ninety six euro Football Championship and a match between Russia
Speaker 1: and Germany was due to take place in the city
Speaker 1: the following day. It was also one of the hottest
Speaker 1: day of the years so far, and so people were
Speaker 1: out and about enjoying the day. The weekend, therefore, was
Speaker 1: already quite a monumental one, with many events taking place.
Speaker 1: Janet and Fiona headed into Preston and spent the early
Speaker 1: afternoon shopping and chatting about their plans. Fiona later told
Speaker 1: the program Crime Watch that they then decided to go
Speaker 1: to the pub and spent a lot of the afternoon
Speaker 1: and evening drinking. Fiona said that that night they'd both
Speaker 1: had a lot to drink, having been out since the
Speaker 1: early afternoon. They went into the Adelphi Pub for last order,
Speaker 1: and by this point they'd both had a lot to drink.
Speaker 1: Fiona explained that at some point after they went into
Speaker 1: the pub, they became separated and she couldn't find Janet,
Speaker 1: Fiona said she decided to leave and go home. She
Speaker 1: said she did remember thinking she should have waited for
Speaker 1: Janet and made sure that she got into a taxi okay,
Speaker 1: but that the evening did not pan out that way.
Speaker 1: The next day, at around noon on Sunday, the sixteenth
Speaker 1: of June, people were out and about on the River
Speaker 1: Ribble close to penworthen Bridge. A dog walker was traveling
Speaker 1: down the river when he spotted what looked like blonde
Speaker 1: hair in the water. He flagged down a man who
Speaker 1: was riding a jet ski along the river and asked
Speaker 1: him to pull into the side to have a look
Speaker 1: at what he had seen. The two men discovered that
Speaker 1: they'd found the body of a young woman floating in
Speaker 1: the river. They pulled her onto the embankment and then
Speaker 1: immediately contacted the police. It was clear from the outset
Speaker 1: that whatever had happened, this had been the result of
Speaker 1: a violent crime. A postmartem showed that she had been
Speaker 1: beaten and kicked in the head. As a result, she
Speaker 1: had been knocked unconscious and stamped on before her body
Speaker 1: was dumped. She had lots of injuries to her head
Speaker 1: and face, and it would later be established that she
Speaker 1: had a fractured jaw and a broken nose. Finger shaped
Speaker 1: bruise marks on her face showed the investigators that the
Speaker 1: killer had clasped their hand over her mouth at some
Speaker 1: point during the attack. The woman's body was also covered
Speaker 1: in scratches, which had been caused seemingly by being dragged
Speaker 1: naked through the riverside undergrowth. The postmartem also revealed that
Speaker 1: there was no evidence relating to a sexual assault, but
Speaker 1: that sexual activity had occurred shortly before her death. Therefore,
Speaker 1: they could not completely ruled out that an assault might
Speaker 1: have taken place. Her cause of death revealed something tragic.
Speaker 1: The woman had not died from her injuries and had
Speaker 1: actually drowned. The theory was that the woman had been
Speaker 1: left by the water, but that the tide had come
Speaker 1: in and the water had taken the woman's body into
Speaker 1: the river. It was thought that she may have lain
Speaker 1: there unconscious for around six hours before being taken into
Speaker 1: the water. The discovery in the river Ribble was absolutely
Speaker 1: horrifying for all involved with the investigation, and identifying who
Speaker 1: this victim was was pivotal. It didn't take long to
Speaker 1: establish that the woman was twenty year old Janet Murgatroyd.
Speaker 1: Her blood stained blouse and her jewelry were found close
Speaker 1: to the scene. However, police did not recover her size
Speaker 1: ten wrangler jenes or her purse that she was known
Speaker 1: to have with her. The police investigation began with a
Speaker 1: close inspection of the scene around Janet's body, as well
Speaker 1: as trying to identify her movements before the discovery. Police
Speaker 1: learned that Janet had been out the prior afternoon into
Speaker 1: the evening and that she'd been at the Adelphi Pub
Speaker 1: at last orders. Information that Fiona had lost track of
Speaker 1: Janet and could not find her was also of interest,
Speaker 1: and therefore they had to use other means to try
Speaker 1: and track down where she went. Using CCTV, they found
Speaker 1: that after leaving the pub, she headed down Fishergate at
Speaker 1: around one am. On the footage, Janet is seen clearly
Speaker 1: intoxicated and staggering along the street. The next piece of
Speaker 1: information that they had came from a witness who was
Speaker 1: driving that route that night. He explained that he was
Speaker 1: picking his mum up from her sister's house that night
Speaker 1: and that they passed Janet as they were driving. He
Speaker 1: explained that his mum pointed Janet out as she was
Speaker 1: walking alone and asked him if they should give her
Speaker 1: a lift. He said he told us she would probably
Speaker 1: be fine and if they did give her a lift,
Speaker 1: she might be sick in the car. They then drove
Speaker 1: their route back home. At around one fifteen am. Janet
Speaker 1: was then seen waiting near Penwarden Bridge, and it appeared
Speaker 1: that she was waiting for someone to give her a lift.
Speaker 1: Around the same time, a man in his home close
Speaker 1: to this area heard some shouting outside. However, he explained
Speaker 1: that he didn't think much about it at the time
Speaker 1: as he lived near quite a few pubs and clubs,
Speaker 1: and people making noise was not uncommon. A taxi driver
Speaker 1: who was in the area at the time, however, did
Speaker 1: see some things that were unusual. Around the same time,
Speaker 1: the driver said he passed a Volvo garage and spotted
Speaker 1: two people arguing. He noticed that the woman was taller
Speaker 1: than the man. As he was watching this argument, and
Speaker 1: as he turned onto Penwarden Bridge, he saw a woman
Speaker 1: running across the road in front of the taxi and
Speaker 1: just behind her there was a man. He looked as
Speaker 1: though he was chasing the woman. Around half one, about
Speaker 1: fifteen minutes after the taxi driver had seen the man
Speaker 1: and woman running across the road. Two brothers were coming
Speaker 1: home from an evening out in Preston. They had decided
Speaker 1: to walk home as it was a warm night, and
Speaker 1: they were traveling over the bridge. As they were passing,
Speaker 1: one of the brothers said that on the far side
Speaker 1: of the bridge he heard what sounded like a woman groaning.
Speaker 1: He said that he'd worked in a dentist before and
Speaker 1: described the sound as someone who had just come round
Speaker 1: from anesthetic. On the Crime Watched reconstruction, the man is
Speaker 1: shown in the bushes at the side of the bridge,
Speaker 1: implying that this is what one of the brothers saw. However,
Speaker 1: he didn't specifically say this on the program, so I'm
Speaker 1: unclear if he did see a man in the bushes.
Speaker 1: At the time, this ear witness was of interest, especially
Speaker 1: as some of Janet's clothes were found near the bridge.
Speaker 1: It was clear that at some point in that half
Speaker 1: an hour journey between the pub and Penwarden Bridge, Janet
Speaker 1: clearly came upon someone who wanted to do her harm.
Speaker 1: Detective Superintendent Graham Gooch, who was leading the investigation at
Speaker 1: the time, told crime Watch that he believed this was
Speaker 1: a local man and that the murder may have changed
Speaker 1: or affected his behavior. He said he was convinced that
Speaker 1: he must have attacked women before and that he would
Speaker 1: continue to do so if he wasn't found. He said
Speaker 1: that they did have a description of some men that
Speaker 1: they wanted to speak to who had been seen in
Speaker 1: the area at the time and had been spotted on CCTV.
Speaker 1: They wanted to speak to a man who was described
Speaker 1: as five feet ten to six feet tall. He was
Speaker 1: a white or pale skinned Asian man with black hair.
Speaker 1: He was wearing a long sleeve white shirt and very dark,
Speaker 1: probably black trousers. Detective Superintendent Gooch said he wanted to
Speaker 1: eliminate several other people, such as the people who had
Speaker 1: been seen arguing at the Volvo garage. There were also
Speaker 1: two men seen walking on CCTV just before Janet. One
Speaker 1: of the men had a white shirt on with black
Speaker 1: trousers and dark hair. CCTV also showed that there was
Speaker 1: a man walking towards the scene of the crime at
Speaker 1: around the same time as Janet. The footage shows him
Speaker 1: walking back on himself towards where he started, and police
Speaker 1: believed he might have seen something relevant the Crime Watch
Speaker 1: said documenting Janet's murder was very important forgetting the right
Speaker 1: information to the right people who might have been watching,
Speaker 1: and Janet's mother and her friend Fiona spoke on the program.
Speaker 1: Janet's mother, Mary said that she felt hatred towards whoever
Speaker 1: had committed her daughter's murder and felt disgusted for whoever
Speaker 1: was still shielding that person. She also later said, I
Speaker 1: just live in the hope that whoever did this will
Speaker 1: slip up in some way. He knows who he is,
Speaker 1: and I'm sure a lot of other people do as well.
Speaker 1: As a result of the Crime Watch segment, police were
Speaker 1: able to speak to and eliminate forty eight people. Despite
Speaker 1: the large scale investigation and DNA being extracted from the
Speaker 1: items from the scene, the police struggled to track down
Speaker 1: the perpetrator or gain any concrete information. More than fourteen
Speaker 1: hundred statements were taken, and despite this, the investigation began
Speaker 1: to slow down. In the months and years following Janet's murder,
Speaker 1: her family sadly had to carry on with their lives
Speaker 1: the best they could with few answers as to who
Speaker 1: did this to Janet or why. Even a five thousand
Speaker 1: pounds Crimestoppers reward, which eventually was raised to ten thousand pounds,
Speaker 1: had not drummed up any relevant leads. In two thousand,
Speaker 1: four years after Janet's murder, someone was summoned to court
Speaker 1: on the charge of murdering her. This was huge progress
Speaker 1: considering the stumbling blocks that investigators had come up against
Speaker 1: in the past. The man that was charged with her
Speaker 1: murder was Andrew Greenwood. Greenwood had been on the police
Speaker 1: radar since nineteen ninety nine. However his name had not
Speaker 1: come up from a line of inquiry. Greenwood had approached
Speaker 1: them in August nineteen ninety nine. He'd reportedly flagged down
Speaker 1: a taxi and asked the driver to take him to
Speaker 1: the police station as he had to confess to the
Speaker 1: murder of Janet Murger Tride. This had set the wheels
Speaker 1: in motion for the police to start building a case
Speaker 1: against him. However, the Crown Prosecution Service did not continue
Speaker 1: with the case in nineteen ninety nine through lack of
Speaker 1: evidence on his part. Andrew Greenwood very quickly retracted his
Speaker 1: confession for the murder and now said that he had
Speaker 1: nothing to do with it. He stated that his confession
Speaker 1: had come from reading articles about the case, watching the
Speaker 1: crime Watch reconstruction and using his own imagination. Police, however,
Speaker 1: decided to re arrest Greenwood in two thousand and charge
Speaker 1: him with Janet's murder. Police believed that Greenwood had come
Speaker 1: across Janet that evening and that she'd spurned his advances,
Speaker 1: and so he had attacked her as a result. His
Speaker 1: trial did not begin until two thousand and two, and
Speaker 1: this is where the prosecution outlined their case, explaining that
Speaker 1: Greenwood had confessed of his own accord and had not
Speaker 1: been a person of interest in the case until that point.
Speaker 1: They also stated that he'd made detailed and repeated admissions
Speaker 1: that he was responsible for the murder, and detailed that
Speaker 1: he said, I wish to say sorry for my action,
Speaker 1: which is not like me. I will carry on repenting
Speaker 1: like I have done for the past three years. All
Speaker 1: of this, as well as his confession, was enough to
Speaker 1: believe that Andrew Greenwood was responsible for Janet's murder. Is
Speaker 1: what the prosecution alleged. Greenwood denied that he had anything
Speaker 1: to do with the murder, although admitted that he was
Speaker 1: in the area that night. He had spent the evening
Speaker 1: at the Sumpter Horse Pub in Penwortham, not far from
Speaker 1: where Janet's body was found and where she lived. He
Speaker 1: stated that he'd watch the Euro's match between Scotland and
Speaker 1: Inca England that day and had drunk around six pints.
Speaker 1: He had then gone back to his father's house for
Speaker 1: some dinner before going back out to meet a friend
Speaker 1: at the pub. He had continued drinking and left around
Speaker 1: eleven thirty pm. He said, I'd had a lot, I
Speaker 1: was drinking too much and everything was going blurry. I
Speaker 1: was in a good mood and left about eleven thirty pm.
Speaker 1: I don't remember going back to my flats. I had
Speaker 1: a blackout in the morning. I just woke up. I
Speaker 1: don't remember anything until the morning after. I woke up
Speaker 1: on the bed with the same clothes on, an orange
Speaker 1: T shirt, black jeans, trainerlike shoes. My clothing was fine
Speaker 1: when I woke up. Greenwood explained that he had experienced
Speaker 1: blackouts before and after Janet's murder, and they usually occurred
Speaker 1: when he'd been drinking or was in a low mood.
Speaker 1: He said at that point he was unemployed and studying
Speaker 1: a statistics course at the local college. He said that
Speaker 1: he'd struggled with depression since he'd been eighteen years old,
Speaker 1: as he had experienced a blackout as he had returned home.
Speaker 1: He explained he'd convinced himself he had something to do
Speaker 1: with the murders, and as a result of the coverage
Speaker 1: of the case, he'd made up many of the gaps
Speaker 1: with information that he'd learned. His confession, he said, was
Speaker 1: a false one, his council explained when he presented himself
Speaker 1: to police in August nineteen ninety nine, he was and
Speaker 1: still is, a psychiatrically damaged and vulnerable individual. What he
Speaker 1: said to them about this crime was a mixture of detail,
Speaker 1: some false, some true, but all of it true and false,
Speaker 1: obtained by him from the extensive media coverage in the newspapers, radio,
Speaker 1: and on TV, including Crime Watch. He said nothing which
Speaker 1: was not already in the public domain. The jury heard
Speaker 1: all of this information, and after deliberate they could not
Speaker 1: come to a decision on whether Andrew Greenwood was guilty
Speaker 1: of Janet's murder. The prosecution decided to retry the case.
Speaker 1: In June two thousand and three, the same information was
Speaker 1: presented to the courts and the jury once again went
Speaker 1: to deliberate. They returned a verdict of not guilty of
Speaker 1: murder but guilty of manslaughter. While this was not what
Speaker 1: the prosecution or the family had hoped for, it was
Speaker 1: a conviction and it was some justice for Janet. David
Speaker 1: Murger tried. Her dad said after the trial, I was
Speaker 1: a little bit disappointed with the eight years, but I'll
Speaker 1: go along with it. At least the man is serving
Speaker 1: a sentence for what he did. This appeared to be
Speaker 1: how many people felt about the case, and while disappointed
Speaker 1: in the sentence, they were happy that a dangerous person
Speaker 1: was off the streets. This, however, is not how the
Speaker 1: case would stay, but just one year later, in two
Speaker 1: thousand four, Andrew Greenwood's manslaughter conviction was quashed on appeal.
Speaker 1: This decision was made based on the fact that the
Speaker 1: judge in the case had ruled some evidence that the
Speaker 1: defense wanted to bring in as inadmissible. However, they believed
Speaker 1: it showed that there were plausible alternate suspects that were
Speaker 1: not looked into in the case. They stated that two
Speaker 1: other suspects had actually been arrested in Janet's case, and
Speaker 1: that one of these suspects was an extremely plausible one,
Speaker 1: given that the wife of one of these suspects had
Speaker 1: given a statement about him, and reportedly Janet had also
Speaker 1: spoken about this suspects violence in the past. In addition,
Speaker 1: Janet's blood was found on the suspects boxersharks at his home.
Speaker 1: The defense also stated that Janet had an ex boyfriend
Speaker 1: named Pitbull who was known to be abusive towards her,
Speaker 1: and they even had a videotape of Janet talking about
Speaker 1: this abuse. Said proved that there were more viable suspects
Speaker 1: than Greenwood, who had no connection whatsoever with Janet. This
Speaker 1: was clearly information that should have been of interest to
Speaker 1: the police. However, this information was not allowed to be
Speaker 1: presented in court, and the appeal court agreed that this
Speaker 1: was unfair to Andrew Greenwood. It is evident that, aside
Speaker 1: from his confession, which he stated was false, there was
Speaker 1: no physical evidence to link Greenwood to the case, to Janet,
Speaker 1: or to the scene, and so no real evidence to
Speaker 1: convict him of murder. It is relevant that two separate
Speaker 1: juries could not come to a decision to convict him
Speaker 1: on murder charges. He was released and the case returned
Speaker 1: to its original state of being unsolved. Police in two
Speaker 1: thousand and four said that they were not looking for
Speaker 1: anyone else in the murder. However, since then, there have
Speaker 1: been multiple appeals for information in Janet's case. On the
Speaker 1: twenty first anniversary of Janet's murder in twenty seventeen, CCTV
Speaker 1: showing Janet walking from the Adelphi Pub up Fishergate was
Speaker 1: released to the public in the hope that someone would
Speaker 1: recognize her from that night, or just recognize something relevant.
Speaker 1: Lancashire Police Detective Chief Inspector Gary Brooks said, twenty one
Speaker 1: years on from Janet's brutal murder, we remain committed to
Speaker 1: finding her killer. Janet was a young woman with her
Speaker 1: whole life ahead of her, a student at the University
Speaker 1: of Central Lancashire and a part time staff member with
Speaker 1: Lancashire Police. She had much to look forward to and enjoy. However,
Speaker 1: this was all taken away from her in a vicious
Speaker 1: attack which we believe was sexually motivated. This was an
Speaker 1: opportunist offense by a very dangerous man who, despite the
Speaker 1: passage of time, still needs to be brought to justice.
Speaker 1: Detective Chief Inspector Pauline Stables of Lancashire Constabulary's Major Investigation
Speaker 1: Team said, first and foremost, my thoughts are with Janet's
Speaker 1: family and friends. At this time, I would like to
Speaker 1: use the twenty fifth anniversary of Janet's death to appeal
Speaker 1: to anyone with information which may assist us to please
Speaker 1: come forward. We have never closed this case and it
Speaker 1: remains a crime we desperately want to solve. Even if
Speaker 1: you think the information is insignificant. Please come forward and
Speaker 1: tell us what you know so we can investigate. Unfortunately,
Speaker 1: Janet's case is still unsolved, and it does only take
Speaker 1: one person to come forward with information to solve this.
Speaker 1: It seems that DNA samples were taken and could prove
Speaker 1: useful in this case. However, a person of interest has
Speaker 1: to emerge for this to be helpful. It's unclear what
Speaker 1: line of inquiry the police have been following since the
Speaker 1: collapse of the trial against Andrew Greenwood. This case has
Speaker 1: affected many people, Janet's family, the community, people who've become
Speaker 1: entwined in it. Janet had so much to live for,
Speaker 1: was looking forward to so much, and hearing about her
Speaker 1: excitement that day about her future really affected me. She
Speaker 1: had many plans which were cut short, and her murder
Speaker 1: does deserve to be solved. If you have information, please
Speaker 1: contact police on one oh one our crime Stoppers at
Speaker 1: eight hundred five five five one one 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 by reviewing the podcast wherever you listen,
Speaker 1: including Spotify, and also just share the episodes our ways.
Speaker 1: I'm Caprice and this has been unseen. Yeah,