Ian Huntley and the Soham murders - was he framed?

First topic message reminder :

Here's the background to the case - two friends murdered by the school caretaker in his house and the girlfriend who gave him an alibi

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soham_murders

oham murders
Jessica Chapman
Holly Wells
Born Jessica Aimee Chapman
Holly Marie Wells
1 September 1991 (Chapman)
4 October 1991 (Wells)
Soham, Cambridgeshire, England
Died Both c. 4 August 2002 (aged 10)
Soham, Cambridgeshire, England
Body discovered Lakenheath, Suffolk, England
Parent(s) Leslie and Sharon Chapman
Kevin and Nicola Wells
The Soham murders occurred in Soham, Cambridgeshire, England, on 4 August 2002. The victims were two 10-year-old girls, Holly Marie Wells and Jessica Aimee Chapman. Their bodies were found near RAF Lakenheath, Suffolk, on 17 August 2002, by a local farm worker.

Ian Kevin Huntley, a caretaker at local secondary school Soham Village College, was convicted on 17 December 2003 of the girls' murder and sentenced to two terms of life imprisonment, with the High Court later setting a minimum term of 40 years.

His girlfriend, Maxine Ann Carr, was the girls' teaching assistant at St Andrew's Primary School. Carr had provided Huntley with a false alibi and received a three-and-a-half year prison sentence for perverting the course of justice.


Hoping Tommy can post what he has read up on regarding the question of whether Huntley was framed.

Thanks Tommy I will go through the pictures again, maybe Im not seeing it right.

In the first picture of them crossing the car park, they look to be wearing dark tops, or is it the camera angle.

Another interesting thing about mobile phone data that was said early on in search for girls...


'The reported last signal from jessica's phone was said to have been a good few miles north of soham at around 1.00am on the monday morning; apparently around seven hours after they were both abducted.'

Time and date top left. Looks like 18:24






Time and date top left looks like 18:24 again.





Top left again 18:24... but can start to see bottom left time/date.



Now here...





Time and date seen top left and bottom left and both different...

Plus look at car over on its own on the right by yellow ground bit... why does part of it disappear and surrounding yellow ground and pavement change shape...?

https://www.theguardian.com/uk/2002/aug/08/childprotection.society1

Did they meet Huntley on the way out or back? That would define the time he said he saw them.

Also I cant understand why if they saw him, all of a sudden he was filled with murderous intentions and abused and murdered them. Maybe he really was a nutter.

Tommy Monk wrote:Plus look at car over on its own on the right by yellow ground bit... why does part of it disappear and surrounding yellow ground and pavement change shape...?

Taken from a slightly different angle...obviously.

Camera was a fixed cctv camera...


And magica... he said he saw them about 5.45pm... if he had done them in he could have said he never saw them at all...

Tommy Monk wrote:Camera was a fixed cctv camera...


And magica... he said he saw them about 5.45pm... if he had done them in he could have said he never saw them at all...

The camera shows different.

It was clearly showing the same scene from a slightly different angle, hence the increased amount of pavement seen and the decreased amount of greenery on the other side seen.

Don't think so... just pics cropped differently... as seen by the varying amount of times seen.

Tommy Monk wrote:Don't think so... just pics cropped differently... as seen by the varying amount of times seen.

If you think it's cropped differently, why did you try to make an issue out of it?

If you notice, all three of them are slightly different.

Cropped differently... same camera.

Tommy Monk wrote:Cropped differently... same camera.

so the issue is?

The issue I raised was that when you see the whole picture you can see two sets of time/date... one top left and other bottom left... but showing different times!


Plus that red car on its own to the back right hand side... shape and position changes in a very strange way...

Tommy Monk wrote:The issue I raised was that when you see the whole picture you can see two sets of time/date... one top left and other bottom left... but showing different times!


Plus that red car on its own to the back right hand side... shape and position changes in a very strange way...

It had been raining, looks to me like the sun came out causing a glare on the car.

Doesn't look like that to me... and what about the two different times showing?

You know that cop who was the liaison officer Tommy, he was done for having child porn images on his computer. Does seem strange that he was a paedo and the girls went missing. Could Huntley and another man, maybe the cop, have done this? Just a thought.

There's no evidence that this was a crime related to paedophilia though. The forensic people couldn't come up with anything like that.

What I don't get is why Huntley's story was rejected by the prosecution. OK, so it was a bit far fetched, but they actually brought the bath into the court room, and it was cracked, so how did they think he killed them? Why would he abuse the two girls and then get them in the bath to kill them? That makes no sense to me.

magica wrote:Did they meet Huntley on the way out or back?  That would define the time he said he saw them.

Also I cant understand why if they saw him, all of a sudden he was filled with murderous intentions and abused and murdered them.  Maybe he really was a nutter.

I think the story was that they meandered around and doubled back, or whatever. I also can't understand why he would suddenly be overcome with a desire to murder two young girls who happened to speak to him, or who knocked on his door. He certainly didn't appear to be a nutter when he was on the news explaining how he saw them. Why did he say he saw them at all and speak to the press so freely about it?

Tommy Monk wrote:Camera was a fixed cctv camera...


And magica... he said he saw them about 5.45pm... if he had done them in he could have said he never saw them at all...

The timeline is a bit woolly. The official version has them leaving the house at around 6.15. I read that the computer was in use at the house until 5.35 - almost certainly being used by the girls. They then had the barbecue didn't they? If so, I doubt he could have seen them at 5.45.

I presume the computer was checked to see what they were looking at, and to make sure they hadn't arranged to meet anyone or anything like that. The police must also have known what time Huntley spoke to Maxine that day. It was said they spoke on the phone just before the girls spoke to Huntley.

Raggamuffin wrote:There's no evidence that this was a crime related to paedophilia though. The forensic people couldn't come up with anything like that.

What I don't get is why Huntley's story was rejected by the prosecution. OK, so it was a bit far fetched, but they actually brought the bath into the court room, and it was cracked, so how did they think he killed them? Why would he abuse the two girls and then get them in the bath to kill them? That makes no sense to me.

I think he said one fell into the bath and the other girl screamed and he held her until she stopped screaming, meaning he suffocated her.

I found that odd, as what was the girl doing while he killed the other girl in the bath, was she knocked out beforehand?

magica wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:There's no evidence that this was a crime related to paedophilia though. The forensic people couldn't come up with anything like that.

What I don't get is why Huntley's story was rejected by the prosecution. OK, so it was a bit far fetched, but they actually brought the bath into the court room, and it was cracked, so how did they think he killed them? Why would he abuse the two girls and then get them in the bath to kill them? That makes no sense to me.

I think he said one fell into the bath and the other girl screamed and he held her until she stopped screaming, meaning he suffocated her.

I found that odd, as what was the girl doing while he killed the other girl in the bath, was she knocked out beforehand?  

Yes, that's what he said. He said that one (Holly I think) fell in the bath and drowned, and the other one (Jessica I think) screamed and accused him of pushing Holly in the bath, so he put his hand over her mouth and she died as well. The prosecution rejected that story. They seemed to accept that at least one girl had been in the bath though - that's what puzzles me. Why would he choose to kill someone deliberately in the bath?

Also, he washed the duvet or the cover, and he said that's because there was blood on it from the nose bleed. If there was a no nose bleed, why was there blood on the bed? If he killed at least one of them in the bedroom in a manner which drew blood, why was the bath involved? It's all very strange.

The original story was the girls went upstairs just after last photo was taken allegedly at 5.04pm... although I think this photo looks edited myself... and that was later time they were seen by family...


Apparently the girls used the Internet for about half hour on an internet chat room and slipped out soon after... seen by Huntley at 5.45 and then various other sightings around town up until about 6.45pm...


The phone was switched off around this time and registered with phone mast in another town.


I don't think they were in Huntleys house and I don't think he killed them.

Tommy Monk wrote:The original story was the girls went upstairs just after last photo was taken allegedly at 5.04pm... although I think this photo looks edited myself... and that was later time they were seen by family...


Apparently the girls used the Internet for about half hour on an internet chat room  and slipped out soon after... seen by Huntley at 5.45 and then various other sightings around town up until about 6.45pm...


The phone was switched off around this time and registered with phone mast in another town.


I don't think they were in Huntleys house and I don't think he killed them.

I read that they had the barbecue after the photo was taken, and after they came off the computer. That's what Holly's mother said.

However, as I said, the timeline is a bit woolly. Your timeline would make sense if you believe that Huntley saw them at 5.45. If he did, then either he's innocent, or they went back to his house after they'd been in other places, including the sports centre.

If you don't think he killed them, why do you think he confessed to all that stuff?

The early reports of timeline all said last sighting was photo being taken at 5.04pm... then they went upstairs... slipped out soon after unseen... 5.45 huntkey saw them... numerous sightings after up until about 6.45.


Green car was seen then and phone turned off registering at mast in next town where car was heading... other reports said phone was still transmitting g a signal up until 1.00am and also placed it nearer to other town and mast.

Tommy Monk wrote:The early reports of timeline all said last sighting was photo being taken at 5.04pm... then they went upstairs... slipped out soon after unseen... 5.45 huntkey saw them... numerous sightings after up until about 6.45.


Green car was seen then and phone turned off registering at mast in next town where car was heading... other reports said phone was still transmitting g a signal up until 1.00am and also placed it nearer to other town and mast.

Not so.

She added: "Oliver was first to finish and he got down from the table." She said he rang his friend Ryan at 6.10pm.

Mrs Wells said: "The girls got down shortly after that. Kevin (her husband), Rob, Trudi and I continued to sit around the table in the kitchen and the girls went upstairs and that was the last we saw of them.

http://www.standard.co.uk/news/the-day-my-holly-died-7225406.html

There is a thread on Flap in archive with all the early details and links on it...


If you are a member over there then you could find it and copy and paste some of the stuff over over to here?


I tried to log in to do just that but unable either because I forgot password and entered incorrect one or my account has been removed.

Raggamuffin wrote:

Tommy Monk wrote:The early reports of timeline all said last sighting was photo being taken at 5.04pm... then they went upstairs... slipped out soon after unseen... 5.45 huntkey saw them... numerous sightings after up until about 6.45.


Green car was seen then and phone turned off registering at mast in next town where car was heading... other reports said phone was still transmitting g a signal up until 1.00am and also placed it nearer to other town and mast.

Not so.

She added: "Oliver was first to finish and he got down from the table." She said he rang his friend Ryan at 6.10pm.

Mrs Wells said: "The girls got down shortly after that. Kevin (her husband), Rob, Trudi and I continued to sit around the table in the kitchen and the girls went upstairs and that was the last we saw of them.

http://www.standard.co.uk/news/the-day-my-holly-died-7225406.html

That was not the original story in early days after they disappeared...


The story I told is the original story given...

Anyway Tommy, why do you think Huntley would confess to killing the girls (by accident or not) if he hadn't? I must say that it does bother me a bit that he said at some point that he can see them walking away from the house in his mind. Perhaps he really did see them walk away.

I think a lot of it hinges on what he told Maxine Carr and when. At some point he did tell her that the girls had been in the house - something he kept from the police and the press. That doesn't necessarily mean he killed them of course, but it does raise questions as to what else he kept secret from the police and the press.

Tommy Monk wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:

Not so.



http://www.standard.co.uk/news/the-day-my-holly-died-7225406.html

That was not the original story in early days after they disappeared...


The story I told is the original story given...

The timeline you posted is from 17 August 2002, and it doesn't say when they left the house. Are you suggesting that Holly's mother changed the timeline later?

The sighting by Huntley was reported as per what he said at the time. As nobody had reason to suspect him at the time, it was taken as true.

He was packed off to Rampton for weeks and 'worked on'...


There is a news clip if him standing outside his house and saying what happened a few days after they went missing...


He said he was outside front washing his dog and they came past... they asked after Maxine and he said something about her not getting job... then they carried on along their way...


The early reports of details of disappearance said clearly that last sighting by parent was photo at 5.04... then they went upstairs... then some time later they slipped out unseen... they parent only realised they were missing some time around 8.00 isherwood when one of the people there mentioned how quiet they were...



The archive thread on Flap has loads of copy and pastes of articles and details given in early days after they disappeared.

Tommy Monk wrote:He was packed off to Rampton for weeks and 'worked on'...


There is a news clip if him standing outside his house and saying what happened a few days after they went missing...


He said he was outside front washing his dog and they came past... they asked after Maxine and he said something about her not getting job... then they carried on along their way...


The early reports of details of disappearance said clearly that last sighting by parent was photo at 5.04... then they went upstairs... then some time later they slipped out unseen... they parent only realised they were missing some time around 8.00 isherwood when one of the people there mentioned how quiet they were...



The archive thread on Flap has loads of copy and pastes of articles and details given in early days after they disappeared.

I've seen the interview Huntley gave outside his house at the time. However, according to Maxine, he told her at some point that they'd been in the house. He told her that before he was arrested and was sent to Rampton, so he did lie to the press didn't he?

The early reports don't mention when the girls went out or what time they had the barbecue.

Red Shirts

Holly and Jessica's red Manchester United tops and their other clothes were found cut and
burned in a bin in an outbuilding of Soham Village College, known as "the hangar".

Police discovered them after finding a set of keys in Ian Huntley's home.
He had previously denied having keys to the hangar.

Two of Huntley's hairs were found in with the clothes and his fingerprints
were on a bin bag which had been placed on top.

Some 49 tiny fibres matching the girls' shirts were found on Huntley's clothes and around his house.

Fibres from Huntley's carpet and curtains were also found on the shirts,
establishing a two-way link between the clothes and Huntley's home.

http://murderpedia.org/male.H/h/huntley-ian-evidence.htm

Spindleshanks wrote:Red Shirts

Holly and Jessica's red Manchester United tops and their other clothes were found cut and
burned in a bin in an outbuilding of Soham Village College, known as "the hangar".

Police discovered them after finding a set of keys in Ian Huntley's home.
He had previously denied having keys to the hangar.

Two of Huntley's hairs were found in with the clothes and his fingerprints
were on a bin bag which had been placed on top.

Some 49 tiny fibres matching the girls' shirts were found on Huntley's clothes and around his house.

Fibres from Huntley's carpet and curtains were also found on the shirts,
establishing a two-way link between the clothes and Huntley's home.

http://murderpedia.org/male.H/h/huntley-ian-evidence.htm

I read somewhere that the shirts were planted there, and were not the ones the girls were wearing, but there's no evidence to support that.

One thing strikes me about the discrepancies re the sightings of the girls. If I had seen a missing person later than the proposed time of death, and I was sure about the time, I'd be telling everyone that they'd got it wrong. Did the people who said they saw them after 6.30 or so ever say anything else?

This is puzzling.

The court also heard Carr express doubt over Huntley’s version of events. She told Mrs Nixon: "It doesn’t add up, the times don’t add up, because he rang me at my mum’s house at 6:40 They were going across that car park at like 6:15, they would have seen Ian, this nosebleed incident would have happened.

He rang Maxine at 6.40? Was that when the girls were in the house or what? He's abusing and/or murdering two girls and he rings his girlfriend at the same time?

http://www.scotsman.com/news/uk/huntley-told-his-mother-i-ve-been-framed-1-495887

Raggamuffin wrote:

Spindleshanks wrote:Red Shirts

Holly and Jessica's red Manchester United tops and their other clothes were found cut and
burned in a bin in an outbuilding of Soham Village College, known as "the hangar".

Police discovered them after finding a set of keys in Ian Huntley's home.
He had previously denied having keys to the hangar.

Two of Huntley's hairs were found in with the clothes and his fingerprints
were on a bin bag which had been placed on top.

Some 49 tiny fibres matching the girls' shirts were found on Huntley's clothes and around his house.

Fibres from Huntley's carpet and curtains were also found on the shirts,
establishing a two-way link between the clothes and Huntley's home.

http://murderpedia.org/male.H/h/huntley-ian-evidence.htm

I read somewhere that the shirts were planted there, and were not the ones the girls were wearing, but there's no evidence to support that.

One thing strikes me about the discrepancies re the sightings of the girls. If I had seen a missing person later than the proposed time of death, and I was sure about the time, I'd be telling everyone that they'd got it wrong. Did the people who said they saw them after 6.30 or so ever say anything else?

They must have also planted the fibres of the shirts in Huntleys home too.

I'm pretty sure they would have determined via DNA that these shirts belonged to the girls, they didn't just find shirts they also found the trousers, the girls underwear and a trainer. The photos of the clothing are on that link.

I just read something that said someone who knew them claimed to have seen the girls at about 7.20pm. I can't recall what time it was the girls are supposed to have died.

The piece also said that other significant items were located close to Huntleys home and that the last mobile phone signal couldn't give an accurate location but was in the Soham area.

Raggamuffin wrote:This is puzzling.

The court also heard Carr express doubt over Huntley’s version of events. She told Mrs Nixon: "It doesn’t add up, the times don’t add up, because he rang me at my mum’s house at 6:40 They were going across that car park at like 6:15, they would have seen Ian, this nosebleed incident would have happened.

He rang Maxine at 6.40? Was that when the girls were in the house or what? He's abusing and/or murdering two girls and he rings his girlfriend at the same time?

http://www.scotsman.com/news/uk/huntley-told-his-mother-i-ve-been-framed-1-495887

Is that when the girls are supposed to have died?

Is it possible they actually died later than that especially if they were seen at 7.20 by someone who knew them.

Do they know exactly what time the girls died?

There was no dna of either girls or Huntley found on the shirts that were found partially burned in the bin...


There was no dna of girls found in Huntley house or car.


There was no dna of Huntley found on girls bodies or anywhere in surrounding area where bodies were found.

Tommy Monk wrote:There was no dna of either girls or Huntley found on the shirts that were found partially burned in the bin...


There was no dna of girls found in Huntley house or car.


There was no dna of Huntley found on girls bodies or anywhere in surrounding area where bodies were found.

It wasn't just the shirts they found in that bin though.

Spindleshanks wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:This is puzzling.



He rang Maxine at 6.40? Was that when the girls were in the house or what? He's abusing and/or murdering two girls and he rings his girlfriend at the same time?

http://www.scotsman.com/news/uk/huntley-told-his-mother-i-ve-been-framed-1-495887

Is that when the girls are supposed to have died?

Is it possible they actually died later than that especially if they were seen at 7.20 by someone who knew them.

Some time between about 6.30 and about 6.50 I think. The reasoning behind that is the CCTV at the sports centre which shows them at 6.28, and also a witness saw them in that area at around 6.30. Jessica's phone was switched off at 6.46, and it was proposed that Huntley switched it off to stop her phoning anyone.

Dr Davey painstakingly detailed the other items of clothing found among the charred remains in the bin. Jessica's Umbro tracksuit bottoms had also been cut from her body.
In a zipped pocket Dr Davey found a half-eaten packet of Polo mints and a bracelet with a dolphin lozenge. Other sweet papers were found in the bottom of the bin.
Part of an inside pocket was missing but a piece of material recovered during the post-mortem examination on Jessica's body provided a match.
A missing part of the tracksuit logo was found in soil at the spot near Lakenheath where the bodies were found.
Holly's tracksuit trousers had been cut off as had the black Marks & Spencer bra bought for her by her mother the day before she disappeared. It was fastened at the back and had been cut between the cups - causing a decorative embroidered flower to fall off - and on both straps.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1447645/I-cut-clothes-off-bodies-says-Huntley.html

Raggamuffin wrote:

Spindleshanks wrote:

Is that when the girls are supposed to have died?

Is it possible they actually died later than that especially if they were seen at 7.20 by someone who knew them.

Some time between about 6.30 and about 6.50 I think. The reasoning behind that is the CCTV at the sports centre which shows them at 6.28, and also a witness saw them in that area at around 6.30. Jessica's phone was switched off at 6.46, and it was proposed that Huntley switched it off to stop her phoning anyone.

Well whatever time they died, I reckon by the evidence presented relating to the clothes they died at the hands of Huntley.

Spindleshanks wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:

I read somewhere that the shirts were planted there, and were not the ones the girls were wearing, but there's no evidence to support that.

One thing strikes me about the discrepancies re the sightings of the girls. If I had seen a missing person later than the proposed time of death, and I was sure about the time, I'd be telling everyone that they'd got it wrong. Did the people who said they saw them after 6.30 or so ever say anything else?

They must have also planted the fibres of the shirts in Huntleys home too.

I'm pretty sure they would have determined via DNA that these shirts belonged to the girls, they didn't just find shirts they also found the trousers, the girls underwear and a trainer.  The photos of the clothing are on that link.

I just read something that said someone who knew them claimed to have seen the girls at about 7.20pm.  I can't recall what time it was the girls are supposed to have died.

The piece also said that other significant items were located close to Huntleys home and that the last mobile phone signal couldn't give an accurate location but was in the Soham area.

Huntley admitted they'd been in the house though, so fibres would be found there. He said they came in because one of them had a nosebleed, and that they then left. He told Maxine they'd been in the house. It was only later at the trial that he admitted he killed them.

Spindleshanks wrote:Dr Davey painstakingly detailed the other items of clothing found among the charred remains in the bin. Jessica's Umbro tracksuit bottoms had also been cut from her body.
In a zipped pocket Dr Davey found a half-eaten packet of Polo mints and a bracelet with a dolphin lozenge. Other sweet papers were found in the bottom of the bin.
Part of an inside pocket was missing but a piece of material recovered during the post-mortem examination on Jessica's body provided a match.
A missing part of the tracksuit logo was found in soil at the spot near Lakenheath where the bodies were found.
Holly's tracksuit trousers had been cut off as had the black Marks & Spencer bra bought for her by her mother the day before she disappeared. It was fastened at the back and had been cut between the cups - causing a decorative embroidered flower to fall off - and on both straps.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1447645/I-cut-clothes-off-bodies-says-Huntley.html

I find that very odd. Why remove their clothes at all, and why put them in a bin where they could be connected to him?

Bodies hidden

In a "series of ruthless acts", Huntley tried to cover his tracks after killing the girls.

He waited until nightfall and then folded the bodies into the boot of his red Ford Fiesta and drove them to a quiet spot he knew near Lakenheath airbase, just across the Suffolk border.


Where police found fibres from the girls' shirts

Enlarge Image
With black bin liners around his feet to avoid leaving prints, he carried them up the rough track.

After cutting off their clothes, he waded deep into the nettles of a drainage ditch and dumped the bodies - at some point returning to set fire to them.

When he got back home after depositing the bodies, a "clammy" but calm Huntley joined the search for the girls.

The next day he began a clean-up operation at his home, washing the dining room carpet and scrubbing every inch of the house with what one police officer recalled was a "lemony" cleaning fluid.

He tried to cleanse his car, ripping out the boot lining and replacing it with household carpet.

He also removed a throw from the back seat.

Huntley took the car to a garage at Ely, had the tyres changed, despite them being hardly worn, and slipped the mechanic £10 to put a false number plate on the receipt.

But a forensic examination of the car when it was seized on 16 August still found evidence linking him to the girls.

In the foot-well and the wheel arches, scientists found traces of a distinctive mix of chalk, brick dust and concrete used to cover the road leading to the ditch.

Pollen from 64 types of plant at the site where the bodies were found - some of them quite rare - was also matched to grains in the car and on Huntley's shoes.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/3257664.stm

Raggamuffin wrote:

Spindleshanks wrote:Dr Davey painstakingly detailed the other items of clothing found among the charred remains in the bin. Jessica's Umbro tracksuit bottoms had also been cut from her body.
In a zipped pocket Dr Davey found a half-eaten packet of Polo mints and a bracelet with a dolphin lozenge. Other sweet papers were found in the bottom of the bin.
Part of an inside pocket was missing but a piece of material recovered during the post-mortem examination on Jessica's body provided a match.
A missing part of the tracksuit logo was found in soil at the spot near Lakenheath where the bodies were found.
Holly's tracksuit trousers had been cut off as had the black Marks & Spencer bra bought for her by her mother the day before she disappeared. It was fastened at the back and had been cut between the cups - causing a decorative embroidered flower to fall off - and on both straps.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1447645/I-cut-clothes-off-bodies-says-Huntley.html

I find that very odd. Why remove their clothes at all, and why put them in a bin where they could be connected to him?

I don't know. I can only assume it was in an attempt to destroy any potential link to him with the girls bodies.