The Great Train Robbery (11 page)

Police attention now turned to the solicitors who represented the buyers, John Wheater and his managing clerk, Brian Field. McArthur set out in some detail the outcome of interviews with the pair and the growing suspicion that they were not all they initially seemed to be:

Wheater stated that one Leonard Field first came to see him in connection with the sale of Leatherslade Farm on or about 21 June 1963.
19
Leonard Field produced to him particulars of sale which had been obtained from Midland Marts Limited, the agents for Rixon, the vendor. Wheater then described negotiations in an account which tallies with that given by Mr Meirion-Williams, the solicitor acting for Rixon. Wheater handed over his file of papers relating to the transaction and on the surface had followed the procedure of a solicitor looking after his client's interest in the matter of the purchase of property. Bearing in mind that he was dealing with another solicitor this is not surprising. However, it is apparent that everything possible in the circumstances was done by Wheater to screen the identity of his client. He says that Field paid him the deposit money, the sum of £555, in cash which he paid in to his client's account.

Subsequently, when interviewed by Detective Chief Superintendent Butler he was unable to recall whether or not he issued Field with a receipt and so far has not produced a copy of any such receipt. He states that Field gave his address as 150 Earls Court Road and does not think he has seen him again since the deposit was paid on 23 July 1963. Prior to this he had written to Mr Meirion-Williams asking for possession upon exchange of contracts and before completion in order that extensive redecoration work could be carried out to the premises.

When contracts were exchanged Wheater signed their half of the contract on behalf of his client. Although it apparently does not affect the legality of the contract and was accepted by Mr Meirion-Williams, this is a most unusual occurrence. The self-evident effect of it is that any subsequent investigator is denied a sight of Leonard Field's signature, something which could lead to establishing identity. This point has not yet been put to Wheater but, assuming for the moment that this was a bona fide transaction, one would expect him to be in possession of a signed document from Leonard Field authorising him to sign the contract.

Although he stated that he had not visited the address given by Leonard Field, 150 Earls Court Road, Wheater admits a connection with the address in that he is acting for a company who are purchasing these premises, which he states consist of a club on the ground and basement floors and letting accommodation for ten rooms on the upper floors. Wheater states that there is no connection between Leonard Field and his managing clerk, Brian Field, but says the two have met in connection with the pending trial of Harry Field on charges of horse doping. He professes to be unaware that his managing clerk, or anyone else from his office for that matter, had been with Leonard Field to view Leatherslade Farm. He didn't think that his managing clerk had any dealings with Leonard Field in the purchase of these premises, adding that he has little knowledge of conveyancing.
20

Wheater had, of course, contradicted himself in this interview, having told Rixon a different story during their telephone conversation back in July (i.e., that Brian Field had indeed visited the farm in the company of Leonard Field and that clearly Brian Field was closely involved with the conveyancing of the farm.

This contradiction had come out during Rixon's police interview and led the police to dig deeper into the affairs of Wheater and Field. When the police began to delve into the address attributed to Leonard Field, 150 Earls Court Road, more inconsistencies and contradictions in Wheater's story began to surface.

The premises at 150 Earls Court Road were originally part of the property empire of the notorious slum landlord Peter Rachman.
21
When Rachman died on 29 November 1962, his widow, Audrey Rachman, took control of the properties and ran them through a company called Michian Ltd, which was registered at 150 Southampton Row, London WC1.

In March 1963, Michian Limited began negotiations to sell 150 Earls Court Road to a partnership consisting of Anthony Deane, Brian Hocking and Donald Williams.
22
Of the three, Deane was put forward as the nominee purchaser. However, Deane withdrew, leaving the remaining two partners to carry on with the transaction. They formed a company for the purpose, called Jiltslaid Investments Ltd and, on 14 August 1963, Hocking signed an amended contract on behalf of this company.

According to Wheater, he was acting for Hocking, whom he had represented in a previous property deal, and was also asked by Hocking to look after the formation of Jiltslaid Investments Ltd. Hocking had, however, told a number of others in confidence, including tenants at the property, that he was merely a front man for the real purchaser, i.e. Wheater himself. When put on the spot during his police interview, Hocking gave the following account:

I am in the process of buying the premises at 150 Earls Court Road, SW5. The negotiations started in about February 1963, and originally a Mr Deane was also in the partnership but he dropped out at the end of June, 1963. A company is being formed for the purchase, named Jiltslaid Investments Ltd, but to date no return of directors has been made.

James and Wheater Solicitors, of 3 New Quebec Street, W1, are acting for us in the purchase of the property which is being sold with vacant possession, apart from the basement which is used as a club. I paid a £1,000 deposit to Mr Wheater on 2 July, 1963, and I signed a contract on behalf of Jiltslaid Investments Ltd on or about 13 August, 1963. Completion was due within about eight weeks.

I had asked to be given access to the premises upon signing the contract and this permission was given verbally to Mr Wheater by the vendors' solicitors. The vendors were a company named Michian Ltd. I have known Sergiusz Paplinski for some years and I knew that he ran 150 Earls Court Road on behalf of the owners. I was given to understand by Sergiusz that the tenants were being given notice to leave so that the premises would be vacant before completion. Sergiusz himself had a first floor studio at the address and was affected by this. Sergiusz found a new flat at 6 Southwell Gardens, SW7, and I introduced him to Mr Wheater who acted for him in negotiating his lease. When Sergiusz was about to leave I visited him at 150 Earls Court Road, and as far as I could tell only he and one other tenant, a woman, were left there. When Sergiusz left he told me the place was empty of tenants. I understood that the owners' agents were removing furniture. I should mention that the rooms had all been let furnished. I told Sergiusz that I was only a nominee for the purchasers of 150 Earls Court Road, but this was not strictly true. My reasons for this were that I did not wish to disclose the identity of my partner. We have not yet completed the purchase, delay having been caused by difficulty in raising a mortgage. However, we hope to complete within a week or two.
23

When the police interviewed Paplinski, he confirmed what Hocking had originally told him back in the spring of 1963, months before the robbery, and the revised account of his role:

I lived at 150 Earls Court Road, SW5 until about the end of July or beginning of August, 1963. I rented a studio room there. Until March 1963, apart from living at the address, I looked after the house for the landlord. He then died and his widow decided to sell the house. Her solicitors began to negotiate the sale and on or about 22 March, 1963, I was sent Notices to Quit to be served on all the tenants there. I knew Brian Hocking who was acting for the purchaser of the house. He told me that the real purchaser was a solicitor named Wheater.

When I found a new studio flat at my present address, 6 Southwell Gardens, SW7, Brian Hocking introduced me to Mr Wheater and he negotiated the lease for me. I went with Brian Hocking to see Mr Wheater at his office near Marble Arch. When I moved, all the other tenants at 150 Earls Court Road had already left. Brian Hocking knew this as he was arranging for builders to go in and re-decorate. I never discussed with Mr Wheater the fact that I was the last tenant to leave. Brian Hocking would know for himself as I had given him a key to the premises before I left.
24

While these enquiries were in progress, a dramatic discovery was made by a couple in woods just outside Dorking. According to DS McArthur:

On 16 August, 1963, a discovery was made which definitely connects Brian Field with the train robbers. At about 8.35 am that morning, John Ahern, a Clerk, was riding his motor cycle along a road near Coldharbour, Surrey, accompanied by a pillion passenger, Mrs Esa Nina Hargreaves, a Supervisory Clerk. The motor cycle engine began cutting out and Ahern stopped the bike.

In his statement, John Ahern recalls:

We both left the machine to let it cool off and began walking down the track away from the road. I was talking to Mrs Hargreaves and after going a few yards I saw three cases on the ground among the trees and about 20 yards off the Dorking Road. I could see that it was not rubbish, and both Mrs Hargreaves and I went to check them. They were placed side by side in a straight line. There was nothing around to indicate why the bags were left there. I said to Mrs Hargreaves that someone had had a picnic and left their cases behind and that I would strap them on the bike and run them to the police station. I saw the one with the zip and thought that I had better look inside to see if there was any identification inside. Mrs Hargreaves was with me when I opened the holdall. I saw what appeared to be bundles of £1 Bank of England notes with brown adhesive bands around. Both Mrs Hargreaves and myself were shocked and I re-zipped the bag. I immediately thought of the big train robbery and told Mrs Hargreaves not to touch the other bags. I did not touch them. My thoughts were to get the police as soon as possible, and keeping the bags under observation. Both Mrs Hargreaves and myself went back to the road. We eventually stopped a car with a man, woman and girl in and took them back to the bags, un-zipped the hold-all and showed them the contents and then asked them to contact the police. Mrs Hargreaves and myself went back to the road again because I was uneasy as there may have been someone still about who was connected with the money.
25

DI Basil West of Surrey Constabulary attended the scene and went to the spot indicated by Ahern and Hargreaves, where he took possession of the bags which he describes as a camel leather briefcase, a brown leather briefcase and a holdall. Upon searching the immediate vicinity he discovered a suitcase about 50 yards away from the original find. The bags, which were all filled with banknotes, were taken to Dorking Police Station. DC Alexander Illing, of Surrey Constabulary, later received the bags from Inspector West to examine them for fingerprints.
26
When Illing examined the bags at Dorking Police Station he discovered not only banknotes totaling £100,900, but also a hotel bill in a pocket inside the leather holdall. The hotel bill was made out to Herr and Frau Field, relating to accommodation at the Sonnenbichl Hotel, Hindelang, southern Germany between 2 and 16 February 1963. The next day DC Illing made a further statement:

Further to my previous statement, I now add that on Friday 16 August when I took possession of a camel leather briefcase, a brown leather briefcase and a hold-all from Mr Ahern and Mrs Hargreaves, the brown leather hold-all was completely enclosed in two polythene bags, one drawn onto the bag from each end. One polythene bag was plain, the other bore markings showing it had originally contained a candlewick bedspread. I did not remove these bags until I reached Dorking Police Station, where I did so. I then handed them to Detective Constable Illing for fingerprint examination.
27

The prints DC Illing found were photographed and the resulting negatives passed on to DS Ray at Scotland Yard's fingerprint department. He carefully analysed them and concluded that:

There were in all 13 photographs which I received of impressions on this case. One of which is a comparison with Brian Field's. Of the remaining 12 photographs, four of them were useless. Three have not yet been identified. The other five disclosed fragmentary finger marks from which I formed an opinion but they were not of a standard necessary to bring before a Court. Of the 13 impressions, three were made by a hand other than Brian Field's. I can say that with certainty. The four were useless because they were not sufficiently defined to make comparison possible.
28

The mystery surrounding the discovery was now twofold: whose money was it and why had it been abandoned there?

Scotland Yard's Criminal Intelligence Section, C11, had at this time received information that the robbers' original plan was for Leatherslade Farm to be thoroughly cleaned up by a close associate of Bruce Reynolds and John Daly after they had left. His name was William Still and, according to his C11 file, he had been in partnership with James MacDonald since 1959 in an antiques business that now operated from 69 Portobello Road, London W11, which Reynolds and Daly were also associated with. Apparently, Still was to receive a full share of the robbery proceeds for undertaking this task. The plan to clean up the farm had come unstuck when Still was arrested with three associates on 25 June in Euston Square. When the four men were searched, police found in their possession ‘explosives, detonators, drills, putty, a pick handle, jemmy and nylon stockings'. While Still's solicitors, Lessor & Co., made a valiant attempt to get him bail, the application was dismissed. It was at this point that Brian Field volunteered to clean up the farm for the same sum as had been promised to Still. Field's reward for handling the purchase of the farm, along with Wheater, had apparently been £40,000, and he no doubt saw Still's arrest as an opportunity to increase his share of the spoils. However, according to C11's source, he had lost his nerve at the last minute and the farm was never cleaned up as intended.
29

With suspicion now very much pointing to Brian Field's direct involvement in the crime, the police sought a statement from Field himself. DCI Mesher of Scotland Yard's Fraud Squad (Section C6) deals with Field's account of matters concerning Lenny Field in his twenty-two-page report on the purchase of Leatherslade Farm: