Awesome work, Andrew. I am at a loss to grasp how, decades later, Söring still manages to seduce, as if they were ingénues, ever new cohorts of educated people who should know better. Just how much charisma can one one-trick-pony schmuck have?
I have just been looking at 'Till Murder Do Us Part.' Phyllis Workman makes some comments about the internal family life of the Haysoms. Nancy Haysom was 6 years older than Phyllis and Derek Haysom was 25 years older. They had lived abroad and had only returned to Lynchburg in the early 1980's. They didn't know Phyllis and she didn't know them. For her to say that Derek "averted" his eyes from his wife's sexual abuse of their daughter is an absolute outrage. How could she know? All the parents wanted was for Elizabeth to get her BA degree from UVa. So she could support herself. The great expectations were long gone.
In the German ARD “Crime Time” Production Phyllis comes across as more thoughtful and intelligent than in the Netflix documentary. If I’m not mistaken, she is Elizabeth’s third cousin. Who of us have a close relationship with their third cousins? I don’t even know mine. So good for Elizabeth Haysom that she has Phyllis.
The sexual abuse allegations always remind me of the Menendez brothers’ case: Throw dirt on the wall and see what sticks.
Yes...I agree. But. That remark that Elizabeth "was always being sent off to school." The implications one can draw from that are parental indifference or worse. St. Georges's, Riddlesworth Hall, and Wycombe Abbey were linked and challenging hurdles in the path through the British educational system for the talented kids of the upper class. St. George's became more international later on, but it was always basically British and could be described as a Swiss feeder school, if you will, to good English prep schools like Riddlesworth, and from there possibly to Wycombe, if the girl could cut the mustard. And Elizabeth was remembered at Riddlesworth as 'a clever girl.' They didn't want wounded children. It was an elite system with very high standards, requiring not only serious testing but at least a day of interviews at Wycombe. Elizabeth did well all the way up to and most of the way through Wycombe. If anything such as what she has described at St. George's happened, well, too bad, her career would have been derailed. This was a police, medical, and psychiatric matter and that would have taken precedence. (If it had happened. It didn't happen.) Elizabeth reinvented her past at some point at Wycombe. But where it really went wrong was when she began to realize that she was not going to be able to go to Cambridge. There were other reasons, as well as psychiatric reasons why not, but my theory is that this is getting near the crux of the matter. Riddlesworth is in Norfolk, or was. ( Looks like Covid killed the school. ) This is East Anglia, and part of it is the famous fen country. Everything is a little different from other parts of England. It is flat , low lying, there is the enormous sky, the light is different, it is off the North Sea, there is a creeping cold, a Norfolk jacket weighs a ton, try one on. Norfolk's close neighbor, Cambridgeshire has a place ten feet below sea level. The Cambridge ' backs' are artificial canals which flow all through the back of the colleges and then as far as I can tell come to dams of some sort where there is the sound of rushing water. Weirs. East Anglia is all ditched, dredged and drained. Elizabeth's entire vision of her future from the time she was probably twelve years old was of a journey that flowed from these three schools straight into this world of 'weir-splashed happiness' at Trinity College, Cambridge. And then it didn't happen.
Even the least informed viewer of the Netflix documentary can see that Phyllis is very partial to Haysom, and she's certainly within her rights to feel and think whatever she wants.
However, proper and professional reporting for a documentary would have required a clear distinction between Phyllis' own observations and experiences with the Haysom family, and second hand information that she received from Haysom at a much later date. Good catch, Wheatley!
Sending kids to international schools at a very young age, forcing just their success without the warmth and welcome of a home sweet home and the absence of loving parents and friends in their hometown can become a serious problen in the teenager's psyche. That should be very clear and that is what came out very clearly in her testimony. She never had been a very tough boy. I could think of the possibility that Phyllis does not have own children and "adopting" Elizabeth.
There are 5 main failures made by the investigators, which became obvious very clearly (at least within the last days):
1. Throughout the confessions in London the tape recording was stopped several times following Soering's will (usually there is no such opportunity for the suspect). The investigator had followed Soering's will to stop the recording that he will go on answering the questions
2. The investigator didn't confront Soering with any evidence they had (trained behaviour in investigations).
That proves that they did not have much.
3. They didn't correct Soering or asking him on details they already had been aware of e.g. Have you used the shower?
We have evidence that someone had taken a shower in the bathroom. You were bleeding in that car? We did not find any blood in that car by forensic examination. So you had put new cloth on right?
4. They had put too many details in Soering's mouth helping him to "remember things" e.g.Ham and rice and salad
5. Just concentrating on Soering while not interviewing and comparing Soering's statements with Haysom by interviewing her each day. Maybe they had feared the limitation of her lawyer which would affirmate what is unprofessional just to follow the "easier" route.
Gardner's first case?
Gardner had been the rookie (first homocide), and Reid the lead investigator until he left BC Police Department (April '86).
SOURCE:Netflix interview with Gardner's female colleague
BTW:
In his new YT video.Soering declares Haysom to acting out the role as a nasty squid during a foursome in Yugoslavia while being on vacations with one of Soering's rival in love. That is quite a new role. Up to now, she had been a bee queen or Lady Macbeth.
1.PACE had guidelines on interview recordings and a code of conduct was introduced in 1988 but not made mandatory until 1992.
2.We know they didn't have much, but Soering didn't know that
3. Police not obliged to correct a suspect
4.Gardner's first murder case but he had six years investigative experience.
Not failings as they were cleverly investigating and got him to confess and reveal crucial details like he wasn't wearing pants - Beaver picked up on this.
But I agree that not tape recording everything was far from ideal, especially following the suspect's wishes. But in those days it was permissable
Sorry StopperCrime....I like your native English (is your surname Terry?) but I only can find weak answers according to my opinion.
1. Compare your anwer to the analysis of Dr. Griffith to be more specific and be able to have a scientific result!
2. That is nonsense, cause Terry Wright had become aware of a letter (dated right before the first interview!), in which Soering tried to pass a note to Elizabeth which clearly stated that the American cops don't have much. The hint in that note was about that she should shut up about any crime details. The investigators helped Elizabeth in the first 4 days by just concentrating on Soering, who had placed both right on the first day (05.06.86). I will have to exceed my list to 5 points. So please look above.
3. Completely nonsense. Please look at the very famous interview of Jodi Arias which is accessable on YT. There you can clearly see Jodi lying and the investigator correcting her with evidence (her being at the scene, having sex, finding a camera in the washing machine ecetera)
You try very hard to be logical but it ain''t that easy...right😂
Ok extra lesson for you....
The idea of taking the blame for Haysom at the crime is older than the interview.
Soering and Wright had realized that Haysom became very nervous seeing Gardner in London and Soering took over more control in answering questions adressed to both.
So Soering couldn't rely on what Haysom will do during her interviews. That is the reason for him to give him away right on the first day. His wording is like well trust me, I'm gonna tell you the truth and she could take the blame for the crime allone to play the hero. The note didn't ever reach Haysom which had increased the dramatic blackboxing between both of them. The results which affirmate this position is that she had a weak moment after receiving a muddy anwer (investigation is on a good way) by Beever for asking him if Soering had confessed the murder already. So this I did it myself was something like a checkup after Beever had asked her "Or are you both guilty".
Soering got no positive legal consultation by the German embassy. I am confirmed about the fact that he had waived the legal support by a lawyer cause he feared that the lawyer will help to find out that both had been at the scene!
The last indication is the correspondence between both where he had written to Haysom in a letter "a letter in which you will take the blame for the crime would piss me off"
Courtney and Rachel were smart enough to put that also in the right direction. The 2perp theory!
The Freudal slip in "our trip to Bedford" during his interview is the ultimate topping on the 2perp cake!
Awesome work, Andrew. I am at a loss to grasp how, decades later, Söring still manages to seduce, as if they were ingénues, ever new cohorts of educated people who should know better. Just how much charisma can one one-trick-pony schmuck have?
I have just been looking at 'Till Murder Do Us Part.' Phyllis Workman makes some comments about the internal family life of the Haysoms. Nancy Haysom was 6 years older than Phyllis and Derek Haysom was 25 years older. They had lived abroad and had only returned to Lynchburg in the early 1980's. They didn't know Phyllis and she didn't know them. For her to say that Derek "averted" his eyes from his wife's sexual abuse of their daughter is an absolute outrage. How could she know? All the parents wanted was for Elizabeth to get her BA degree from UVa. So she could support herself. The great expectations were long gone.
In the German ARD “Crime Time” Production Phyllis comes across as more thoughtful and intelligent than in the Netflix documentary. If I’m not mistaken, she is Elizabeth’s third cousin. Who of us have a close relationship with their third cousins? I don’t even know mine. So good for Elizabeth Haysom that she has Phyllis.
The sexual abuse allegations always remind me of the Menendez brothers’ case: Throw dirt on the wall and see what sticks.
Yes...I agree. But. That remark that Elizabeth "was always being sent off to school." The implications one can draw from that are parental indifference or worse. St. Georges's, Riddlesworth Hall, and Wycombe Abbey were linked and challenging hurdles in the path through the British educational system for the talented kids of the upper class. St. George's became more international later on, but it was always basically British and could be described as a Swiss feeder school, if you will, to good English prep schools like Riddlesworth, and from there possibly to Wycombe, if the girl could cut the mustard. And Elizabeth was remembered at Riddlesworth as 'a clever girl.' They didn't want wounded children. It was an elite system with very high standards, requiring not only serious testing but at least a day of interviews at Wycombe. Elizabeth did well all the way up to and most of the way through Wycombe. If anything such as what she has described at St. George's happened, well, too bad, her career would have been derailed. This was a police, medical, and psychiatric matter and that would have taken precedence. (If it had happened. It didn't happen.) Elizabeth reinvented her past at some point at Wycombe. But where it really went wrong was when she began to realize that she was not going to be able to go to Cambridge. There were other reasons, as well as psychiatric reasons why not, but my theory is that this is getting near the crux of the matter. Riddlesworth is in Norfolk, or was. ( Looks like Covid killed the school. ) This is East Anglia, and part of it is the famous fen country. Everything is a little different from other parts of England. It is flat , low lying, there is the enormous sky, the light is different, it is off the North Sea, there is a creeping cold, a Norfolk jacket weighs a ton, try one on. Norfolk's close neighbor, Cambridgeshire has a place ten feet below sea level. The Cambridge ' backs' are artificial canals which flow all through the back of the colleges and then as far as I can tell come to dams of some sort where there is the sound of rushing water. Weirs. East Anglia is all ditched, dredged and drained. Elizabeth's entire vision of her future from the time she was probably twelve years old was of a journey that flowed from these three schools straight into this world of 'weir-splashed happiness' at Trinity College, Cambridge. And then it didn't happen.
Thanks for that little essay on Haysom's schools.
Even the least informed viewer of the Netflix documentary can see that Phyllis is very partial to Haysom, and she's certainly within her rights to feel and think whatever she wants.
However, proper and professional reporting for a documentary would have required a clear distinction between Phyllis' own observations and experiences with the Haysom family, and second hand information that she received from Haysom at a much later date. Good catch, Wheatley!
Thanks.
Sending kids to international schools at a very young age, forcing just their success without the warmth and welcome of a home sweet home and the absence of loving parents and friends in their hometown can become a serious problen in the teenager's psyche. That should be very clear and that is what came out very clearly in her testimony. She never had been a very tough boy. I could think of the possibility that Phyllis does not have own children and "adopting" Elizabeth.
There are 5 main failures made by the investigators, which became obvious very clearly (at least within the last days):
1. Throughout the confessions in London the tape recording was stopped several times following Soering's will (usually there is no such opportunity for the suspect). The investigator had followed Soering's will to stop the recording that he will go on answering the questions
2. The investigator didn't confront Soering with any evidence they had (trained behaviour in investigations).
That proves that they did not have much.
3. They didn't correct Soering or asking him on details they already had been aware of e.g. Have you used the shower?
We have evidence that someone had taken a shower in the bathroom. You were bleeding in that car? We did not find any blood in that car by forensic examination. So you had put new cloth on right?
4. They had put too many details in Soering's mouth helping him to "remember things" e.g.Ham and rice and salad
5. Just concentrating on Soering while not interviewing and comparing Soering's statements with Haysom by interviewing her each day. Maybe they had feared the limitation of her lawyer which would affirmate what is unprofessional just to follow the "easier" route.
Gardner's first case?
Gardner had been the rookie (first homocide), and Reid the lead investigator until he left BC Police Department (April '86).
SOURCE:Netflix interview with Gardner's female colleague
BTW:
In his new YT video.Soering declares Haysom to acting out the role as a nasty squid during a foursome in Yugoslavia while being on vacations with one of Soering's rival in love. That is quite a new role. Up to now, she had been a bee queen or Lady Macbeth.
https://youtu.be/UzBGEF9krt4?si=4FaJYPMEb5-MOI3E
1.PACE had guidelines on interview recordings and a code of conduct was introduced in 1988 but not made mandatory until 1992.
2.We know they didn't have much, but Soering didn't know that
3. Police not obliged to correct a suspect
4.Gardner's first murder case but he had six years investigative experience.
Not failings as they were cleverly investigating and got him to confess and reveal crucial details like he wasn't wearing pants - Beaver picked up on this.
But I agree that not tape recording everything was far from ideal, especially following the suspect's wishes. But in those days it was permissable
Sorry StopperCrime....I like your native English (is your surname Terry?) but I only can find weak answers according to my opinion.
1. Compare your anwer to the analysis of Dr. Griffith to be more specific and be able to have a scientific result!
2. That is nonsense, cause Terry Wright had become aware of a letter (dated right before the first interview!), in which Soering tried to pass a note to Elizabeth which clearly stated that the American cops don't have much. The hint in that note was about that she should shut up about any crime details. The investigators helped Elizabeth in the first 4 days by just concentrating on Soering, who had placed both right on the first day (05.06.86). I will have to exceed my list to 5 points. So please look above.
3. Completely nonsense. Please look at the very famous interview of Jodi Arias which is accessable on YT. There you can clearly see Jodi lying and the investigator correcting her with evidence (her being at the scene, having sex, finding a camera in the washing machine ecetera)
2. So why didn't he take his own advice and shut up then?
You try very hard to be logical but it ain''t that easy...right😂
Ok extra lesson for you....
The idea of taking the blame for Haysom at the crime is older than the interview.
Soering and Wright had realized that Haysom became very nervous seeing Gardner in London and Soering took over more control in answering questions adressed to both.
So Soering couldn't rely on what Haysom will do during her interviews. That is the reason for him to give him away right on the first day. His wording is like well trust me, I'm gonna tell you the truth and she could take the blame for the crime allone to play the hero. The note didn't ever reach Haysom which had increased the dramatic blackboxing between both of them. The results which affirmate this position is that she had a weak moment after receiving a muddy anwer (investigation is on a good way) by Beever for asking him if Soering had confessed the murder already. So this I did it myself was something like a checkup after Beever had asked her "Or are you both guilty".
Soering got no positive legal consultation by the German embassy. I am confirmed about the fact that he had waived the legal support by a lawyer cause he feared that the lawyer will help to find out that both had been at the scene!
The last indication is the correspondence between both where he had written to Haysom in a letter "a letter in which you will take the blame for the crime would piss me off"
Courtney and Rachel were smart enough to put that also in the right direction. The 2perp theory!
The Freudal slip in "our trip to Bedford" during his interview is the ultimate topping on the 2perp cake!