Cambridgeshire Murders (15 page)

Mrs Warnes was identified by her brother-in-law, Thomas Allen. Asked when he had last seen her alive he described the time he had spent with her on the day of the murder. He had arrived from Cambridge by train at about 2.15 p.m. and had spent the rest of the day in St Ives in her company.

At seven in the evening, or soon afterwards, they had been joined by Kunne, a man whom Allen had never before met. Kunne and Warnes seemed to be on good terms and they accompanied him to the Great Eastern Railway Station where he caught the 8.57 p.m. train back to Cambridge.

When Superintendent Griffin asked him when he last saw his sister-in-law before the day in question, Allen answered: ‘I should think it would be about six months ago.' He then stated that she had never, by word or letter, ever mentioned Kunne to him. He also claimed that he was not aware of the nature of the relationship between Warnes and Kunne, nor had he been given any feeling that his presence had caused any upset.

It was Frederick Finke who identified Kunne. He explained the deceased's home life and the nature of their employment at Wootten and Sons. He also mentioned that Kunne was notoriously short tempered but, during the last three weeks of his life, had been more fractious than usual. This had made him difficult to get along with and had led Kunne to neglect his work.

The next witness was Lucretia May Cooper. She detailed her employment with Warnes, saying that she had begun working for her on 29 December 1910. According to her statement, it was after working at the Temperance Hotel for a week that she had first met Kunne.

On the night of the deaths she had departed for her evening out at seven-thirty. She described Warnes and her guests, Thomas Allen and Gustave Kunne. As far as she knew all three of them seemed happy. She went on to describe the discovery of the bodies, mentioning that the back door must have been left unlocked by mistake. When asked whether she had actually entered the room she confirmed that she had not.

Griffin decided to change his line of questioning. He asked, ‘Have you ever heard any quarrels between Mrs. Warnes and Kunne?' Cooper replied that she had heard one the previous year. When pressed as to when during the year Cooper responded that it was shortly before Kunne had returned to Germany. This dated the row to the early part of the previous summer. According to her the argument was based on jealousy.

Barratt, the coroner, asked: ‘Can I take it the man accused the woman of going out with another man?'

‘No,' May clarified. ‘She was out with another lady friend.'

Next Griffin asked whether there had been any other quarrels. At first Cooper played them down saying that there had been just little tiffs, but the coroner reminded her of a major quarrel that had taken place just before Easter of 1912. Apparently, this too had been the result of Warnes taking a walk with another woman. This quarrel had led to Kunne assaulting Warnes.

Through Cooper answering a series of questions put to her by the coroner, a picture was painted of a row which had taken place at the bottom of the stairs at the Temperance Hotel and culminated with Kunne grabbing Warnes around the waist and her struggling to get free of him. May had unsuccessfully tried to separate them and in the end the police had been called. The attending officer Constable Bailey was not called to give evidence. Cooper had seen no signs of injury to Warnes but had noted that Kunne had sported a black eye afterwards.

Although she had heard Kunne say nothing on the subject, Warnes had told her servant that he wanted her to get a divorce from her own husband so that he could marry her.

Inspector Gale took the stand and handed May the clasp knife and asked whether she was familiar with the tool. ‘Yes, Sir. It belonged to Mr Kunne,' responded the witness. She agreed with Gale that Kunne had practically taken the place of master of the house and, in describing the dead man's personality, said ‘Kunne would sometimes stamp his foot in a rage.' A few minutes later she added that he was very jealous of her.

The next witness called was Harry Sines who had been in the Railway Inn from about 9 p.m. Warnes and Kunne were already there, having just waved off the Cambridge train. The three of them walked towards the town centre and had something to drink in the Robin Hood public house. At half past nine they reached the Temperance Hotel and he left their company. In the time he had spent with them they had both been friendly and sober.

Gale's statement filled in more details. Warnes' body had been behind the door, face down with her head about a foot from the corner of the room. The man was lying on his left side across Warnes' waist and with his left arm through a deep hole in the lace curtains that extended to approximately two feet in length. Kunne's left hand stretched out, almost around her neck. Gale had touched their skin and found it to be slightly chilly. Warnes was still dressed for outdoors. When the inspector opened her jacket he had seen that there was obvious bleeding.

On inspecting the area around the bodies he discovered the clasp knife, a battered felt hat which looked like the one that Kunne had been wearing and a broken lamp. The glass globe and chimney of the lamp were smashed: the shards and some spilt paraffin were lying in the chair. The lamp was unlit but had been replaced in an upright position on the table. Aside from the damaged lamp and the fact that the table appeared to have moved by a few inches, the room showed no signs of disturbance.

Gale had also observed the presence of several empty beer bottles and glasses, and one almost full glass of stout.

The coroner asked Gale whether he knew either or both of the deceased. Gale replied, ‘I have know the woman since I have been here, and that is five years. Three years ago Mrs Warnes' husband kept the Cow and Hare. In September 1909, they had been quarrelling and fighting and both bore marks of violence. They then parted and the husband had hardly been to St Ives since.' Gale went on to explain that he had often seen Kunne with Warnes, and that the two had been under observation since a complaint in April 1912. Then, at Easter 1912, Constable Bailey had to be called for the incident at the bottom of the stairs. Two days later Gale had observed that Kunne had two black eyes.

Dr Grove's description of the scene matched Gale's, although he added that there was blood on the knife and also on the inside of Kunne's right hand, and a little on the outside of Kunne's left hand. There was also a moderate amount of blood under the woman's body.

Grove had made the post mortem examination on Sunday 2 February. He began his testimony by describing the state of Kunne's body. The man was described as ‘exceedingly fat' and his enlarged liver showed that he had been a heavy drinker. The fatal injury was a single stab wound that had passed between the ribs, piercing the heart. The blade had gone in horizontally and at almost 90º to the chest.

Although Mrs. Warnes had also died from a single stab wound to the heart her injury was somewhat different: the blade had been almost vertical when it had entered and had travelled diagonally downwards. It had entered the chest wall approximately an inch lower than it had entered the skin and had cut across the heart, leaving a large gaping wound.

In Grove's opinion both deaths would have been almost instantaneous. On both victims the wound was approximately one eighth of an inch narrower than the blade of the knife but the doctor explained that was consistent with the elasticity of skin. Also from the lack of any other disturbance in the room he strongly discounted that there had been any third party involved in the incident.

He discounted the suggestion that Warnes could have killed Kunne before killing herself, explaining that she must have died first for her body to have been found underneath. Griffin asked whether it would have been possible for the wound to be self-inflicted. Grove replied that he would expect a self-inflicted wound to go straight inwards: ‘The direct wound being downwards and the cut being vertical was against it being inflicted by herself. It would be extremely improbable, so improbable as to be impossible.' He explained that the extent to which she would have needed to twist her wrist around have left her unable to exert sufficient force upon the knife to make the fatal wound.

Grove stated that he believed that only someone standing in front and above her could have inflicted Warnes' wound. That left Grove with only one conclusion: that Kunne had killed Warnes before turning the knife upon himself.

He explained the evidence by drawing the following scenario:

Mrs Warnes and Gustave Kunne had returned to the Temperance Hotel and had gone into the tearoom. Kunne had already made his plan and carried the clasp knife in readiness. Mrs Warnes had taken the seat near the window and had sipped her glass of stout. He had drunk beer, possibly to help him carry out his plan. To ensure that he took Mrs Warnes by surprise he had deliberately knocked the lamp. He returned the lamp to the table before plunging the knife into her breast. Her weight unbalanced him and he ripped through the lace curtain before falling on her.

This idea did not explain how Kunne had had sufficient light to stab Warnes accurately, or how the glass from the lamp ended up on the chair if he was sitting on it as it was broken. Neither did it explain how her weight had unbalanced the heavy man if she was still sitting or the likelihood that he had stabbed himself after falling.

Another policeman, Constable Coulson, had gone with Frederick Finke to Kunne's room where he had discovered letters from Warnes. The servant girl, Cooper, identified the handwriting as that of her employer.

The coroner adjourned the inquest for almost an hour. He used the time to look at the letters to determine whether anything contained in them would have bearing on the case. At 6.30 p.m. the inquest was re-convened and Barratt, the coroner, described the notes as affectionate. He felt it was essential for the jury to hear extracts from selected letters.

The first was dated 16 April but without a year. It was assumed that the year in question was 1912. Warnes had written: ‘As soon as I got in the house why did you not tell me what you had to say and where I had been. I was not with anyone else. I went to buy Easter eggs for you to send away and that is what I got in return when I got home. I was surprised at the way you treated me. You tried to kill your Lil, that is what you always said you would do, and perhaps it is not too late. But be careful what you do; you see I shall not be afraid. I shall still hold my own.'

On 12 May she wrote: ‘I am sorry we met as we did and then to end like this. You know I often told you, the reason I left “Mr W” because he did not treat me well. Then you say you love me as you do, then for you to do the same. My throat has been very bad. Lots of blood has come from it, but it is much better now. Sorry to write like this, but I never thought I could. I feel I must forget you and you must forget me as much as possible.'

Kunne received her letter of 27 June just before his trip home to Germany. This missive was clearly in reply to a communication he had made to her. In it she had written: ‘When you say suicide, I hope it is not my doing'.

Further on she had said: ‘Don't let things worry you too much. I shall not be able to go for my holiday yet, as I have people staying, but I feel a little better than last week. Dear G, you have asked me to forgive you, I will do so, but it is impossible for me to forget. You must not show your temper again to me.'

The final communication read was an undated letter referring to October 1912.

October will soon slip by and you will be early then. Have no fear. You say I am cruel in not writing more lovingly to you. That may be to you also my revenge. You remember, George, you had your revenge on me for nothing, and I am not man mad, and I cannot say how things will turn out for us, but whatever it may be we will have things straight.

In his summing up the coroner still directed the jury to his three original options: the man had killed the woman, the woman had killed the man, or that it was a double suicide. In contradiction to the previous statements Barratt described both the fire and lamp as still being alight. He reminded the jury that Kunne had been shown to find his temper hard to control, and that Warnes' letters had demonstrated the intense and jealous nature of their relationship. He went on to remind the jury that Grove had thought it impossible that Warnes' wounds were self-inflicted. His personal opinion was that the scenario suggested by Grove was the most probable and Kunne would have been driven by his love for Warnes.

The jury retired, but after only twelve minutes they returned with their verdict. Their conclusion was that Mr Kunne had ‘intentionally and with malice' killed Warnes before killing himself. ‘Had he', the coroner asked the jury, ‘at the time he committed the crime, full possession of his mental faculties?'

‘Yes,' replied Mr Meadows, the foreman.

A verdict of murder and felo de se
¹
was recorded and the inquest was concluded at 7.25 p.m.

Warnes was buried in the afternoon of Wednesday 5 February. The cortege left from outside the Temperance Hotel at just after 2 p.m. and the Revd O.W. Wilde conducted the service in front of a packed church. At the cemetery over 200 people were present along with the family mourners who included Warnes' three brothers and one sister, their spouses and children.

The inscription on the coffin read

In loving memory of

E
LIZABETH
W
ARNES

Died February 1st 1913

Aged 46 years

Three wreaths accompanied the coffin and these read ‘With deepest sympathy from brother Walter, wife and family', ‘In loving memory from brother George and family' and ‘In loving memory of our dear sister, from brother Harry and family'.

By contrast, at the funeral of Kunne, held the next day, only his employer, Mr Wootten and Frederick Finke, were mourners. The grave was dug in the north-east corner of the cemetery. Although a large crowd had gathered to watch the burial they remained silent throughout.