Mugford’s secret year

[Bill Robertson]

Why was Mugford kept in a police house for a year prior to the trial? Who paid her expenses? Why did Stan Jones visit her 36 times during that period? Why would a young woman agree to such an egregious regime of self denial? What was the implied 'threat' to her if she had protested at such a loss of liberty?

I tried to get answers to these questions during my research but pretty much drew a blank. I feel that answers to these questions could reveal much about Mugford's role in the MOJ. This was a highly unusual situation for what was supposed to be a straightforward murder investigation. I'm not aware of any other case where a prosecution witness was treated in the same manner.

It was reported in the trash press that Mugford was guarded by armed police, however Mugford was in no danger as JB was on remand. I was left to conclude that it suited the police to keep her under 'house arrest' to prevent her talking to anyone, especially journalists, about the case. Perhaps she was not trusted to keep her version of events private for any length of time? I assume that she embarked on a sexual relationship with Stan Jones, she did after all disclose after the trial that she enjoyed adventurous sex with JB and I doubt she suddenly stopped when he was arrested. I wondered also if RB might have been slipping her money? My understanding is that she continued her studies in London; someone must have come up with the cash for commuting. Mugford must have had compelling reasons for agreeing to put her life on hold. In my view it was financial compensation; she knew that the trial and imprisonment of JB was her only hope of significant monetary gain from the WHF tragedy.

Neither EP or Essex County Council would divulge payments made to Mugford, though there was some documentation evidence that they did make payments. I suspect that there is much of interest in that year, not just her grooming as the star witness.

[Leslie Aalders]

Why was Mugford kept in a police house for a year prior to the trial? Who paid her expenses? Why did Stan Jones visit her 36 times during that period? Why would a young woman agree to such an egregious regime of self denial? What was the implied 'threat' to her if she had protested at such a loss of liberty?

I tried to get answers to these questions during my research but pretty much drew a blank. I feel that answers to these questions could reveal much about Mugford's role in the MOJ. This was a highly unusual situation for what was supposed to be a straightforward murder investigation. I'm not aware of any other case where a prosecution witness was treated in the same manner.

It was reported in the trash press that Mugford was guarded by armed police, however Mugford was in no danger as JB was on remand. I was left to conclude that it suited the police to keep her under 'house arrest' to prevent her talking to anyone, especially journalists, about the case. Perhaps she was not trusted to keep her version of events private for any length of time? I assume that she embarked on a sexual relationship with Stan Jones, she did after all disclose after the trial that she enjoyed adventurous sex with JB and I doubt she suddenly stopped when he was arrested. I wondered also if RB might have been slipping her money? My understanding is that she continued her studies in London; someone must have come up with the cash for commuting. Mugford must have had compelling reasons for agreeing to put her life on hold. In my view it was financial compensation; she knew that the trial and imprisonment of JB was her only hope of significant monetary gain from the WHF tragedy.

Neither EP or Essex County Council would divulge payments made to Mugford, though there was some documentation evidence that they did make payments. I suspect that there is much of interest in that year, not just her grooming as the star witness.

Very interesting Bill,I had no idea she was in a police safe house for a whole year.

[Bill Robertson]

She had a whole year to get her story straight and still managed to get her knickers in a twist numerous times during her evidence. How a jury could have believed her I can't imagine.

[Leslie Aalders]

She had a whole year to get her story straight and still managed to get her knickers in a twist numerous times during her evidence. How a jury could have believed her I can't imagine.

They probably didn't Bill,two obviously didn't for sure and the others only enquired about the blood in the silencer being told that there was no doubt it was Sheila's and instructed that they could convict on that evidence alone.Wonder how the Judge would have got round about the Aga burns if it had been available at the time.