language, suddenly turned her talent to crime reporting. West produced a brilliant study of the post-war treason trials in The Meaning of Treason ; its portrait of William Joyce (Lord Haw-Haw) was acclaimed as the best single biography she was ever to write. In December 1949 she turned to the case of Donald Hume, accused of the murder of the shady car dealer Stanley Setty. Her impressions at Hume’s trial, one of which is included here, were published in the newspapers before being reworked into her full-scale and haunting study Mr Setty and Mr Hume which appeared a few years later. Hume was acquitted of murder, and Miss West thought it likely that Setty’s murder was likely to rank as one of the great unsolved mysteries. “The possibility that Hume murdered Mr Setty can definitely be excluded,” she wrote. “But who murdered Mr Setty, and how, and where, is known to nobody but the murderer. Not for lack of evidence. That is piled sky-high. There is so much that whatever theory the mind may base on that evidence, there exists some fact which disproves it.” 7 Hume had pleaded guilty to being an accessory to Setty’s murder, and served eight years of a twelve-year sentence. On his release, he went to a Sunday newspaper and confessed to murdering Stanley Setty. In fact, Hume went on to murder again and was sentenced to life imprisonment, spending nearly thirty years in Broadmoor.
Like Rebecca West, the critic Alexander Woollcott enjoyed a lifelong fascination with murder, and was one of the first to strike a distinctively American tone in writing about crime. The British may have the best mysteries, but by and large the Americans write up crimes with greater fizz. It was an American, Truman Capote, who in the 1960s invented a completely new genre, the non-fiction novel, and with the publication of In Cold Blood raised the true crime book to the level of literature. In the 1930s, Woollcott relished the retelling of old murders in what he self-deprecatingly dismissed as “a grab-bag of twice-told tales”. He was living in a less sophisticated age than our own, in which the incidence of unsolved crime (or, at any rate, murder) is statistically rare. Of the 716 murders reported in England and Wales in 2003–4, for example, only fifty-four remained unsolved a year later, a clear-up rate of 92 per cent. Improved detection and scientific techniques are responsible, methodology that would have been unrecognizable (indeed, unimaginable) to the fictional 1940s detectives of the Department of Dead Ends, a non-existent branch of Scotland Yard, invented by writer Roy Vickers 8 , in which details of all unsolved murders were stored. But in spite of such giant strides, unsolved murders will never be killed off altogether. Consigning mystery to history is not a realistic option. The American crime writer Ed McBain believes people like mysteries because they can come close to the violence without being part of it, and can be sure that “the people who are doing the violence at the end of it are going to be caught.” But the stories that follow have no ending, for they finish curled up in a question mark; we are drawn closer to them because the mystery is not yet dispersed.
EVIDENCE BY ENTRAPMENT
(Rachel Nickell, 1992)
Brian Masters
In Britain, the most notoriously unsolved murder of the 1990s was that of Rachel Nickell on Wimbledon Common. Her killing, witnessed by her little son on a summer’s morning, provoked a national clamour. Detectives eventually arrested Colin Stagg, an out-of-work loner who lived nearby. But he was freed by a judge at the Old Bailey when it was revealed that police had tried to snare their suspect into confessing by the use of a so-called “honeytrap,” a woman police officer who, operating undercover and using the name “Lizzie James”, had befriended Colin Stagg and sought to establish a relationship with him. The judge, Mr Justice Ognall, ruled that evidence from such a witness was