Crime Immemorial

Jane Maria Clouson was born in April 1854 in Deptford, London, England. Her family was working-class, and tragedy struck early: her older sister Sarah died of consumption in 1863, and her mother passed away in 1867, leaving Jane motherless at thirteen. Jane had a younger sister, Maria, and a younger brother, Charles, who also died young. By fourteen, Jane was employed as a domestic servant in the household of Ebenezer Whitcher Pook, a Greenwich printer with ties to The Times. The Pooks, a middle-class family, had several children, including Edmund Walter Pook, who was three years older than Jane.

Jane’s life as a maid was typical of many young women in Victorian England, where domestic service was a common occupation for working-class girls. Her role involved long hours of labor, and her position in the Pook household placed her in close proximity to the family, including Edmund, who would later become the prime suspect in her murder.

On the night of April 25th, 1871, a patrolling police officer discovered Jane Clouson lying in Kidbrooke Lane, near what is now Rochester Way, close to the junction with Brenley Gardens. She had been savagely beaten with a hammer. The bloodstained weapon was found about a mile away, and Jane’s purse, containing 11s. 4d., remained untouched, ruling out robbery as a motive. There was also no evidence of sexual assault. Jane was rushed to Guy’s Hospital, where she lingered for five days, passing away on April 30th, two days after her seventeenth birthday. Her last words, reportedly spoken before losing consciousness, were haunting: “Oh, let me die.”

Before her death, Jane allegedly named Edmund Pook as her assailant, a claim that would drive the investigation. However, this statement was later ruled inadmissible in court as hearsay, complicating the prosecution’s case. Jane was not identified until May 1st, when relatives confirmed her identity, and the police swiftly arrested Edmund Pook the same day.

Edmund Walter Pook, aged twenty, was the son of Jane’s former employer. It was alleged that Jane and Edmund had been involved in a secret romantic relationship for several months, and that Jane had become pregnant. According to some accounts, Edmund’s parents discovered the affair, and Jane was dismissed from their household at 3 London Street (now Greenwich High Road) in early April 1871. The Pooks claimed her dismissal was due to “slovenly habits” and “unkempt appearance,” but Jane’s family and supporters argued it was because of her pregnancy and Edmund’s refusal to marry her, as his brother had already “married beneath his station,” angering their father.

The prosecution’s case rested on several points. For one thing, a shopkeeper identified Edmund as the buyer of the hammer found near the crime scene. In addition, a man matching Edmund’s description was seen fleeing Kidbrooke Lane that night.

Edmund’s trousers were also reportedly stained with blood and mud, and seven witnesses claimed to have seen Jane and Edmund together on the evening of April 25th.

Further, it was asserted that Jane and Edmund had continued their relationship after her dismissal, meeting secretly and exchanging letters, though no correspondence or witnesses to these meetings were produced in court. Jane had reportedly told her aunt and cousin that Edmund planned to “make an honest woman of her” and elope, raising speculation that she had gone to meet him that night.

The case first went to a coroner’s inquest, where Edmund was found guilty of willful murder. However, the trial at the Central Criminal Court (Old Bailey), presided over by Chief Justice Sir William Bovill, took a different course. On July 15th, 1871, several key elements of the prosecution’s case unraveled. For example, Jane’s dying declaration was ruled inadmissible as hearsay, and the shopkeeper’s identification of Edmund as the hammer’s buyer was questioned.

There was also no concrete evidence, such as letters or reliable witnesses, supported claims of a continued relationship, and the prosecution also failed to conclusively link the blood and mud on Edmund’s trousers to the crime.

After just twenty minutes of deliberation, the jury acquitted Edmund. The verdict sparked outrage among the public, who had gathered in large crowds outside the courtroom. Many believed Edmund had escaped justice due to his middle-class status and his father’s connections to The Times. Newspaper coverage had heavily implied Edmund’s guilt before and during the trial, fueling public fury when he was acquitted.

The police investigation was marred by errors, described by some as “ham-fisted.” For instance, when Edmund offered an alibi and the name of a witness, the police declined to follow up, and Edmund later changed his story, claiming he was alone and running home due to an impending “fit” (he reportedly suffered from seizures). The failure to secure physical evidence, such as letters or reliable witnesses, weakened the case. Some historians suggest the police’s focus on Edmund may have blinded them to other suspects, leaving open the possibility that the true murderer escaped justice.

Following the acquittal, Edmund and his family fled London, reportedly changing their identities to escape relentless press harassment. Edmund faced further scrutiny in two criminal libel suits, where pamphlets accused him of being a murderer despite his acquittal. He was represented by solicitor Henry Pook (no relation) in these cases. The case highlighted stark class divides, with many believing that Edmund’s social standing and family influence swayed the outcome.

Jane’s funeral on May 8th, 1871, drew thousands who lined the streets in the rain as her body was interred at Brockley and Ladywell Cemeteries, alongside her mother. Public sympathy for Jane, a “motherless girl” and working-class victim, led to a subscription-funded memorial at the cemetery. The monument, featuring a praying child atop a pillar, stands alone in a grassed area and bears an inscription: “A motherless girl who was murdered in Kidbrooke Lane, Eltham aged 17 in 1871… Her last words were, ‘Oh, let me die.’” The memorial, maintained by groups like Women Against Violence Expressing Solidarity (WAVES), remains a poignant reminder of her tragedy.

For years after, Kidbrooke Lane was shunned after dark due to reported sightings of Jane’s ghost, described as a bloodied figure in a white dress, crying for help. These sightings, including by patrolling policemen, persisted until the lane was developed, and the ghost stories faded.

Jane Clouson’s murder, marking its 150th anniversary in 2021, continues to resonate as one of Victorian London’s most iconic unsolved cases.