Margaret Corbett Beagley

Margaret Corbett Beagley was found dead in a cul-de-sac at the back of her home at 1 Stanhope Place in the Haymarket district of Edinburgh on 12 February 1950.

She had been assaulted and beaten to death with a stone.

A 23-year-old labourer was tried for her murder but acquitted after the judge ruled that the labourer was a mental defective and that an alleged statement that he had made to the police was not admissible. As such, with its exclusion, there was not enough evidence to justify him continuing with the case. His statement was described as 'non-competent evidence'. In part the issue arose after he was brought back from Glasgow on a charge of Fraud and that during interrogation on that matter he was questioned without warning on the entirely separate and unrelated matter of the murder of Margaret Beagley.

It was said that he had the mind of an 8-year-old child and was feeble-minded.

He was initially interviewed by the police amongst nearly 3,000 people that the police questioned shortly after the murder but allowed to let go. However, he was arrested on 14 March 1950 after a boarding-house keeper complained that he failed to pay whilst at her guest house in Edinburgh between 19 and 21 February 1950. He was arrested on 14 March 1950 in Glasgow and brought back to Edinburgh on the fraud charge and during his interrogation the police started to ask where he was on the night of Margaret Beagley's murder, resulting in an alleged confession which was ruled inadmissible by the judge.

When the detective inspector was asked whether he had noted that the labourer was a man of very weak intellect, he said that he did notice. When he was asked whether he thought that the labourer was a mental defective, he replied, 'I would not say he was very brilliant'. When he was then asked whether he saw any signs that the labourer was feeble-minded, he replied, ‘Yes, I did'.

When the Chief Constable gave evidence, he detailed the work done by the police in eliminating people in the district and others from suspicion and noted that quite a number of people were interviewed more than twice. He then said that by the time that the labourer was arrested in Glasgow in connection with the alleged board and lodging fraud that they had a list of about 20 people with whom they were not entirely satisfied about but said that at that time he had no evidence that the labourer was associated with the attack.

It was heard that when the Chief Constable had questioned him, he had said, 'I don't care whether you broke into the House of Commons or Holyrood Place, I want to know where you were that Sunday night'. However, when the Chief Constable related the interrogation at the trial, the labourers defence objected to the evidence, saying that the Chief Constable had tried to trap the labourer and that the evidence should not be allowed and the judge upheld his submission which meant that there was insufficient evidence for the trial to continue and the labourer was released.

The labourers defence had objected whilst the chief Constable was detailing the interview at the trial on the grounds that the labourer had by that time been detained for an hour and twenty minutes whilst on a fraud charge, whilst noting his condition at the time and the fact that the medical reports showed that he was a mental defective with the mind of an 8-year-old. The defence noted that up until that point the labourer had been arrested on a fraud charge and that some of the questions were 'a plain attempt to obtain information', adding, 'They were just an attempt to entrap the labourer into an admission. When these observations were made to a man who has the mental age of eight, it shows perfectly plainly that no evidence of anything that the labourer said in the course of that evening should be allowed'. It was also noted that the labourer had made a statement about a minute after some of the questions. The Chief Constable denied that the labourer had been frightened, saying, 'He was never frightened and was treated with all kindness'. When the judge asked the police constable whether he had told the labourer that there were a number of witnesses who had said they had seen a man of his description with Margaret Beagley on the night of the murder, the chief Constable replied, 'I did'. When the Chief Constable was then asked whether he thought that it was right to take a statement from a man whose mental age was eight, the Chief Constable said, 'I don't know that'.

The defence then claimed that it was being suggested that the questions had been calculated to frighten the labourer and said, 'He was never frightened, and nothing was done to frighten him in any shape or form'.

It was heard that the labourer had been cautioned and charged before he made his statement, but when the judge asked the police how he looked at that time, they said 'Well, he looked a bit dazy. After a little he put his head on his hand and was sobbing'. When the judge asked whether the labourer had been in a fit condition to make replies, the police replied, 'Yes, and to make a statement also'.

After withdrawing for an hour to consider, the judge returned and noted that the labourer must have been fairly high on the list as far as the police were concerned when he was brought back from Glasgow and noted that the police should not be hampered unduly in making investigations and noted that a heavy responsibility lay on the investigating officer. He said, 'It may be very difficult for him fully to appreciate just where the line should be drawn. He may well err in his judgement'. He went on to say that suspects had to receive protection and that if suspected, should be warned, noting that in the current case that that had come too late. He then said, 'Furthermore, anything that he does say should be truly a voluntary statement. I cannot leave out of account that the accused was recognised by both the Chief Constable and an inspector as feeble minded'.

When the judge considered the objection, he noted that the labourer was one of twenty people who the police were interviewing in relation to the murder of Margaret Beagley and that he was not under suspicion but was being questioned with a view to possible elimination. He said that in deciding the question of the objection the issue referred to the importance of the suspected person being warned that statements made might be used in evidence and to the difficulties that might in certain circumstances beset the police with during the course of their investigation and then ruled that he thought that in this case that the warning came too late, noting that the ultimate test was, of course, the fairness to the labourer. The judge then said that he could not leave out of account that the labourer was recognised by both an inspector who had questioned him and the Chief Constable, as being feeble-minded and said that that feature made it difficult strictly to observe the safeguards. He then said that the court had to look at the matter not so much from the point of view of the police but from the point of view of the labourer and stated that as such he would sustain the objection to the admission of the statements and the case collapsed.

The murder indictment against the labourer was that he had assaulted Margaret Beagley and had hit her on the head with a stone or other instrument.

During their enquiries the police interviewed more than 3,000 people. It was said that there had been 53 witnesses in the case, 20 of whom were cited to give evidence at the trial and that evidence including a stone, a baton and various articles of clothing and several medical reports had also been prepared. The stone was a heavy piece of stone, about 75lbs in weight, and about two feet long.

They made calls at a great number of houses, shops and factories, taking statements from the various people including lorry drivers and motorists who were known to have been in the Haymarket vicinity on the Sunday night and appealing for those that they had not already spoken to that had been there to come forward.

It was said that as a result of that that every move of Margaret Beagley was known until she was last seen talking to a man at the corner of a street not far from the cul-de-sac where her body was found.

Plaster casts were also taken of footprints in the cul-de-sac and round about, but they failed to reveal any clues.

The labourer was also charged with having between 19 and 21 February 1950 in a house at Gilmore Place in Edinburgh, obtained board and lodgings to the value of £1. 10s without paying or intending to pay. However, that charge was also thrown out after his murder acquittal.

The labourer was described as a black-haired man of medium height. When he was charged, he was stated to have been of no fixed abode and unemployed.

Although he was interviewed early on in the investigation, he was not arrested until after the incident at a boarding house.

The boarding house proprietrix from Gilmore Place in Edinburgh said that the labourer had arrived at her guest house on the night of Sunday 19 February 1950. She said that he had no luggage but had told her that it would be coming along later. She said that he explained his inability to pay in advance by saying that he was in the Merchant Navy and that the Merchant Navy office would not open until the Monday morning.

The labourer was interviewed by the police following the incident at the boarding house on 14 March 1950 after being brought back to Edinburgh from Glasgow which was when the statement that was later disallowed was taken.

Margaret Beagley was a shop girl.

Margaret Beagley's mother said that she had fourteen children and that Margaret Beagley was the third youngest.

She said that on 12 February 1950 that she asked her to take a message to a friend in Granton and said that when she failed to return when it got late that she began to worry.

A witness who lived in the neighbourhood of Elgin Place said that she heard a thud on the night of the murder which she said she thought was the sound of someone throwing coal against a waggon.

Another woman who had been visiting the neighbourhood said that on the night of the murder she had been in Elgin Place and that she saw a couple cross her path, and later identified the labourer as the man that she saw at an identification parade.

A detective inspector said that on the morning of 15 February 1950 that the labourer had been at his house in Lothian Street where he lived with his mother and that he was seen there by the police and later that day went to the police station to give a statement accounting for his movements on the Sunday night. The detective said that the labourer told him that he had met a man at Register House on the Saturday and had been stood some drinks and had then gone to Bathgate where he had stayed, returning to Edinburgh on the Monday. The detective said that the labourer was taken to Bathgate by the police but had been unable to identify the place that he had stayed.

He said that shortly after Margaret Beagley's murder the labourer had pawned his suit and shoes but that the items were recovered, although no traces of blood were found on them.

Prior to the court hearings on Tuesday 30 May 1950 it was heard that a queue for the public gallery formed as early as 7am and the court was said to have been filled more than half an hour before the proceedings began.

It was noted that local interest in the case had brought large crowds to the vicinity of the court and that all day there had been queues of people trying to find seats in the public gallery and that even when it was full many people still waited hopefully outside throughout the day. It was further reported that when news of the labourer’s acquittal reached the crowds in Parliament Square at about 5.45pm that there was a rush towards one of the entrances of the building where it was thought that he would appear. It was said that the crowds became so large that about a dozen policemen were called to clear the Square. Then, just before 6pm, the labourer, accompanied by his brother, with his father walking a short distance behind, left the building. Many of the waiting people immediately followed behind, spilling on to the roadway in George IV Bridge. It was reported then that a police car came to the scene and that two uniformed inspectors alighted to disperse the crowd, and the labourer was then allowed to walk off undisturbed in the direction of his home.

Margaret Beagley's funeral took place on the afternoon of Thursday 16 February 1950 at Warriston Crematorium.