Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 1
CrackerC117

The Death Of Arthur Brumhill In Northampton

18 posts in this topic

An elderly petshop worker was found dead in his store in 1993. 76 year old Arthur Brumhill lost his life after not long after being seen by Crime watch witnesses and was found covered in straw in the basement of the shop.

In March 2017, one man, a former colleague of Arthur was cleared of the guilt of his murder.

So who could be responsible? There doesn't appear to be any motive for the murder, other than robbery, for which an elderly man working alone would be a prime target. Several witnesses in the BBC Crimewatch feature reported seeing a man in a yellow tracksuit acting suspiciously around the time of Arthur's death on Wellingborough Road, where the shop was. One man reported that the man had blood on his jumper and appeared to drop what could be a weapon. Another woman, also elderly, reported the man near to her home. He seemed to be hiding behind a wall.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 

youre reporting a death that happened in 93.... and no links or reasons why this is odd?

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, seeder said:

youre reporting a death that happened in 93.... and no links or reasons why this is odd?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-northamptonshire-39155856

The case is still unsolved.

Quote

After the conclusion of this trial, the murder of Arthur Brumhill remains unsolved and the truth about what happened on that night in 1993 a mystery. While police will continue to work on his case and it is hoped one day they will be able to solve his murder, his family now have to return to the endless waiting and frustration of not knowing what happened and why and whether they will ever receive justice.

http://swordandscale.com/pet-shop-murder-remains-a-mystery/

 

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you for the link Still Waters. My sources of information were BBC.co.uk and www.youtube.com

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

Here's a collection of clips across the years regarding the Arthur Brumhill case.

 

And this is part one of the Crimewatch episode that covers Arthur's case.

 

To me, this is just baffling. Was there no CCTV in the area? It was 1993, CCTV was definitely in operation, and given that it was along a shop high street I find it surprising there was no footage captured.

Edited by Seryth

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, Seryth said:

Here's a collection of clips across the years regarding the Arthur Brumhill case.

 

And this is part one of the Crimewatch episode that covers Arthur's case.

 

To me, this is just baffling. Was there no CCTV in the area? It was 1993, CCTV was definitely in operation, and given that it was along a shop high street I find it surprising there was no footage captured.

The surprising lack of evidence reminds me very much of the Damien Nettles case. It sounds to me as though their is likely to have been CCTV at the bank, where a witness saw the man in yellow, but the pet store was further along the road from that, where more traditional stores were. I imagine at the time, CCTV was around, but only for larger stores with a modern, corporate image, i.e. banks. I don't think corner shop type stores as we say in England would have had them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

What's most revealing to me is that the perp didn't bring a weapon- instead, he used what was available- and so that would indicate to me that he didn't go there with the intention of killing the man.

 

 

Edited by regi

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, CrackerC117 said:

The surprising lack of evidence reminds me very much of the Damien Nettles case. It sounds to me as though their is likely to have been CCTV at the bank, where a witness saw the man in yellow, but the pet store was further along the road from that, where more traditional stores were. I imagine at the time, CCTV was around, but only for larger stores with a modern, corporate image, i.e. banks. I don't think corner shop type stores as we say in England would have had them.

I agree - that's why I was drawn in to this case too!

You're probably right. I'm also in England, and my local corner shops (both in the city and in the countryside, I live between both) have CCTV. However I'm not sure if it was quite so widespread in the early '90s, or if it was essentially a result of the surveillance state that grew through the '90s as technology developed and boomed post 9-11.

 

2 hours ago, regi said:

What's most revealing to me is that the perp didn't bring a weapon- instead, he used what was available- and so that would indicate to me that he didn't go there with the intention of killing the man.

Yes. The perp could have entered the shop for a burglary, and had an altercation with Arthur that escalated and ended violently.

 

I'm also curious about the sack of hay. Why was the killer trying to hide the owner's body in his own shop? Surely that's a poor effort, and is obviously going to be discovered just as quickly as if he hadn't hidden it at all. Perhaps a sign of the killer panicking and trying to hastily cover up the evidence.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, regi said:

What's most revealing to me is that the perp didn't bring a weapon- instead, he used what was available- and so that would indicate to me that he didn't go there with the intention of killing the man.

 

 

That's a good point, but you could also say that it suggests the killer knew Arthur or knew the store well and that there would definitely be a weapon in the store. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Seryth said:

 

I'm also curious about the sack of hay. Why was the killer trying to hide the owner's body in his own shop? Surely that's a poor effort, and is obviously going to be discovered just as quickly as if he hadn't hidden it at all. Perhaps a sign of the killer panicking and trying to hastily cover up the evidence.

I can only think of three possibilities so far. I wonder if the hay was used to make it look as though Arthur collapsed on his own whilst carrying the hay and banged his head (many elderly people die of falls). Or could it have been a humiliation killing? I've heard of murderers who like to degrade and humiliate their victims. Or like you say, it could have been to buy himself/herself some time by making the body less obvious.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, CrackerC117 said:

I can only think of three possibilities so far. I wonder if the hay was used to make it look as though Arthur collapsed on his own whilst carrying the hay and banged his head (many elderly people die of falls). Or could it have been a humiliation killing? I've heard of murderers who like to degrade and humiliate their victims. Or like you say, it could have been to buy himself/herself some time by making the body less obvious.

Or, the killer and the victim knew each other and the crime was spur of the moment. Remorseful killers often cover the victim's face or body with whatever is at hand.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What do people think of the man in yellow near to the elderly woman's home? I've just watched the CW video again and it seems he was a different man to the man seen on Wellingborough Road. The fact that there are two persons of interest, suggests in my mind that this was a planned murder.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, CrackerC117 said:

I wonder if the hay was used to make it look as though Arthur collapsed on his own whilst carrying the hay and banged his head (many elderly people die of falls). Or could it have been a humiliation killing? I've heard of murderers who like to degrade and humiliate their victims. Or like you say, it could have been to buy himself/herself some time by making the body less obvious.

From what I understood, it seemed that the hay had been placed over his body after he had died. This makes me think it's not the collapsed theory, as then how would the hay end up on top of him? I'm more inclined towards Likely Guy's idea of a spontaneous murder.

 

22 minutes ago, CrackerC117 said:

What do people think of the man in yellow near to the elderly woman's home? I've just watched the CW video again and it seems he was a different man to the man seen on Wellingborough Road. The fact that there are two persons of interest, suggests in my mind that this was a planned murder.

I'm not sure what to make of the man in the high-vis jacket, nor the man in the yellow tracksuit with blood on it, which definitely seems suggestive of involvement. As for premeditation, I can't figure out what motive anyone would have to kill Arthur. By all accounts he was a sweet man who held everyone's best interests at heart and loved his shop.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

1 hour ago, Seryth said:

As for premeditation, I can't figure out what motive anyone would have to kill Arthur. By all accounts he was a sweet man who held everyone's best interests at heart and loved his shop.

This may be barking up the wrong tree here, but I am keeping an open mind to the possibility of a sexual motivation here. A witness saw Arthur talking to someone late at night in the store, this was way after the time you would expect the store to close, in fact, you would expect the store to have been locked up long before then, it was about 21:40. The person seemed to be a friend of Arthur. 

Earlier, I mentioned the hay being used to humiliate Arthur, what if it was a sexual humiliation? Could asphyxiation have been overlooked by the police at the time, due to his obvious head injuries? Ofcourse, I am not making any accusations here, there has been no known evidence to suggest it was a sexual attack. But my humiliation comments earlier and the fact Arthur was seen late at night with someone who seemed friendly leads me to think of that avenue.

Edited by CrackerC117

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If it was a sexual attack, why the head injuries? An attempt afterwards to hide the sexual nature of the attack? Why?

As for the store closing earlier - I agree that is late for a small high street shop to be open. However, this was a pet shop. I'm not sure when or how often the animals would have needed their bedding changed, food and water topped up etc. It could have taken quite a while to sort out. Perhaps he closed the shop to have some food, and then returned to the shop to put the animals to bed last thing at night and ensure they're fed/watered/clean.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What if it was a homosexual attack? The person seen in the store with arthur was male and back in 1993, homosexuality was very much a tabboo subject. 

The next time I pass a pet store, I'll speak to the staff about how long it takes them to change the bedding etc. Duston Pet Shop, in the same town as Arthur's shop, closes at 17:30 at the very latest.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/20/2017 at 6:43 PM, CrackerC117 said:

What if it was a homosexual attack? The person seen in the store with arthur was male and back in 1993, homosexuality was very much a tabboo subject. 

The next time I pass a pet store, I'll speak to the staff about how long it takes them to change the bedding etc. Duston Pet Shop, in the same town as Arthur's shop, closes at 17:30 at the very latest.

Do you mean a homophobic attack? I.e an attack by someone who thought/knew Arthur was [secretly] homosexual? Be interesting avenue to check down, though I imagine if his family suspected this they would have informed LE as it could have been quite useful info in narrowing down lists of suspects.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Seryth said:

Do you mean a homophobic attack? I.e an attack by someone who thought/knew Arthur was [secretly] homosexual? Be interesting avenue to check down, though I imagine if his family suspected this they would have informed LE as it could have been quite useful info in narrowing down lists of suspects.

I was thinking more that Arthur and the guy seen in the shop with him at 21:40 might have engaged in activity. But the homophobia theory is definitely plausable. Perhaps someone saw Arthur and the other person in the shop, waited for them to leave and targeted Arthur, possibly.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 1

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.