REPRODUCED FROM ARCHIVE:
=====================================================

March 5th 2004


Ripper solicitors were doubtful he'd done all the murders
A British born businessman living in Melbourne has reported comments
made to him about the mass murderer Peter Sutcliffe, better known as
‘The Yorkshire Ripper’, by the senior partners from the solicitors
company who represented him in May 1981.


Tony Holland alleges they told him that; “the Ripper wants to plead
not guilty to 6 of the murders” because “he does not know about
them.”


After Sutcliffe was charged with murder in January 1981 he was
represented by the solicitors firm Lumb and Kenningham. Junior
partner, Kerry Macgill, and John Lumb handled the case for the
company. Macgill is now a circuit judge.


Kenningham, Lumb and Holland were friends when they all lived in
Bradford in the 1970s. They were also business partners and joint
shareholders in a property company called Vilindra. Land registry
records show that along with Gene Fagan they purchased a property at
7
Russell Street, Little Horton in Bradford on June 26th 1978.


As a result of their business dealings Holland claims to have been a
regular visitor to the Lumb and Kenningham offices between 1977 and
May 1981 when Sutcliffe was convicted.


Holland has stated that “when Lumb and Macgill got to see Sutcliffe
he
was unable to give full details on all the murders” and “when I asked
Derek Kenningham about this he told me, they had nothing on 6
murders”
and this was “not because Sutcliffe did not want to talk about the
murders” as “he was very talkative” about the other murders but
“because he does not know about them”.


The comments attributed to Lumb and Kenningham give some weight to a
number of stories that Peter Sutcliffe may not have murdered all of
the women he was convicted of.


In 1980 a major Sunday Times ‘Insight’ piece claimed that Assistant
Chief Constable George Oldfield, who took overall control of the
chase
for the Ripper after the murder of sixteen year old Jayne Macdonald
in
Leeds in June 1977 had said ‘Oldfield conceded to us – that there is
not one Ripper, but – at least –two.’


Later in 1989 R.J.P. Warren, deputy chairman of the West Yorkshire
Police Authority said “it was known in the top echelons of the police
that two men were involved in the series of murders.” Brian Marriner,
author of ‘A century of sex killers’ said “I don’t think now that
Sutcliffe did all the killings he confessed to.”


Holland further alleges that a senior Detective told him he knew the
man who became famous as ‘Wearside Jack’ after a tape was posted to
the police taunting them for not catching the Ripper. The voice,
which
was distinctive and located as from the Sunderland area caused the
police to concentrate their efforts on finding someone with a
Wearside
accent, this allowed Sutcliffe to escape arrest on the numerous
occasions he was questioned.


On May 22nd 1981 Sutcliffe was found guilty of the murder of 13 women
and seven attempted murders. He was jailed for life, with a
recommendation that he should serve at least thirty years.


Holland has lived in Australia since 1982 and has courted controversy
by his occasional willingness to talk about his work in the British
security organisation, M16 in the 1970s.


Neither Lumb nor Kenningham have so far been willing to comment on
Holland’s claims after letters were sent to them.


Watch out for the 'The Case of Tony Holland' out later this year from
RPM Publications


---------------------------------------------------------------------------­­-----


[JP/DOJ.1/2000]


State of Victoria


AFFIDAVIT


I, John Anthony Holland, Of 31 Kidman street, Yarraville, Melbourne,
3013 Australia, Retired mechanical engineer, make oath and say that:
That on Tuesday the 19 January 1981, two months after I had given my
prepared statement to Superintendent Dick Holland I had heard nothing
further from the police and I got a telephone call from Derek
Kenningham asking if I would come around to their office in Ivegate.


I was aware by then that Police had caught a most infamous person
nicknamed by the press as the “Yorkshire Ripper” and I was also aware
that the firm of Lumb and Kenningham were representing him. I was
impressed that my old partners were moving up in the world. I was
surprised that Derek wanted to see me however, and I guessed it was
about the taxation investigation, Derek said that nothing was amiss
about that matter, and that he was trying to fix it up. I agreed to
go
along in the afternoon to sort the “little” problems Derek might be
having. Derek indicated that those problems would only take a few
minutes.


When I arrived Derek’s wife, the receptionist, asked me to go
straight
in. Derek came straight to the point, in view of the recent
developments involving The Yorkshire Ripper, their new client Peter
Sutcliffe perhaps we should present a united front to the taxation
authorities to see if these matters could be dealt with as quietly as
possible.


I was only too happy to agree and I could see Derek was relived that
I
was on side to get these matters settled without fuss.
I then asked about Sutcliffe. Was he mad, bad likeable or what and I
admit to being as curious as most people who had follow the hunt for
this person, Derek was only too happy to talk to me about his famous
client.


I was told that Kerry McGill and Sutcliffe got on very well and that
Sutcliffe was receiving daily invitations from very famous solicitors
who wanted to represent him but he was refusing to budge and Jack and
he were confident that they would take the matter all the way to
trial. McGill was spending a lot of time at Armely prison he said.


Derek added that Jack and Kerry would shortly be traveling to London
to talk to the DPP and he mentioned a man called David Kyle about the
plea that Sutcliffe wanted to make admissions to murdering only 4
people and not all 13 as the press were claiming.


I recall Derek saying clearly that Police had given them two
different
blood groupings, one for Sutcliffe and one for another man, and that
police were indicating that Sutcliffe may only be a copy cat.


I was staggered by this and sat there as Derek kept on talking about
fate and how strange it is that Kerry had at one time been stopped by
police for cruising in a red light area, and questioned as a Ripper
suspect apparently McGill lived somewhere in Manningham and was
stopped on his way home and questioned.


After about fifteen minutes, Derek indicated he had another
appointment soon and that I should telephone later on in the month to
see how things were progressing regarding the taxation business.


I was happy to be leaving on such an up beat note.


I saw Derek four more times after that; one time Jack attended. Three
of those times were with Derek alone and were no more than a casual
hello in the street with me asking if things moving along
satisfactorily to which Derek usually said yes but one day he stopped
to arrange a lunch with himself and Jack for later that week Thursday
26th February.


Lunch was at a spot all three of us had previously eaten, the pub at
the top of Ivegate. The pub offered discrete surroundings for a quite
conversation about what Derek could achieve with the taxation
department and how soon that matter could be resolved to the
satisfaction of all parties.


Derek as usual was the talker, he confirmed that Peter Nixon, his
firms accountants had been in touch with Sue Thompson to indicate a
misunderstanding may have taken place, but he said Thompson had not
been happy with Nixon’s position and wanted to continue the
investigation.


Jack said he was going to try to head off any embarrassment either by
going directly to Dick Holland who he knew well or through his new
friend at the DPP, David Kyle.


As we were leaving the Pub and walking down the hill towards the
office of Lumb and Kenningham, Jack pointed to the bottom of the
hill,
and said that he had just seen Dick Holland walking by. Jack hurried
of to catch up saying this was as good a time as any to see Dick.


I do not know the outcome of that meeting and Derek was never in the
office when I phoned to inquire about it during the following 4 or 5
weeks. My last phone call to ask Derek about the taxation matters was
around the end of March 1981, his wife informed me he was with a
client and could not be disturbed.


On the 7th April 1981, I begun a remarkable series of problems it has
taken me 23 years to unravel.


---------------------------------------------------------------------------­­-----


Crown Court Judge who represented Peter Sutcliffe maintains 'his
right
to silence'


Mark Metcalf
c/o RPM Publications
BCM Box 3328
London WC1N 3XX
www.red-star-research.org.uk
revopermin...@ukonline.co.uk
0845 345 3958 or 07967 886257


Reference ­ Tony Holland, ex-Bradford resident and Peter Sutcliffe


His Honour
Kerry Macgill
Combined Crown Court
The Courthouse
1 Oxford row
Leeds LS1 3BG


October 26th 2004


Dear Mr Macgill,


I am an independent publisher and freelance journalist, who has had
articles published in a range of newspapers such as the Guardian, The
Independent, The Big Issue and New Statesman as well as many places
abroad.


I have been researching the case of Mr Tony Holland, once of Bradford
and now living in Melbourne in Australia, where he is a successful
businessman. Mr Holland was convicted of handling stolen goods at
Bradford Crown Court in 1981
[see attached article] and sent to prison for one year, reduced on
appeal to six months after the Law Lords agreed that the main witness
against him was ‘’a young man lying on oath’’.


I have undertaken an extensive examination of Mr Holland’s claims,
which has included thoroughly looking in to his claim to have worked
for the security services, MI6. Mr Holland believes that his
conviction may be related to his intimate knowledge of the case
against Peter Sutcliffe, the Yorkshire Ripper.


Mr Holland was in a business partnership with your employers at the
time, John [Jack] Lumb and Derek Kenningham [both of whom I have
written to on this matter, with no reply from either] and this
partnership had turned sour. He regularly visited the offices and
spoke to Mr Lumb and Mr Kenningham throughout 1981, I also understand
that you were present on a number of these occasions, which if not
true then I am sure you will deny.


Mr Holland alleges that both Mr Lumb and Mr Kenningham told him that
Peter Sutcliffe could not possibly have committed all of the crimes
has was charged with, and that whilst he was able and willing to
recount events of some of the murders and attacks he had no knowledge
of others. This would, of course, mean that if Sutcliffe didn’t do
all
the murders then someone else must have. And that person, unless they
have been arrested for something else, would remain free.


At first I must admit that I viewed Mr Holland’s ideas and its
implications as ridiculous, but after I started to examine the
charges
and prosecution of Mr Sutcliffe it became clear that on many
occasions
police officers at the time said there were two people involved, both
working independently of each other. And recently I met Ron Warren,
deputy chairman of West Yorkshire Police Authority who has recounted
that George Oldfield told him there were two people involved. I have
also now read a book by Noel O’Gara called ‘the Real Yorkshire
Ripper’
and I have become more and more concerned.


Mr O’Gara has sent me a copy of a letter he was handing out in Leeds
on October 21st, which if I may say so contains some extremely
damaging allegations against you. I would like to request an
opportunity to meet with you and discuss them, I am sure you will
want
to refute them.


I would also like to discuss whether you, as Peter Sutcliffe’s
solicitor ever undertook an independent examination of his claims to
have committed each of the crimes he confessed to? Did you for
example, visit the scene of each crime to ascertain that his
confession fitted the facts, did you try and obtain independent
verification that what he was saying was true?


I look forward to hearing from you as soon as possible. I can be
contacted by post, e-mail or telephone as detailed above.


Yours faithfully


Mark Metcalfe

.