00:00:00
[audio logo] NARRATOR:<i> Every fraud</i>
<i> begins with a promise.</i>
00:00:07
VICKY THAKORDAS-DESAI: She
paid for their weddings. She paid for various trips. She wanted to look after
them as best as she could.
00:00:15
NARRATOR:<i> A quick</i>
<i> fortune, easy money, or</i>
00:00:17
<i> a life transformed overnight.</i> PETER JOYCE: She
would have left
00:00:21
a reasonable estate behind. It had been a sizeable
sum of money. NARRATOR:<i> But behind</i>
<i> these illusions</i>
00:00:27
<i> lie calculated</i>
<i> deceptions, carefully</i> <i> hidden in plain sight.</i>
00:00:31
POPPY EVERTON:
It's not uncommon for us to see economic abuse
mixed with psychological abuse
00:00:35
or coercive control. FIONA HOTSTON MOORE:
It's relatively easy with online
banking for someone
00:00:42
to help or coerce
someone into transferring money out of their investments
into another bank account.
00:00:49
NARRATOR:<i> Sometimes</i>
<i> these criminals</i> <i> are backed into a corner</i>
<i> and feel their only way out</i>
00:00:54
<i> is to kill.</i> SHEILA ANDERSON: It
just feel very, very sad that somebody would want money
so desperately that you'd
00:01:02
have to end somebody's life. [exhilarating music] - My name is Emma Wilson,
and I'm a fire scientist.
00:01:26
I investigate fires, usually
on behalf of the police. Usually the primary
investigator.
00:01:32
So I attend a fire
scene when I'm invited to, to work out where
it started, how it started,
00:01:38
and, if possible, to help
with who might have started it, if there is a who. NARRATOR:<i> In the early</i>
<i> hours of December 15, 2021,</i>
00:01:48
<i> a fire was reported</i>
<i> in the suburbs</i> <i> of Newark, Nottinghamshire.</i>
00:01:54
EMMA WILSON: I
first got involved in this case when
I was contacted by Nottinghamshire police.
00:01:59
I was told that it was
a domestic fire, that there had been a fatality. The victim's name was
Elizabeth Vamplew.
00:02:09
I was told that it had
been investigated by a team initially, but their findings
were inconclusive
00:02:17
and that they needed
a second opinion in order to be able to confirm the route
that the investigation
00:02:23
should go. NARRATOR:<i> Elizabeth Vamplew</i>
<i> was a 77-year-old mother and</i>
00:02:29
<i> grandmother,</i>
<i> and a familiar face</i> <i> amongst the tight</i>
<i> knit community</i>
00:02:33
<i> of her quiet cul-de-sac.</i> - I'm Sheila Anderson. I was born and bred
in Newark, and
00:02:40
I came down here
to live in a bungalow because of my disability. Elizabeth was a very,
very lovely woman.
00:02:48
When I opened the paper and I
saw that, I was really shocked. I couldn't believe it.
00:02:53
It was just something that
you don't hear of all the time and knew it like that.
00:03:02
- My name is Poppy Everton. I work for Hourglass
Safe Aging. Elizabeth was a really
warm and caring person,
00:03:10
somebody that was always
going out of her way to support and help the people
around her and her loved ones.
00:03:16
She was a devoted
mother and grandmother, really enjoyed spending
time with her grandkids.
00:03:21
That was when she
was at her happiest. She ultimately
loved Christmas, and her family often talk
about how that time of year
00:03:28
brought her such joy. Very, very well liked
amongst family, friends, and the community as a whole.
00:03:34
NARRATOR:<i> Elizabeth was most</i>
<i> happy tending her small but</i>
00:03:37
<i> well-kept garden</i>
<i> and spoiling her three</i> <i> beloved grandchildren.</i>
00:03:43
- We also know that Elizabeth
would help with money or gifts for her family, whether that
be at birthdays, Christmases.
00:03:50
And just making sure that
they felt supported by her. - My name is Dr.
Vicky Thakordas-Desai,
00:03:57
and I am a consultant
forensic psychologist. Elizabeth seemed to be
a doting and caring mother.
00:04:07
She clearly loved her children. She wanted the best for them. She had supported
them financially.
00:04:13
She paid for their weddings,
she paid for various trips for them, and it
just seemed that she
00:04:19
wanted to look after them
as best as she could. NARRATOR:<i> Elizabeth</i>
<i> suffered from limited</i>
00:04:24
<i> mobility and required visits</i>
<i> from nurses twice a day.</i>
00:04:29
- My name is Peter
Joyce, King's Counsel, and I was the lead
prosecutor in the case.
00:04:35
Elizabeth was very disabled,
her breathing was poor, her mobility was very poor.
00:04:41
She had to go around
in a wheelchair. She was put to bed. She was got up. She was basically looked after.
00:04:48
She was all but bedbound,
but not quite. NARRATOR:<i> One</i>
<i> of Elizabeth's nurses</i>
00:04:54
<i> was her daughter-in-law,</i>
<i> Karen Vamplew.</i> SHEILA ANDERSON: Well,
actually, I bumped into Karen
00:05:01
a time or two,
and I've spoken to her and we've just said
hello, and she just
00:05:06
seemed an ordinary
person like myself. POPPY EVERTON: Karen was an
informal carer for Elizabeth,
00:05:14
so although Elizabeth had
paid carers coming in, Karen was helping her
with particular things
00:05:20
that she may have
needed support with. VICKY THAKORDAS-DESAI:
By Karen regularly
00:05:24
checking in on Elizabeth
and being present for her, it seems that Elizabeth would
have felt a sense of trust
00:05:31
and safety around Karen. Here was somebody who was
looking after her, who wanted
00:05:37
to ensure her well-being. NARRATOR:<i> Karen Vamplew</i>
<i> was a 41-year-old</i>
00:05:42
<i> mother of four who was known</i>
<i> to have financial difficulties.</i>
00:05:47
PETER JOYCE: Karen
Vamplew was married to Elizabeth Vamplew son. Karen had trouble
making ends meet.
00:05:54
There's no question about that. VICKY THAKORDAS-DESAI:
Chronic financial stress
00:05:58
can be very debilitating
for an individual. So the level
of pressure that she would have been
under to pay off
00:06:08
her debts, to support her
family would have been immense. NARRATOR:<i> At 1:25 AM</i>
<i> on December 15, 2021,</i>
00:06:22
<i> Karen Vamplew called</i>
<i> emergency services to report</i>
00:06:26
<i> a fire at Elizabeth's home.</i> - The version of events
given by Karen
00:06:32
was that she had woken up in
the early hours of the morning. Had become nervous
around her mother-in-law
00:06:42
and wanted to check on her. She drove to the property,
said that when she got there,
00:06:48
she had realized she'd
forgotten her keys and couldn't remember
the number for the key safe.
00:06:53
- She said she'd gone there
to look because she had not had a call from Elizabeth.
00:06:58
EMMA WILSON: So she tried
to raise her mother-in-law by knocking on the door
and the windows
00:07:03
and could not get
any attention. But she also doesn't describe
seeing, hearing, or smelling
00:07:07
anything else at that time. My understanding is
that she was initially present for a significant
period of time
00:07:13
when she couldn't find her
keys and couldn't access the key lock according to her.
00:07:18
She then says that she goes
back home to retrieve her key, but that she'd only left
the area for around 10 minutes
00:07:26
and then returned. And when she returns,
she opens the front door to Elizabeth's bungalow
and immediately sees smoke.
00:07:34
PETER JOYCE: She said that
she'd found the fire light. She said that she'd gone
in and pressed an alarm button.
00:07:41
EMMA WILSON: Then
Karen immediately contacts the fire service. NARRATOR:<i> Fire</i>
<i> services took just</i>
00:07:50
<i> five minutes to respond,</i>
<i> arriving at Elizabeth's home</i>
00:07:54
<i> at 1:30 AM.</i> EMMA WILSON: When
the fire service arrived, Karen has then explained
to the fire crews
00:08:03
and to the fire investigator
that her mother-in-law was a heavy smoker and had
a habit of smoking in bed.
00:08:10
NARRATOR:<i> When firemen</i>
<i> entered the blazing property,</i>
00:08:13
<i> they encountered</i>
<i> intense heat and</i> <i> smoke 2 feet from the floor.</i>
00:08:18
<i> They found Elizabeth crouched</i>
<i> at the foot of her bed.</i>
00:08:23
PETER JOYCE: Elizabeth
had to be rescued by two very brave
firemen who got her out alive, despite the fact
she was grievously injured.
00:08:34
She was saying something
about cigarettes to the nurse at the hospital. NARRATOR:<i> Elizabeth</i>
<i> was suffering</i>
00:08:42
<i> from burns to 80% of her</i>
<i> body and from the effects</i>
00:08:45
<i> of smoke inhalation.</i> - Elizabeth was recovered
outside by the firefighters
00:08:51
and that she was later taken
to hospital and died there. - All over the television,
Facebook, social media
00:09:00
and in the Newark advertiser. And it was
in the Newark advertiser that I read all
about it properly.
00:09:07
I feel very, very sad
that the lady had to die. NARRATOR:<i> On December 15, 2021,</i>
<i> 77-year-old Elizabeth Vamplew</i>
00:09:23
<i> died after being rescued</i>
<i> from her burning home,</i>
00:09:27
<i> and police immediately</i>
<i> launched an investigation.</i>
00:09:31
EMMA WILSON: When
I was first told that there had
been a fatality, I was told that she was
an elderly lady who
00:09:38
lived in an address on her
own, that she had carers come to help her on a daily
basis in the morning
00:09:44
and in the evening. And that she was largely
bedbound and needed help to move around.
00:09:51
I was also told that she had
a son and a daughter-in-law who were part of her
family group, and
00:09:59
that her daughter-in-law was
part of her care group at times as well. NARRATOR:<i> In the initial</i>
<i> stages of the investigation,</i>
00:10:10
<i> police had little evidence</i>
<i> to suggest the fire</i>
00:10:13
<i> was not caused</i>
<i> by Elizabeth dropping</i> <i> a cigarette in her bedroom.</i>
00:10:17
EMMA WILSON: The information
that Karen Vamplew gave to the fire investigation
team at that initial stage was
00:10:23
that Elizabeth was
a very heavy smoker and tended to smoke in bed. However, information
from the carers
00:10:30
was that she did not
smoke in her bed. She smoked once in the morning
and once in the evening.
00:10:37
PETER JOYCE: Elizabeth was
quite canny in some ways because she pretended
she didn't smoke, but did
00:10:46
and hid the cigarette
end in the kitchen or smoked outside the door. But she was also very
careful about smoking
00:10:54
because whenever she
finished her cigarette, she would put it
out under a tap and hide it away
to get rid of it.
00:11:02
EMMA WILSON: The information
about smoking in her bed was only ever
received from Karen.
00:11:07
So that was the route that
the initial investigation team followed, that
she was a heavy smoker.
00:11:12
Their conclusion
was that the fire was most likely
the cause of a dropped lit cigarette in the bed.
00:11:19
NARRATOR:<i> As part</i>
<i> of the initial investigation,</i>
00:11:22
<i> both Elizabeth's son</i>
<i> and daughter-in-law, Karen,</i>
00:11:24
<i> were questioned by police.</i> - He was very angry that-- that had happened to him.
00:11:33
Quite clearly been
at home on the night of his mother's death. There was nothing
to do with him.
00:11:38
NARRATOR:<i> Police</i>
<i> were particularly</i> <i> interested in questioning</i>
<i> Karen about her movements</i>
00:11:42
<i> on the night Elizabeth died.</i> PETER JOYCE: She
said she'd gone
00:11:46
there to look because she had
not had a call from Elizabeth. Her account was
she found the fire
00:11:51
and had gone round
by chance that night. That was the basic story. There was CCTV evidence
of her leaving her home.
00:12:00
There was evidence of her car
arriving and being parked quite near to Elizabeth's home.
00:12:07
There was CCTV
evidence of her running away from the first
visit back to her car,
00:12:15
not walking-- running. There was CCTV evidence
of her getting home, carrying what looked like a towel.
00:12:22
There was more CCTV
evidence of her coming out of her house, again, about two
minutes later, having changed,
00:12:30
and going back, purporting
then to find the house on fire. NARRATOR:<i> Police</i>
<i> also discovered</i>
00:12:37
<i> Karen contacted</i>
<i> the home insurance</i> <i> company the very day that</i>
<i> Elizabeth had died in the fire.</i>
00:12:44
VICKY THAKORDAS-DESAI:
Karen contacted the insurers on the same
day her mother-in-law dies.
00:12:49
And it really just
shows how insensitive she was to the situation. But equally, it
raised suspicions.
00:13:01
NARRATOR:<i> In early</i>
<i> 2022, police decided</i> <i> to take a more</i>
<i> detailed look into</i>
00:13:06
<i> Karen Vamplew's background.</i> EMMA WILSON: I was
given very little detail
00:13:11
about the background
of the case. It helps me to remain unbiased
since my initial examination
00:13:18
of the information. My understanding is that there
was some fraud aspect to it involving financial
gain of Karen
00:13:28
taking money from Elizabeth. - Karen was hard
up, no question. Karen Vamplew's main interest
in life, it seemed to me,
00:13:39
was actually money for Karen. Karen needed Elizabeth's
money to make ends meet to maintain
her lifestyle
00:13:49
with her husband and kids. NARRATOR:<i> Despite having no</i>
<i> previous criminal record,</i>
00:13:54
<i> police discovered</i>
<i> that Karen had</i> <i> been accused of financial</i>
<i> misdealings in the past.</i>
00:14:00
PETER JOYCE: She had
a previous relationship, which had ended when it was suggested
that she'd taken money,
00:14:06
and she then dumped that
particular friend or male friend when that came out. She wasn't charged with
anything about that,
00:14:14
but she was
investigated about it. NARRATOR:<i> Police</i>
<i> also discovered</i>
00:14:19
<i> that in the weeks</i>
<i> leading up to her death,</i>
00:14:21
<i> Karen made a number</i>
<i> of cash withdrawals</i> <i> from Elizabeth's account.</i>
00:14:26
- I looked at all
the banking evidence. I looked at the evidence
of Elizabeth's expenses,
00:14:31
which we saw down the years,
some of the material that she'd given to Karen
or money she'd given to Karen
00:14:37
were legitimate, but very few. - My name is Fiona
Hotston Moore, and I'm a forensic accountant
and expert witness.
00:14:50
Typically when we're looking
at someone like Elizabeth and they're a bit older and
perhaps spending a lot of time
00:14:57
at home, we expect to see
fairly modest expenditure. We would see small amounts
for looking after themselves,
00:15:06
maybe the odd gift
to the family members and then regular
payments to their carers.
00:15:11
So it's a very
consistent pattern. POPPY EVERTON: When Karen
was interviewed by police
00:15:16
several times,
at a certain point, it was disclosed that
some of the bills for Karen and her husband were
actually in Elizabeth's name.
00:15:25
And the reason that
was given for this was that ultimately,
the company was potentially
00:15:30
going to cut Karen and her
partner off due to the debts potentially that
had accrued already.
00:15:36
And so they had put this
in Elizabeth's name. Karen did mention that
Elizabeth was aware of this.
00:15:42
- If I was looking
at the records and I noticed that someone was
paying someone else's bills,
00:15:49
then that could
potentially be a red flag. Why would they be paying them? It could be out
of the kindness of their heart,
00:15:55
but it could suggest
that actually, they weren't aware they were
paying someone else's bills
00:15:59
or there was a level
of coercion going on. NARRATOR:<i> When police examined</i>
<i> Elizabeth's bank statements,</i>
00:16:06
<i> the number of unusual</i>
<i> cash withdrawals</i> <i> led investigators to suspect</i>
<i> that Elizabeth had been</i>
00:16:12
<i> the victim of economic abuse.</i> - I think older people,
the most common form of abuse
00:16:18
is economic abuse. It's often for some
form of financial gain, so it's not uncommon
for us to see
00:16:24
economic abuse mixed
with psychological abuse or coercive control. PETER JOYCE: Karen was
one of Elizabeth's carers.
00:16:34
Karen played on that to have
access to Elizabeth's finances. POPPY EVERTON: Often,
the power dynamic,
00:16:43
when there are care and support
needs for the victims, can be worrying when
that person who's
00:16:49
delivering that care and
support is ultimately somebody who has their own
gain in mind, and
00:16:55
somebody who needs that
level of care and support, is going to be very
dependent on that person
00:17:01
to provide that for them. And unfortunately, that puts
them in the perfect position
00:17:06
to exploit that power. VICKY THAKORDAS-DESAI: Karen
was in a trusted position. She was supporting
Elizabeth, and
00:17:13
it is possible that because she
was helping her in her day to day activities,
that she felt
00:17:19
entitled to something
from Elizabeth and entitled to that money. POPPY EVERTON: Karen admitted
in a police interview
00:17:27
that she felt that Elizabeth
was quite well off, money wise in her opinion. And ultimately, Elizabeth
was in a position
00:17:35
where she owned the bungalow
that she lived in. She was able to pay
independently
00:17:41
for carers, for a cleaner,
for a gardener and to Karen, who was
in significant financial
00:17:48
dire straits. Ultimately, this would
have potentially been an area of real resentment.
00:17:58
NARRATOR:<i> Police discovered</i>
<i> around April 2021,</i>
00:18:01
<i> Elizabeth had approximately</i>
<i> 27,000 pounds in her bank</i>
00:18:05
<i> account, but the balance began</i>
<i> to dwindle soon after Karen</i>
00:18:10
<i> became Elizabeth's nurse.</i> - It's relatively easy with
online banking for someone
00:18:17
to help or coerce someone
into transferring money out of their investments
into another bank account,
00:18:25
and it's potentially
difficult to trace that happening until it's happened.
00:18:32
PETER JOYCE: It shows
a gradual denuding of the account of Elizabeth's
money and going down
00:18:37
and down and down. And you could see transactions
happening, which were clearly for Karen's benefit.
00:18:44
Karen was doing much
of her shopping and things on Elizabeth's account. She had access to the card.
00:18:50
We could see where
the money had been spent, and then you could see how
the account had been basically
00:18:57
reduced over the months
from the moment Karen became a carer with the card. VICKY THAKORDAS-DESAI:
It is possible
00:19:06
that Karen started
to rationalize in own mind that she was entitled
to some of this money.
00:19:12
She was caring for Elizabeth. She was checking in on her. She was doing her
day-to-day errands.
00:19:19
So Karen may have felt a sense
of entitlement to those funds. POPPY EVERTON: Hourglass
did a piece of research
00:19:30
a few years ago, and one in
four people that were spoken to did not think that taking
money from an older relatives
00:19:38
bank account or precious
items from their home counted as abuse. And this is unfortunately a--
00:19:46
a societal issue as a whole. This notion
of entitlement that if you provide care and support
for somebody,
00:19:54
you are entitled to money. You're entitled to belongings. It's just not true.
00:19:59
You provide care and support
for somebody in your family because you want to provide
care and support for them that
00:20:05
doesn't come with
strings attached, or it shouldn't come
with strings attached.
00:20:09
But ultimately, people do
feel entitled to some form of gain from that. And that's where these
situations in domestic abuse
00:20:16
can really escalate and the
risk can really escalate. FIONA HOTSTON MOORE:
In cases such as Elizabeth,
00:20:23
we would also look at their
wider financial investments. So we'd be looking
at any ISAs and savings
00:20:29
and so on that they've got and
seeing whether those ISAs and savings were still
there, or was
00:20:35
there evidence
that actually those had been drawn from as well. NARRATOR:<i> Police also</i>
<i> discovered that in the days</i>
00:20:41
<i> leading up to her death,</i>
<i> 10,000 pounds was withdrawn</i>
00:20:46
<i> from Elizabeth's</i>
<i> individual savings account,</i>
00:20:49
<i> known as an ISA.</i> POPPY EVERTON: This
essentially goes to show the access that
Karen does have, not
00:20:56
only to Elizabeth's
account, but we have to think about how
she may have coerced that
00:21:03
from Elizabeth and what
the conversations may have been to lead to that, whether
it's emotional manipulation,
00:21:10
whether it's coercive control
and the level of threat there. There are lots and lots
of ways that people
00:21:15
can use to essentially
manipulate and exploit older people for financial gain. VICKY THAKORDAS-DESAI: Karen
was in a position of trust.
00:21:25
Elizabeth had trusted her
with access to her accounts. And over time, Karen took
advantage of that trust
00:21:33
and drained Elizabeth's
account of her savings. This tells me that Karen had
really started to see Elizabeth
00:21:44
as a means to an end. Elizabeth was a financial
source for her. It seems that Karen had
stopped seeing Elizabeth as a--
00:21:55
as a human being,
and she was reduced to an object that could satisfy
her own needs and desires.
00:22:11
NARRATOR:<i> During</i>
<i> their investigation</i> <i> into Elizabeth</i>
<i> Vamplew's death, police</i>
00:22:16
<i> discovered that the day before</i>
<i> Elizabeth died in the house</i>
00:22:19
<i> fire, Karen Vamplew accompanied</i>
<i> her mother-in-law to the bank.</i>
00:22:25
PETER JOYCE: The bank was
saying, before we authorize funds, any more
payments on the card,
00:22:31
we want to see
the older Mrs. Vamplew. In other words, Elizabeth
to see whether or not she
00:22:38
was being taken advantage
of by the user of the card. Elizabeth was bedbound, and
Karen did something with regard
00:22:47
to the phone that stopped the
bank getting in touch directly with Elizabeth, like
turning off the answering
00:22:55
machine, something like that. But she prevented
the bank getting directly to Elizabeth while she
Karen, was milking the account.
00:23:03
NARRATOR:<i> When the bank were</i>
<i> unable to speak with Elizabeth</i>
00:23:06
<i> on the phone, the bank limited</i>
<i> Elizabeth's spending to just</i>
00:23:10
<i> 5 pounds per transaction.</i> - And that's when the bank
put a stop on the card.
00:23:17
And effectively,
that's when the goose stopped laid the golden egg. It's also the time, I
think, when Elizabeth first
00:23:23
became really aware as to just
how extensive Karen's raiding of her account had been.
00:23:30
POPPY EVERTON: On the 14th
of December 2021, Karen accompanied
Elizabeth to the bank.
00:23:36
And this is something that we
may see in situations where that perpetrator will
attend appointments,
00:23:43
whether at a bank, a GP
surgery with social care with that victim, because
ultimately, what this does
00:23:50
is if that victim is concerned
that something's going on or something untoward
maybe happening,
00:23:56
particularly with
their finances, because Karen went
with Elizabeth. It leaves very little
room for any disclosures
00:24:03
to be made to bank staff
or to any other professionals that we see in these
situations as well.
00:24:10
PETER JOYCE: And it's
almost certain that that was the first
time that Elizabeth really
00:24:13
understood just how
Karen had been milking Elizabeth's account,
because there was
00:24:20
virtually nothing left in it. It was very, very depleted
by her daughter-in-law.
00:24:26
For the first time,
Elizabeth knew just what had been happening to her money. NARRATOR:<i> After</i>
<i> examining bank records,</i>
00:24:36
<i> police discovered that</i>
<i> in just eight months,</i>
00:24:39
<i> Elizabeth's account</i>
<i> balance dropped</i> <i> from 27,000 to 105 pounds.</i>
00:24:46
POPPY EVERTON: It's very
likely that during that trip to the bank, Elizabeth
realized how much money had
00:24:52
been taken out of her account. The vast differences
with what should be in there to her
knowledge and
00:24:58
what was actually
in the account, and it may be
at that point, she has become aware that
she has been exploited
00:25:04
by her daughter-in-law, Karen. And ultimately,
in that moment, you have to consider the horror,
the betrayal, the concerns
00:25:13
about money worries,
because not only has this been done by somebody in a
position of trust and somebody
00:25:19
within the family,
so that betrayal is going to be very much overwhelming. NARRATOR:<i> The trip</i>
<i> to the bank was</i>
00:25:25
<i> less than 24 hours</i>
<i> before the fire that</i> <i> would take Elizabeth's life.</i>
00:25:31
- There was not really much
time for Elizabeth to react. And if she was made aware
during that trip to the bank
00:25:38
the financial
economic abuse that was happening from
her daughter-in-law, it is quite suspicious
that the incident
00:25:45
happened the following day. And similarly, something
that we see as a charity when there are grandchildren
in a situation, an older person
00:25:56
may not choose
to report to the police because ultimately, they do not
want to criminalize the parents
00:26:02
of their grandchildren. PETER JOYCE: The day after the
visit to the bank, two things
00:26:07
happened, I think. Elizabeth found out
what had been happening. And the day after, the money
had ceased for Karen.
00:26:17
Elizabeth had ceased
to be of use to Karen. She was only
a burden now in terms of having to care for her.
00:26:24
And so she killed her. NARRATOR:<i> With police now</i>
<i> believing that Elizabeth</i>
00:26:35
<i> was the victim of economic</i>
<i> abuse before she died,</i>
00:26:38
<i> fire expert Emma</i>
<i> Wilson was brought</i> <i> in to determine exactly where</i>
<i> and how the fire was started.</i>
00:26:46
- The damage at the bungalow
was relatively limited. It was primarily
restricted to the bedroom
00:26:53
that Elizabeth used. There was some damage
that had come out into the hallway
of the bungalow,
00:26:59
and some smoke damage had
spread to some of the rooms where doors had been opened.
00:27:03
However, information
from the carers was that she did not
smoke in her bed. PETER JOYCE:
Elizabeth didn't take
00:27:11
cigarettes into her bedroom. She normally smoked
at the kitchen door so the smell would
not invade the house.
00:27:18
She didn't want the smell
in the house, which was another feature
why you wouldn't have
00:27:22
her smoking in her bedroom. And she always took great care
to get rid of the evidence
00:27:27
of having smoked. NARRATOR:<i> Emma was also</i>
<i> skeptical of Karen Vamplew's</i>
00:27:32
<i> account that she hadn't noticed</i>
<i> the fire when she first arrived</i>
00:27:35
<i> at her mother-in-law's home.</i> - So Karen's story
didn't make sense,
00:27:40
because if she had been outside
that front door of the bungalow 10 minutes prior to her
entering it and alerting
00:27:48
the fire service
to a large flaming fire, I would have expected her to
have heard the smoke detector,
00:27:54
smelled smoke, or seen
smoke as she looked through the letter slot. And therefore to have alerted
the fire service at that point
00:28:03
of a fire within the property. As a fire scientist,
my issue with that is there is
a difference in the way
00:28:10
that flaming fires
and smoldering fires burn. Smoldering fires develop
with large amounts
00:28:17
of smoke but no flames. They can take a minimum of 10
minutes on the right materials,
00:28:23
but more likely 20, 30
minutes or several hours to develop into a flaming fire. Whereas a flaming
fire or a fire
00:28:30
started by a lighter,
or a match, that continues
as a flaming fire for its entire
duration and only
00:28:37
takes minutes
to really take hold. So there is a big
difference in the timing factors of those
different types of fires.
00:28:46
NARRATOR:<i> Emma Wilson</i>
<i> and the forensic team</i>
00:28:48
<i> examined photographic</i>
<i> evidence from the fire</i>
00:28:51
<i> to determine if she believed</i>
<i> the fire had been started</i>
00:28:54
<i> by Elizabeth smoking in bed.</i> EMMA WILSON: The only
evidence of smoking materials
00:29:00
that I saw in the images
was in the kitchen. PETER JOYCE: They
went into great detail
00:29:05
as to where the fire
had started. I mean, they looked
in the kitchen for things like cigarettes
and the ashtray.
00:29:13
- I did ask the initial
investigation team if they found anything
amongst the debris.
00:29:18
The reason I asked
that is because when something like a lighter
is burnt in a fire,
00:29:23
it doesn't look like
a lighter anymore. All you have are
the metallic parts.
00:29:27
So you have the lighter shroud,
you have the flint wheel, but you don't have
the plastic bodies.
00:29:33
I asked the initial
investigation team if they'd found
anything like that, and they said they had not.
00:29:40
NARRATOR:<i> The forensic</i>
<i> team decided</i> <i> to carry out a series</i>
<i> of tests to replicate</i>
00:29:44
<i> the start of the fire using</i>
<i> samples of Elizabeth's bedding.</i>
00:29:49
EMMA WILSON: As part
of their investigation, they did carry out some
laboratory-based burning tests.
00:29:55
These were small
scale tests based on fragments of the bedding
and the mattress recovered from the scene.
00:30:03
The tests that were done,
however, were inconclusive. This is likely because there'd
been a fire-- firefighters
00:30:10
had extinguished the fire
with quite a lot of water, so the materials that
they used were no
00:30:16
longer in their primary state. So they were wet,
and they'd probably suffered from being packaged in
plastic packaging for a while
00:30:23
afterwards as well. The conclusion
that they reached was that with those materials,
it did not cause a fire.
00:30:31
But given that they
had been altered by the addition
of firefighting water that they couldn't be sure
that under other conditions,
00:30:39
such as the materials
being dry, that it could not
have caused a fire. NARRATOR:<i> Emma Wilson</i>
<i> decided to carry</i>
00:30:48
<i> out more elaborate</i>
<i> tests to determine</i> <i> the cause of the fire.</i>
00:30:53
EMMA WILSON: I made
two recommendations. One, recommendation
was to carry out a new series of burning tests
to use dry materials that
00:31:04
were the same or as similar
as possible to those that Elizabeth had
in her property.
00:31:10
And that meant getting
the same type of mattress, getting bedding
of the same type,
00:31:15
and also washing
it and making sure that it had some wear to it
so that it wasn't brand new.
00:31:20
And then setting
up a burning test so that we could
see whether or not on these dry materials
that were as close as
00:31:27
possible to the ones
Elizabeth had, whether or not we could start
a fire using a cigarette.
00:31:33
PETER JOYCE: They did
all sorts of tests. They did do tests
with a fire expert. They did it
in a shipping container
00:31:39
with identical mattress,
identical things. They needed to prove
that Elizabeth hadn't
00:31:45
set fire to the bed herself. EMMA WILSON: We set up
a mattress with the bedding.
00:31:53
We carried out
several tests using cigarettes, all of the same
brand that Elizabeth smoked.
00:31:58
We would light
them and we would put them in different
positions within the bedding.
00:32:02
That included partial
covering with the duvet, that included putting
it on the pillow
00:32:07
and on the mattress with
the sheet on it itself. So we did several
tests and none of them
00:32:12
initiated even
a smoldering fire. The final test
that we carried out involved applying a flame
to the corner of the bed,
00:32:21
and that initiated
a fire immediately. The fire that we lit
caused fire damage in a very similar
pattern to what could be
00:32:32
seen in Elizabeth's bedroom. It was my opinion
in my review process that this was not an accidental
death at that stage.
00:32:44
So it means that somebody
set the fire rather than it being a dropped lit cigarette.
00:32:53
I think it was at this
point that the investigation team were confident
that they could
00:32:59
say that this fire was
caused by a person applying a flame to the bedding. PETER JOYCE: They completely
disproved any idea
00:33:10
that a cigarette,
a lit cigarette could have caused the fire
to Elizabeth's bed.
00:33:16
And they proved
that the only way the fire could
have been started was by a live flame ignition.
00:33:28
NARRATOR:
<i> On September 27, 2023,</i> <i> Karen Vamplew is</i>
<i> rearrested and charged</i>
00:33:34
<i> with the murder of her</i>
<i> mother-in-law, Elizabeth.</i>
00:33:38
PETER JOYCE: Having spoken
to two CPS lawyers, I think, it was quite apparent,
having spoken to them
00:33:44
that they'd come
to the conclusion she should-- she should
be prosecuted. I'm bound to say, my reaction
was exactly the same.
00:33:51
She must be. And the fact that Elizabeth was
bedbound at the top of the bed and the fire started
at the foot of the bed, clearly
00:34:01
meant that someone
else had lit it. The case was with a lighter. The report proved that it
was caused by naked flame.
00:34:11
Now, that would
not have been, and could not have been at the foot
of the bed done by Elizabeth.
00:34:18
So there's one obvious person-- Karen. NARRATOR:<i> In April</i>
<i> 2024, Karen Vamplew</i>
00:34:36
<i> stood trial</i>
<i> at Leicester Crown Court</i> <i> for the murder</i>
<i> of her mother-in-law,</i>
00:34:40
<i> Elizabeth Vamplew.</i> PETER JOYCE: It was emotion. The emotion in the dock
was the defendant
00:34:46
looking at photographs
of her children throughout. The emotion in the public
gallery was her husband.
00:34:53
VICKY THAKORDAS-DESAI:
Karen would have known that by killing Elizabeth,
that was going
00:34:56
to bring a tremendous
amount of grief and loss to her husband and the family. Yet, it seems that she
justified her actions
00:35:05
by convincing herself that
the ends justified the means that her husband was going
to inherit the money,
00:35:14
that Elizabeth
was old and frail and that removing
that pain for her. It is possible that she
justified all of those things.
00:35:27
NARRATOR:<i> Despite</i>
<i> pleading not guilty,</i> <i> Karen Vamplew did not</i>
<i> give evidence in court.</i>
00:35:33
PETER JOYCE: But she didn't
come out of the dark. She didn't give evidence.
00:35:37
She didn't risk giving evidence
and risk being cross-examined about the overwhelming
case that in the end,
00:35:44
we had against
her because there was no satisfactory
answer she could give. She couldn't possibly
have answered
00:35:52
the questions I was
going to have for her, so she didn't come out. VICKY THAKORDAS-DESAI: Despite
the evidence against her,
00:36:01
Karen protested her innocence. And that can be
for a number of reasons. It's a method
of self-protection
00:36:10
and self-survival. Again, Karen may also have
had the dawning of realization that she's killed
a family member,
00:36:19
she's killed a mother-in-law. And the significant
impact that that's going to have on her family.
00:36:27
NARRATOR:<i> After</i>
<i> a 21-month investigation,</i>
00:36:29
<i> the prosecution argued</i>
<i> money was Karen's motive</i>
00:36:32
<i> for killing Elizabeth.</i> PETER JOYCE: We could
prove that Karen had been
00:36:39
taking money from Elizabeth. What I was really
interested in proving was that she'd killed her.
00:36:45
If you're prosecuting
a case, you don't actually need
a motive, so long as you can prove the killing.
00:36:50
I was proving the killing
because that's what she was charged with. She wasn't charged with fraud.
00:36:57
That was the motive
for the killing. NARRATOR:<i> During the trial,</i>
<i> Elizabeth's financial records</i>
00:37:05
<i> were shown to the jury</i>
<i> to illustrate</i> <i> the depth of the financial</i>
<i> abuse she suffered in the weeks</i>
00:37:11
<i> before her death.</i> FIONA HOTSTON MOORE: In cases
like Elizabeth's case,
00:37:15
we would be attaining the
banking records of the victim over a number of years. And we would be
analyzing them to see
00:37:24
what was their typical
areas that they spent money on to try and get
a feel for how
00:37:29
much they typically spent
in a year and in which areas they spent it. And then we would be looking
for changes in those trends
00:37:37
of expenditure. So are there now larger
amounts, perhaps being withdrawn from the bank
or cash transactions,
00:37:45
and who is making
those withdrawals, if we can actually
tell, and what might be the reason for those?
00:37:50
So those would be
the telltale red flags. NARRATOR:<i> During</i>
<i> the trial, the prosecution</i>
00:37:56
<i> also highlighted the number</i>
<i> of inconsistencies</i>
00:37:59
<i> in Karen's version</i>
<i> of what happened</i> <i> the night Elizabeth died.</i>
00:38:04
PETER JOYCE: She told
friends different things. She told husband
different things.
00:38:09
She told family
different things. She had been lying to all these
people about what had happened.
00:38:14
The order of events had
gone where when she'd found the fire, and so on. She'd just been lying to her
friends and family throughout,
00:38:25
and they basically
felt betrayed. VICKY THAKORDAS-DESAI: Karen
had spun a web of lies.
00:38:36
Her stories were inconsistent,
her accounts were discrepant, and investigators would
have picked up on that
00:38:43
and used that
to their advantage. NARRATOR:<i> The prosecution</i>
<i> argued that once she had</i>
00:38:50
<i> drained Elizabeth's</i>
<i> account of all her funds,</i>
00:38:53
<i> Karen set fire to Elizabeth's</i>
<i> home because she believed her</i>
00:38:57
<i> husband would</i>
<i> inherit half of her</i> <i> mother in law's</i>
<i> estate, thought to be</i>
00:39:01
<i> worth around 150,000 pounds.</i> PETER JOYCE: I
think she probably
00:39:06
hoped that her husband would
get a part of his mother's will, and she Karen
would benefit from it
00:39:11
because she would have
left a reasonable estate behind as well. Well, it would mean
a sizeable sum of money
00:39:17
for Karen's husband
and Karen's sister-in-law, which no doubt Karen would have
hoped to have benefited from.
00:39:28
VICKY THAKORDAS-DESAI: Karen
had rationalized in her mind that she needed the money, and
that someday her husband was
00:39:36
going to inherit that money. She needed the money
there and then, so she-- there is evidence
of her using identity fraud
00:39:43
and taking money from
Elizabeth's account to fund her own lifestyle. Her actions became
desensitized,
00:39:52
and she started to morally
justify in her own mind why taking money from Elizabeth
at this stage in her life
00:40:01
was appropriate and valid. So she justified it, she
rationalized it in her own mind
00:40:08
and therefore, very
quickly had accepted a conclusion that
ending Elizabeth's life
00:40:18
was one of the options. PETER JOYCE: I think
the real motive was, in fact, getting rid of the burden of
having to care for someone when
00:40:26
you really didn't want to. NARRATOR:<i> A key piece</i>
<i> of evidence for the prosecution</i>
00:40:33
<i> was the testimony of fire</i>
<i> expert, Emma Wilson.</i>
00:40:38
EMMA WILSON: As an expert
witness arriving at court, knowing that
your testimony is going
00:40:44
to be a large part
of the case, it's going to be a big part
of the jury's considerations,
00:40:50
and it's going to help
them make their decision on innocence and guilt. For me,
knowing that that's the reason
00:40:58
I'm appearing in court,
there's a nervousness to it. NARRATOR:<i> Emma's testimony</i>
<i> was vital to prove</i>
00:41:06
<i> that the fire could</i>
<i> not have been started</i>
00:41:09
<i> by Elizabeth smoking in bed.</i> PETER JOYCE: Elizabeth
never, on the evidence,
00:41:13
smoked in her room. Secondly, she always smoked
in the kitchen or by the door-- the open door.
00:41:20
She didn't like people to smell
the fact she'd been smoking. She didn't like people to see
that she'd been smoking, which
00:41:26
was why she'd put
the cigarette out under the tap rather than leaving
a sort of smelly ember.
00:41:31
Basically, she hid
the fact that she'd been smoking from the carers
coming from her sister.
00:41:36
They all knew she
smoked, but she was the pretense that she didn't. But she didn't take
cigarettes into her bedroom.
00:41:46
EMMA WILSON: Considering the
physical evidence that we have, it's my view that it's
more likely that Karen
00:41:54
entered Elizabeth's bungalow,
went to her bedroom, ignited a fire on the bed
whilst Elizabeth was in it,
00:42:05
and then left the property
and closed the door after her. She then went
home, got changed,
00:42:12
and it is likely that she had
some sort of injury or wound or burn on her arm,
and that's why she had a tail
00:42:18
covering it when she returned. That when she returned,
she did enter a property that was filled
with smoke and had
00:42:25
a fairly sizable fire within
it and pressed the care line. It is likely that Elizabeth
became aware of the fire
00:42:35
because she wasn't
found in her bed. She was found
by the firefighters at the base of the bed
on the floor.
00:42:40
So she had made some
attempt to escape. NARRATOR:
<i> The prosecution argued</i>
00:42:51
<i> that Karen's movement</i>
<i> on the night of the fire</i>
00:42:54
<i> clearly showed this was a crime</i>
<i> of planning and premeditation.</i>
00:43:00
- She went around
to Elizabeth's house when Elizabeth
was in bed, having been tucked up for the night by
the carers at about 6 o'clock.
00:43:11
And she went round
and set fire to the bed whilst Elizabeth was in it. Eventually, when she went
back for the second time,
00:43:21
pretending to find
the fire that she'd lit, poor Elizabeth had
managed, however,
00:43:27
disabled to get out of bed
and was lying on the floor at the foot of the bed. And that's where she was
rescued by the firemen.
00:43:37
VICKY THAKORDAS-DESAI:
The event shows a level of planning
and premeditation, although there's clearly
evidence of a lack
00:43:44
of sophistication within that. Karen had access
to the home and started the fire in the home.
00:43:53
So for Karen, she was
intent upon doing this. She planned it. It was now or never.
00:44:00
She had to take the opportunity
and that's what she did-- starting the fire,
burning the house
00:44:07
down with Elizabeth in it. NARRATOR:<i> On May 17, 2024, the</i>
<i> jury delivered their verdict.</i>
00:44:17
PETER JOYCE: She was
convicted of murder unanimously by the jury. No question
of a majority verdict.
00:44:24
EMMA WILSON:
Hearing the verdict, it is almost like
a sense of completion because to me
and the evidence that I had,
00:44:34
that is what I
would have expected the jury to get from that. PETER JOYCE: She
had to be given
00:44:40
life in prison, because that's
the only sentence for murder. And in this case,
it was 32 years.
00:44:47
NARRATOR:<i> Despite</i>
<i> the successful conviction,</i>
00:44:50
<i> the verdict provided</i>
<i> mixed emotions</i> <i> for Elizabeth's family.</i>
00:44:54
PETER JOYCE: I went to see
the family and friends. It was then that it became-- I became aware just how
crossed the husband was.
00:45:01
Her husband was very
angry, not at the verdict. He was very angry that the
initial police investigation
00:45:10
had wrongly arrested
him, because he was nothing to do with
the killing of his mother.
00:45:15
He was livid that
he had been arrested in the first investigation
and understandably.
00:45:24
VICKY THAKORDAS-DESAI: There
are no winners in this-- the tragedy of losing a mother
in the way that she was lost,
00:45:31
a grandmother in the way
that she was lost, but equally a wife and a mother
who would have been detained
00:45:38
and is detained
for a very long time. The psychological shadow
and effects of that would--
00:45:47
would be immense. POPPY EVERTON: It's
very hard to imagine how Elizabeth's
family would have been
00:45:55
affected by this situation. I think it's very difficult
to think about them having
00:46:01
to pick up the pieces
of not only losing someone that was very dear to them and
a huge part of their family,
00:46:09
but also who
the perpetrator was and what the motivations
were is going to be really, really
hard to come to terms
00:46:16
with as a family member. It is almost a double betrayal. You've lost somebody,
and the person
00:46:24
that has taken them from you
is also within your family. [somber music] [exhilarating music]